To think Gone With the Wind really isn't a romantic film?

[FestiveFruitloop]

Just finished watching it, hadn't ever seen it all the way through before. Toxic/abusive relationships, marital rape depicted positively (WTF??), racism and misogyny, manipulative characters... all I can say is I hope it's no longer considered romantic in this day and age. AIBU?

For those of you interested in a big budget mini series, there is North and South, based on the novels by American author John Jakes. Way more context, gorgeous costumes and settings, and plenty of complex characters and situations. Plus Patrick Swayze and James Read as the two central characters. Just stop after book two and don't continue to watch the dreadful book three adaptation....

I think mostly the point of a chat forum is to … chat. And that can include opening a topic up with other relevant themes.

I haven’t seen anyone “banging on” either.

not mythical at all ,if you go on twitter ,read the papers cancel culture is all over the place I'm not banging on either, I made one comment & a reply to you. I'm allowed an opinion even though it's different to yours.

GWTW is too significant culturally, historically and cinematically ever to be cancelled. Won't happen. Education and notes on its historical context, absolutely. Cancellation, never.

NonPlayerCharacter do you not remember the bits in postwar Atlanta where steady, mild mannered Frank is found out to be heavily involved with the KKK, and if I recall correctly Scarlett has to hide them and lie to the authorities about their movements (think Frank got shot?) I think Rhett is only very peripherally involved, if at all, the implication being that he doesn't care enough about protecting his own.

There's quite a lot of moral outrage about freed slaves roaming the place, often in tandem with carpetbaggers- I think there's one bit where a couple of black scoundrels try to grab the reins of her buggy.

Yes, but again, historically those attitudes are accurate... and Frank was always meant to be a bit of a wuss (I think Scarlett thought of him as an "old maid in breeches" when he first started courting Suellen) and not massively bright. Never got the impression he was supposed to be a hero. Rhett wasn't a hero either; he said it himself several times, he's a scoundrel. The only man who would ever love Scarlett after knowing who she really was.

I seem to recall a white man and a black man both attacked Scarlett in the buggy, in both the book and the film.

As the book is written from the perspective of those in the South, particularly women, I think that it is reasonable to expect that they believe the men in the KKK are indeed ‘protecting them’.

I imagine Atlanta, post war, must have been quite a scary place for those citizens who had previously been used to a certain way of life. Yankee soldiers everywhere, carpetbaggers and freed slaves (some of whom may indeed have been dangerous - or are we to pretend that just by virtue of having been on the victors army/previously a slave, they were morally superior to everyone else?). They had been raised to believe certain things and their education was also dependent on how affluent their parents were and whether they were male/female. Our modern beliefs of diversity and inclusion wouldn’t even have entered their thoughts. Again you don’t have to agree with how the characters think in order to appreciate the story being told.

The whole story is about the fall of the South through the eyes of those who lived there at the time, and it depicts how Scarlet adapts and thrives rather than clinging to the old way of life.

The whole story is about the fall of the South through the eyes of those who lived there at the time

This really. That's what it comes down to. It's easy to portray criticism when you're on the opposite side. Like "The help" for example. Could the story have been told from Mammie or Prissy's perspective? Or one dissenting southern voice? Or a northerner's? Sure. But it wouldn't have been the same story. It could still have been a great story, but not the same. And this was Scarlett's story.

As for the whole romantic thing, there are people that find romance anywhere and everywhere, for example some people think the Joker and Harley have a great romance. Plus some people do find drama,hot and cold, hard work and "fighting for it" passionate and romantic. Fucked up is as fucked up does.

Interestingly, this thread has sent me on a Google deep dive, and I have found out some fascinating things, about both the movie and the book (but I can't C & P links due to my stupid phone):

The book was extremely popular with the Nazis in Germany

There were, in fact, several scenes depicting the brutality of slavery originally included in the film, but these were cut- along with many other random scenes- and nobody really seems to know why. David O. Selznick was concerned about not making a film that showed black people in a derogatory light- as a Jewish person on the eve of WW2 he drew parallels with antisemitism- but the finished film drew a lot of criticism from black people and organisations, including the NAACP, so you can't say he really succeeded.

10 year old Martin Luther King was part of a gospel choir at the premier in Atlanta- all dressed up as old time slaves. His dad was the church pastor, and loads of people from his congregation begged him not to let the choir get involved, but he went ahead.

So you can see, despite the film supposedly being "of its age", its portrayal of slavery shocked and offended people even in the 1940s 🙄.

So you can see, despite the film supposedly being "of its age", its portrayal of slavery shocked and offended people even in the 1940s

A young black extra went to Clark Gable as filming began to complain about the racially segregated toilets and Gable threatened to walk off set if they were not desegregated. He also initially refused to attend a premiere where Hattie McDaniel, to whom he had become close, was barred (she eventually persuaded him to go).

Rewatching off the back of this thread.

Scarlett is a fucking superstar. She’s hard as nails when she needs to be. Imagine being a highly pampered product of your 17 year old environment and having to assist in an operation without any form of anaesthesia. Or being an impromptu midwife. Or travelling across battle fields. And then being seen as the saviour of one’s entire war PTSD’ family. At SEVENTEEN / EIGHTEEN.

Like I said: #nails

And despite her ‘hatred’ (really, love) for Melanie, she puts her first, delivers the baby and gets her back to their rural roots to recover (via a war torn country)

Despite the many many many failings of the southern states of America, I Iove that GWTW movie is a female war film.

It is a story about survival.
I would not see it as a romantic film.

And this scene is so powerful.

I wonder how many women in conflicts can relate to this

I didn't know that. Kudos to him. 👍

Go woke, you mean? You can never successfully impose modern attitudes on the people of the past. Film or book become weary diatribes and sound ridiculous. If your temperament is not up to facing reality, stick to modern, up to the minute fiction where everyone fights against all the correct phobias.

I said on a thread the other day about Band Aid that progress isn't always a perfect and problem free line, and I thought of GWTW at the time. Hattie McDaniel became the first African American woman to win an Oscar for her absolutely phenomenal performance as Mammy. Winning the Oscar and paving the way for black actresses, fantastic. Doing it by performing a stereotype, not so fantastic...but it just isn't realistic for society to go straight from black people being treated as inferior and denied their rights, to being cast all the time in brilliant, strong, powerful, problem-free roles (although I'd argue Mammy is a bloody strong character, especially as McDaniel played her). McDaniel was criticised at the time but she said she could make seven dollars a week being a maid or seven hundred by playing one...

I think it's interesting that Mammy is one of the few people Rhett Butler respects and admires, and it's most certainly not because she's servile and obedient!

I have read that Clark Gable recommended Hattie McDaniel for the role; it's certainly well documented that he and she had a bond.

The scene where Hattie McDaniels is speaking to Olivia de Havilland after Bonnie is killed has to be one of the most heartbreaking in cinematic history.
McDaniels was an awesome actress.

It really is heartbreaking. And she could still make the role so funny when it was required. I cry when I see her telling Melanie about Bonnie's death and I crack up when I see her in this clip. I like to do an impression of her here when I'm trying to do up a dress that's too small 🤣

‘You needn’t go. I won’t have you all starve simply because I threw myself at your head. It won’t happen again.’

Chin high class. I aspire.

It really is. Gut wrenching.

The whole concept of Bonnie dying and the aftermath destroying her parents marriage always felt incredibly real and awful.

See the recent version of Persuasion which has the heroine swigging wine from the bottle ana talking about her exes.
Margaret Mitchell was born a mere 35 years after the Civil War ended, and knew people who lived through it so it may be told from the.perspective of relatives and neighbours.

There is a good video about the casting of Scarlett by Be Kind Rewind.

Firstly it isn’t a romance and was never meant to be. Also there is no ‘rape scene’. It is completely open to interpretation.
I have read the book many times and it still has pride of place on my bookshelf. GWTW is of its time and the language is a bit jarring in parts but it’s how it was with a little ‘fluffing up’ obviously.
If you’re seriously offended then don’t watch it or read it (although the book is a corker of a story).

The book is as appallingly racist as The Bell Jar.

I know these attitudes existed and still do, but I hate to see them admired.

You know what? You can admire some aspects of something and abhor others. Nobody posting here has admired racism, they have admired the invention of a strong female character at a time when women’s place was widely considered to be in the kitchen or its aristocratic equivalent. Society in the 1860s Deep South was racist, how could a book in that setting not reflect those values? If it didn’t you’d doubtless be complaining about airbrushing the racism out.