Posted on 04/30/2019 5:35:38 PM PDT by gaijin
The Motion Picture Association of America, the film industry’s board of review, today recommended the re-examination of the British made film ”Oliver Twist” with a view to having deletions and changes made which would remove objections to the firm voiced by many Jewish and other groups, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency learned today.
(snip)
In [the USA] the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith and other Jewish groups protested the scheduled showing of the film on the grounds that one of its central characters, Fagin, was portrayed in an anti-Semitic manner and would inspire anti-Jewish sentiment.
In the British zone of Germany and other places where the film was shown public demonstrations were held in protest.
Recently, several groups in this country, including the New York Chapter of the American Council for Judaism, have called for lifting of the ban on ”Oliver Twist” on the grounds that the prohibition violates the Bill of Rights.
Where do you people who have apparently never heard of the Bible and have no sentimental attachment for the Biblical world come from?
So that's why they exterminated those Canaanites.[/sarcasm]
Remember the original Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory..?
That movie was made but baaaaarely released:
The British author of the original book lived in Africa long-term and it turns out the Oompah-Loompahs really were a bona fide African tribe:
US AfroCentrists argued that the lampoonish presentation marginalized that tribe and therefore, all blacks.
There was TONS of anger from the Mod Squad set; there was endless back-and-forth about the Oompah-Loompahs.
They studio finally retained the novel tribe name but agreed to reshoot the oompah-loompas portrayed as “out of this world” creatures (outlandish skin color and weird eyelashes) instead of being small Africans, before the complainers finally shut up.
(People tell me the Oompah-Loompas are alledgedly famous in their area for being lazy)
Oh, for Pete’s sake.
Remember the actor who portrayed Captain Von Trapp..?
I was shocked that later in interviews he (acting?) admonished that he hated making that movie.
He termed it, “The Sound of Vomiting” or something.
Sorry, but that movie MADE his career; without that boost he’d have been nothing.
He probably thought that voicing support for cultural rot instead of wholesome fare would score him brownie points among Hollywood Moghuls, or something.
YOU have an attachment to the Bible..?
You called me an idolater and POLYTHEIST.
From YOU..? Meh, I brushed it off, but then you went and got a longtime Freeper, powerlifter and very conservative Jew who BACKED YOU UP ON IT...!
***Because I’m a Christian, I am a POLYTHEIST.***
THAT one really blew my hair back.
That was very, very enlightening, that was not just some random JINO making stuff up.
He didn’t appreciate Christianity.
When the movie came out I went with my parents and my sister to see it downtown I loved it and remember that to this day. Sorry to hear he did not like making it as it made nice memories for me.
That’s not a fair take on Christianity’s trinitarian view of God. In actual polytheistic faiths, their gods have disagreements that look like those of sinful humanity. There is no such thing attributed by Christianity to its trinitarian view of God. All the persons of God agree on what they are doing.
Yeah, it’s baffling.
I have studied a LOT of aspects of Judaism but I had no ideah they considered us POLYTHEISTS.
It was months ago but even now, reconsidering it, I’m still shocked.
It really made me reconsider a lot of things, made me re-assess my views on major US committments abroad.
“They consider me a POLYTHEIST —like a Shintoist, or a Roman Pagan, or an Egyptian, or something.”
Pure anti Semitic Click bait using an old article to fan the flames of dissent
Stay in Zambia and mind your own issues
The problem remains as in Jesus’ earthly days. Many people are too tied up in human dependent religion to see God.
The best argument is a display of gospel power.
Going back to that article shows that it is a 1951 vintage issue. I would have thought it was more recent, as it sounds like modern lefties, but no.
I’d pull it as misleading.
Regards,
If this is about the 1967 musical, it was actually a big step up compared to Dickens’ actual portrayal of Faygin, and I honestly don’t get anyone purportedly taking offense over such a delightful film. Faygin is the book instigates Nancy’s murder, puts Bill Syckes up to it. In the musical, he’s pleading with Bill “No violence!” He’s humanized from an insidious creep, who, to top it all is also Jewish (eww!), to a lovable rascal.
Anti-Semitic imagery in English literature is hardly confined to Oliver Twist. Richard Cohen in Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises is portrayed as a pathetic pest. All the Jews in Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris and London are portrayed as terrible people. Then there’s the Vaudevillian accents Pound uses in some of his Cantos. But all of these are forgivable, though bad, as well as Shakespeare’s Shylocke. Marlowe’s Jew of Malta is another matter, but that play is only of historical interest. The only instance that I find totally infuriating and unforgivable is TS Eliott’s Burbank with a Baedeker, Bleistein With a Cigar.
Tra-la-la-la-la-la-laire—nil nisi divinum stabile
est; caetera fumus—the gondola stopped, the old
palace was there, how charming its grey and pink—
goats and monkeys, with such hair too!—so the
countess passed on until she came through the
little park, where Niobe presented her with a
cabinet, and so departed.
Burbank crossed a little bridge
Descending at a small hotel;
Princess Volupine arrived,
They were together, and he fell.
Defunctive music under sea
Passed seaward with the passing bell
Slowly: the God Hercules
Had left him, that had loved him well.
The horses, under the axletree
Beat up the dawn from Istria
With even feet. Her shuttered barge
Burned on the water all the day.
But this or such was Bleistein’s way:
A saggy bending of the knees
And elbows, with the palms turned out,
Chicago Semite Viennese.
A lustreless protrusive eye
Stares from the protozoic slime
At a perspective of Canaletto.
The smoky candle end of time
Declines. On the Rialto once.
The rats are underneath the piles.
The jew is underneath the lot.
Money in furs. The boatman smiles,
Princess Volupine extends
A meagre, blue-nailed, phthisic hand
To climb the waterstair. Lights, lights,
She entertains Sir Ferdinand
Klein. Who clipped the lion’s wings
And flea’d his rump and pared his claws?
Thought Burbank, meditating on
Time’s ruins, and the seven laws.
As I demonstrated in my last post, I am rarely offended. But
“The Jews must feel their stranglehold on the “perpetually offended” title slipping.”
is one example of a post I find highly offensive for multiple reasons. Have fun trying to figure them out. I’m on my way out. Got to pick a pocket or two.
I thought that was a really good answer.
Some really good insights, thank you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.