Gone with the Wind: Anyone here actually sat down and watched it?

I'm pleased with how this thread is going. At least on my last page, everyone is talking good about this film. And I haven't even seen it all, but enough to know it is awesome. Probably why this thread has moved slowly. If it were about City of God it would fly through. Not that it is a bad movie, just sayin.

Yeah, I'm actually surprised by all the positivity. When I first created the thread it took a little while before a single reply even came in. I was worried at first that it might get to 10 or 15 responses and then die out.
 
Yeah, I'm actually surprised by all the positivity. When I first created the thread it took a little while before a single reply even came in. I was worried at first that it might get to 10 or 15 responses and then die out.

I'm surprised too, but we shouldn't be, really. Haters don't come to threads they know nothing about. And the average Joe doesn't go back and watch the classics.
 
Yeah, the sunset with the tree was bad ass. I've seen it in clips from the movie before but it's been long enough that I totally forgot about it. The visual look combined with the dolly out was an awesome effect. I'd really like to see a technical breakdown of EXACTLY how that shot was put together.

I think one thing that's important to remember is that this was 19-fucking-39. For a movie that old, in a lot of ways it actually feels strangely modern. And feels very grand.

That's cool that you plan to power through. I would do the same if I didn't have to work in the morning.

Nah I'm done for the night. I always watch movies over a couple days, like a book I'll just pick up where I left off. So far it's what I expected. Liking the old classic natural beauty of the young women. And Clark Gable is so smooth you can see why so many actors trying to emulate him, and the women with Leigh.
 
Well, its an unpopular opinion with this demographic but I think its worth a watch.


I actually wish they would get rid of all this stupid CGI and go back to paintings!

Some GWTW pics
GoneWithTheWind-580x250.jpg



gone-with-the-wind-2.jpg


gwtw8.jpg


Agreed great movie

1939-gone-with-the-wind.jpg


gone-with-the-wind-4.jpg


451180_film-stairs-gone-with-the-wind-cinematography-vivien-leigh.gif

I've seen it a few times. Its held up pretty well imo, despite the obvious sugar-coating of Civil War era Dixie. The story, the acting, the production values...all very good. Actually, Scarlett might actually be the first anti-hero protagonist, now that I think about it. Overall great film, though. Would recommend watching if you're into classics/can get past the generational gap in filmmaking. Otherwise, may not be for you.

Well there is a reason they sugar coatted the South and Civil war. It was to give you the opinion or perspective of how southerners dealt with changes and perceived the war.
 
Well there is a reason they sugar coatted the South and Civil war. It was to give you the opinion or perspective of how southerners dealt with changes and perceived the war.

I believe there is only allowed to be one perspective regarding the Civil War: White Southerners were evil. And if you make a movie set in the old South whose explicit focus isn't how terrible slavery is and how evil white people were, you are yourself being racist.

I won't defend slavery, but there are two sides to every story.
 
I saw when I was very young (4 years old) Saw it again at maybe 9. Then saw it a few times in 20s.

it's one of those films that I'd remember scenes vividly but couldn't place the movie exactly.

Sort've like watching Tarzan or the Three Stooges, then catching exact scene copies in newer films.

Vivian Lee was a berserker later in life.
 
She is a complicated character who is dealt with accordingly.

While the story is placed in the mid to late 1800s, even in the 30s it was odd to see a woman as open about her sexuality and as economically ambitious as Scarlet.

She was a bitch but ya gotta admire the fact that she was willing to do ANYTHING to see her way of life carry on. And I don't mean the "confederate" way. I mean HER way. She wanted herself, her home, and her family taken care of. Whether she needed to work, fuck, kill, or steal to do it. Thats what she did.

Of course it ended up not really working out for her because you couldnt very well let a woman get away with that shit back then.

But even still. She aint worried about that shit. She'll worry bout that tomorrow.

I thought she ended a winner.

Let's be real, she came to the realization that this whole time she loved Red Butler, but I think that was just due to her fear of being alone.

She still gets a good chunk of his money, she still had her looks. I honestly see her meeting some other boy toy that she can control and manipulate with her beauty and wealth after she gets over her loss of Red.

She won out in the end. The real loser was Red.
 
I thought she ended a winner.

Let's be real, she came to the realization that this whole time she loved Red Butler, but I think that was just due to her fear of being alone.

She still gets a good chunk of his money, she still had her looks. I honestly see her meeting some other boy toy that she can control and manipulate with her beauty and wealth after she gets over her loss of Red.

She won out in the end. The real loser was Red.


I'm not normally the type to correct people on these sorts of things, but since you repeat it over and over. . . It's Rhett. Not Red.
 
I believe there is only allowed to be one perspective regarding the Civil War: White Southerners were evil. And if you make a movie set in the old South whose explicit focus isn't how terrible slavery is and how evil white people were, you are yourself being racist.

I won't defend slavery, but there are two sides to every story.

Well, there is a good reason for that. They were evil. Most of the people might not have been evil, but the entire economy and society of the Antebellum South was inextricably intertwined with the monstrously evil institution that was slavery.

Any movie that tries to portray the positive aspects and people of the Antebellum South without acknowledging the repugnant evil that ran through is very core and supported the whole structure is horribly dishonest.
 
Well, there is a good reason for that. They were evil. Most of the people might not have been evil, but the entire economy and society of the Antebellum South was inextricably intertwined with the monstrously evil institution that was slavery.

Any movie that tries to portray the positive aspects and people of the Antebellum South without acknowledging the repugnant evil that ran through is very core and supported the whole structure is horribly dishonest.


Here's an interesting question: If any of us were born into the South during that time period, can we say for sure that we would be abolitionists, especially if we were born into a wealthy family whose livelihood depended on it? It's easy to say that we would, but can we know for sure? Probably the most any of us can say is that we'd HOPE we would be, but more than likely even most of the best among us would look for a way to be kind and good slave owners (of which there were some, relatively speaking) while still preserving our way of live. We would not be willing to allow our fortunes and family homes to crumble away and become nothing.

It's easy to look back with 2015 eyes and sensibilities and talk about how "evil" and terrible these people were. And I'm sure that some were, but certainly not all. In a place where slavery was simply accepted as a part of life and always had been, it's easy to see why many people would have found ways to justify it or even not question it at all.

I really don't think it's incredibly far from how, today, we justify buying sweatshop goods from China. Many sweatshop conditions are really not far off from a modern form of slavery and that is not an exaggeration. Sure, we talk about how it sucks, but 95% of us still fucking do it. In another hundred years, will there be talks about how evil we were because we fed the system instead of fighting back against it, violently if necessary?
 
never have and never will watch it
 
I've seen the 4 hour version and it just doesn't do it for me. I don't care for stage acting and like most films from that time is just stage acting being recorded.
 
It is in my opinion the greatest film ever made.

Best movies ever made

Godfather 1 & 2
Casino
Inception
The Town
The Fighter
HEAT
Reservoir Dogs
Pulp Fic

GOAT deal with it suckas.
 
I've seen the 4 hour version and it just doesn't do it for me. I don't care for stage acting and like most films from that time is just stage acting being recorded.

The style of acting at that time was definitely different--less naturalistic, and as you say, more influenced by the stage. And I also find that it doesn't appeal to me in the same way that modern acting does.

I think it was a transition period, though. And it might be a bit unfair to simply reduce it to "stage acting being recorded."
 
Here's an interesting question: If any of us were born into the South during that time period, can we say for sure that we would be abolitionists, especially if we were born into a wealthy family whose livelihood depended on it? It's easy to say that we would, but can we know for sure? Probably the most any of us can say is that we'd HOPE we would be, but more than likely even most of the best among us would look for a way to be kind and good slave owners (of which there were some, relatively speaking) while still preserving our way of live. We would not be willing to allow our fortunes and family homes to crumble away and become nothing.

Without a doubt if I have been born and raised in a rich slave-owning family from the Antebellum South I would've almost certainly been pro-slavery. That doesn't change the fact that I would be the bad guy, from a historical point of view.

It's easy to look back with 2015 eyes and sensibilities and talk about how "evil" and terrible these people were. And I'm sure that some were, but certainly not all. In a place where slavery was simply accepted as a part of life and always had been, it's easy to see why many people would have found ways to justify it or even not question it at all.

Your argument is that I can't look down on a people as evil because the evil things they believed were considered normal in their society?

If that's the case, then I absolutely refuse to accept it. I will judge those people by the civilized standards of my own age, and by those standards the Antebellum South was a monstrous place.
 
Your argument is that I can't look down on a people as evil because the evil things they believed were considered normal in their society?

My argument is that societies are multi-faceted and should never be judged entirely by any single element. Slavery was a single element of the Antebellum South--granted, a significant one--but it did not comprise the whole of the South. There was so much more and much of it was good and respectable. Personally, along with the ugliness that was there, I find a lot of beauty in the culture of that time and place.

It's really like judging all of Nazi Germany because of the holocaust. You just shouldn't do that. It's the ultimate in "throwing the baby out with the bath water." Or, today, judging all of China because sweatshop labor is a principal part of their economy. Yes, it's terrible and should be addressed, but despite that there is still a lot of good in China. There are good people, there is good art, there is good literature, there is a rich and valuable culture.


If that's the case, then I absolutely refuse to accept it. I will judge those people by the civilized standards of my own age, and by those standards the Antebellum South was a monstrous place.


Just bear in mind that we will be judged by the standards of future ages and no doubt will ourselves be monstrous and to have lived in a monstrous place. There are a number of reasons for this.
 
Back
Top