The plot was Hamlet. I don't know my Shakespheare or Baboons as well as I should. Touche. I do insist that the character Scar is Richard III. You can stake my name on it, Ghingis Can.

Rosenkavalier, so you think it was an accident that Disney cast Jeremy Irons as the bad cat and James Earl Jones as the good one. Reverse the roles and tell me what you think. The Englishman saves the day in Africa. Sounds like Tarzan. That movie what linguistically profiled. Imagine if Scar had a Yiddish accent or an Arab one. Oh vey.

As for the hyenas, I guess Scar recruited his goons locally. Kind of like the way the British Empire did. Divide and conqure.

As for post colonial Africa, I am afraid we won't be getting much material there for Disney movies any time soon. Perhaps we could do a cartoon on Zimbabwe. James Earl Jones could be Muggabbee and Jeremy Irons could be a white farmer. Whoopi Goldberg could be a princess. No, lets not go there any more.

Sorry, I forgot to mention the other white family in the picture. They don't come off well either. The boys in the family are mean, and the mother is a caricature at best.

So I don't think the intent with Song of the South was to be racist. I think it was drawing a sharp distinction between the main characters (Uncle Remus, Johnny, and Ginny) and the "bad" characters (the aforementioned mother, Ginny's brothers, etc.).

I just think that they were working with the common perceptions about people in the time the movie was made (it was released in 1946). How many portrayals of non-whites in movies released in 1946 would be viewed completely positively in 2008? I think we're just asking too much of Song of the South, and we're passing up its good messages (of not running away from problems, but instead confronting them; of caring for one another) in the process.

Okay, that's all I'll say. :)

Your description of Song of the South's plot is true, but it leaves out the fact that Uncle Remus is the wisest, most caring, most imaginative, and most thoughtful character in the movie. The white parents (especially the mother) come off as total jerks. The grandmother is the only white adult with any redeeming qualities, but her actions fall far short of Uncle Remus' standard.

So while I agree that the slaves singing to and from the field, and the Mammy character, and some other aspects make us modern audience members cringe, when taken in context I don't see anything particularly bad about it (again, compared to pre-1960s major Hollywood films that are even now shown widely). But I do see a caring and wise black character who is abused by the ignorant and thoughtless white adults around him. I think that's something worth seeing -- in context.

Today's audiences would probably need a prologue like they do on Turner Classics, but this time to explain the context.

As the historical reflections of the Bible continue to unfold, we find that a people that later became acceptable to God, (the Gentile, Gog and Magog, Europeans, white folks) seem to perpetuate the idea that TRUTH goes unnoticed forever.

Not only have there been Black Pricesses, there have also been Black Queens. Abrahams wife Kutura, The Queen of Sheba,Makeda: King David's wife, Bathsheba: The Pharoah's wife, Asiya: Mose's wife, Zipporah: and many others. Yet, an enterprise based upon fiction, Disney, would have reservations about presenting an historical Queen and Princess, a Black heroine.

If the black dollar was suddenly withheld from Disney's income statement, I wonder how this would impact the thought of the racist and deceptive spirit governing this Enterprise.

First off, a servant in NOLA with no family and a Voodoo-priestess godmother? Is that really the common experience of a young African-American woman?

OK, being a white woman, I am no expert in what constitutes an accurate portrayal of the black or brown "experience." Living in mutlicultural neighborhoods and attending liberal urban universities doesn't cut it, and I get that.

However, I do see how it could be difficult for [presumably mostly white male] Disney execs to figure out how to make a non-white children's movie: you don't want to "Anglo-cize" non-white characters, but you also don't want to resort to stereotypes to get the "THIS IS A BLACK/BROWN PRINCESS" message across.

I'm no expert in the demographics of Disney either, but maybe the solution is for Disney to put people with more diverse life experiences in executive roles. Maybe, just maybe, Disney should be less concerned with how to least offend people by the steroetypes perpetuated in its *movies* and more concerned with how to address the stereotypes perpetuated by its *business practices.*

You're right. As an Arab American, what I find more and more satisfying each and every year and with every single film that comes from hollywood is the pageant of flat, ethnic stereotypes with which I and my children should identify. That's just intensely pleasing. In fact, the only thing that get's in the way is this annoying minority of people asking me to examine my own prejudices and how they affect real political and social attitudes! Don't they know this is a free country? They should shut up!

"I find it so sad that after all of these years there has not been a brown or black prince or princess storyline out of Disney."

^ Then fucking write one yourself and sell it to Disney. Go on, you're a grownup and there is absolutely nothing in this world stopping you. Better yet, write the blockbuster story, sell it to another company to produce, and make a mint! Then you can really stick it to Disney!

Unbelievable that that loser's post is an 'editor's choice'. What a joke.

All Disney movies must be "Pre-Mermaid" (with the exception of the Pixar stuff.) I haven't seen Lilo and Stitch yet, but I might make an exception for that one.

This rule is partially rooted in the fact that my husband is an animation snob and thinks that Disney "sold out" artistically after Mermaid (one could argue that they sold out long before that, but no matter.)

It also stems from the fact that I worked at Burger King during high school, meaning that I was around for the promotion of all the movies from Aladdin to Pocahontas. Not only did I have to listen to the crappy movie soundtracks all day long, but I had the pleasure of repeatedly telling irate parents "Sorry, we've run out of THAT particular sweatshop-made, easily breakable, wind-up Lion King 'collectible' that your snot-nosed little darling so desperately needs."

That, and for some unexplicable reason "Beauty and the Beast" was THE date movie when I was in high school. Why was that? It was an okay movie, but come on, it's a kids movie. For some reason all of the popular girls were dragging their boyfriends to go see it.