As a longtime fan of Karina Longworth‘s You Must Remember This podcasts, I’ve been meaning all month to settle in with her Song of the South series, a six-episode historical examination of Disney’s most controversial film. This weekend, I’m thinking.

A friend tells me that Longworth’s take is properly lamenting and damning, but that things turn sour in episode #5, which deals with Blaxploitation and the White Backlash of the ’80s.

No one’s disputing that Song of the South contains antiquated, unfortunate and subliminally ugly racial stereotypes in certain portions. Has anyone listened to the five Longworth episodes that have been posted, and if so what’s your take on it?

Everyone understands that Song of the South is an unfortunate relic of a long-past era, of course, but that it’s technically fascinating and quite the achievement for 1946. I’ve only seen excepts from this 1946 Disney release — never the whole thing. And I’d love to see a high-def version just to appreciate the live-action-blended-with-animation material, not to mention the fact that Gregg Toland was the dp.

Longworth may differ, but it’s been alleged here and there that Song of the South isn’t quite as racially toxic as its reputation suggests.

A little more than a month ago HE commenter “Bad Hat Harry”, who’s seen some kind of bootleg copy, maintained that “it’s a perfectly charming, sweet-natured thing, and the only subtextual racial politics one could reasonably read into it have to do with reconciliation, harmony and respect. Uncle Remus is a wonderful character, [and] the stories are all-timers.”

In the same thread HE commenter (“Lord of Misrule“) stated the following: “I have watched this several times and cannot, for the life of me, fully understand what all the fuss is about. There is not one African-American character in the entire movie [who] is not treated with the utmost regard. At one point, one of the characters actually ‘permits’ her son and daughter to play with another black child so they can play together. At another time that same character regretfully, almost tearfully, has to ask Uncle Remus not to keep telling his stories because her (white) child acted irresponsibly.

Posted yesterday (11.20) by Cleveland Plain Dealer‘s Brent Larkin, former director of the editorial page: “Of all the regions in all the states in all the country, Jim Jordan got dragged into ours.

“There was no good reason to punish Greater Cleveland by making the person who’s now the second most contemptible human being in the entire U.S. government part of the region’s delegation to Congress.

“When Jordan slithers out from under his rock each morning, dons a shirt and tie — sans the jacket, lest he be mistaken for Joe McCarthy — his life’s work is to besmirch everything America stands for in service of Donald Trump.

“If it takes undermining yet another principle of democracy by condoning attacks on men and women who have devoted their lives in honorable service to this country, Jordan is always ready and willing.

“If it takes changing the Trump defense strategy on an almost daily basis because facts keep getting in the way, Jordan is the ideal bootlicker. Trump’s support is all that seems to matter to the man former House Speaker John Boehner regularly referred to as ‘a legislative terrorist’ — along with a whole bunch of other descriptions unfit for print.”

We all know that Peggy Noonan wrote speeches for Ronald Reagan and Bush 41, and that The Wall Street Journal is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. Today they’ve posted her 11.21 opinion piece that says the case for impeachment has been “clearly made.” Which it has, of course. But by today’s standards Noonan is a classic-style conservative (or right-leaning independent), and in the current rabid climate the only op-ed piece that would really punch through would be one written by one of the House crazies or, better yet, one of the Republican Senators presumed to favor acquittal. Noonan and the WSJ know that the Senate will not vote to convict. Republican Senators don’t care if Trump is guilty because the Trump faithful — 38% to 40% of the electorate — don’t care.

Regional journo pally; “Saw Uncut Gems last night. There’s no doubt that Adam Sandler gives a terrific performance, but everything else is really problematic. It’s loud. It’s shot as if the Safdie brothers have ADD. The atmosphere and almost all the characters are utterly disgusting. I couldn’t help thinking, ‘Who was this made for? Who wants to pay money to immerse themselves in this bucket of slime?’ I’m not criticizing the craft, but craft to what point? My wife, who has a very high tolerance for all sorts of movies, walked out on the film, and after it was done, I wrote on the comment card “Well made, but repulsive.’

I don’t mind saying I’ve been in a faintly melancholy mood over the all-but-complete domination of whitesides, as HE regulars know. Everywhere I go, nearly every actor in town…a fashion tragedy. It’s not hugely depressing, but despair grips from time to time.

And then Jon Hamm walked onstage following Wednesday night’s Harmony Gold screening of Richard Jewell, and suddenly my whole outlook changed. He was wearing a pair of snazzy, possibly Italian business shoes with — I loved this — slightly worn red soles. Plus a nifty, well-tailored plaid suit. All I know is that I suddenly felt…well, better. The whole whiteside thing fell away.

Imagine that after winning Iowa and possibly New Hampshire, Pete Buttigieg manages to streamroll past a South Carolina loss and then scores big on Super Tuesday. He might not but imagine him doing this, for the sake of hypothesis. If he does he could theoretically assemble a majority of delegates and win the Democratic Party’s nomination for President. If and when this happens, what are African American voters, a majority of whom have been head-in-the-sand stubborn about their support of Joe Biden and are too lazy to pay the slightest attention to Buttigieg or anyone else in the campaign…what are they going to do next November? Vote for Trump? Or what…sit on their hands and let Trump win? At what point does obstinacy morph into self-destruction?

All hail Willem Dafoe‘s harumphy salty dog in The Lighthouse and Adam Sandler‘s crazy-pinball gambler in Uncut Gems. These, for me, are the two biggest standouts among the just-announced nominations for the 35th Independent Spirit Awards. I have to do an 11 am interview with Beanpole director Kantemir Balagov, so for the time being here’s the Indiewire announcement story. I’ll be back around 12:30 or 1 pm.

2:30 pm update: What happened to Sterling K. Brown‘s Best Supporting Actor nomination for his performance in Waves? Remember that Marriage Story‘s Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson and Laura Dern weren’t nominated in their respective categories because Noah Baumbach‘s bicoastal divorce drama will instead receive the Robert Altman Award for ensemble, which makes it ineligible for individual acting nominations.

The Spirit Awards will be held on Saturday, 2.9 — a day before the Oscars — under the big tent in Santa Monica.

I’ve boldfaced the likely winners and in some cases offered comment here and there:

Best Feature:
A HIDDEN LIFE (not happening)
CLEMENCY (rounding out the pack)
THE FAREWELL
MARRIAGE STORY
UNCUT GEMS (nope)

Best Director:
Robert Eggers — THE LIGHTHOUSE (definitely should win)
Alma Har’el – HONEY BOY
Julius Onah – LUCE
Benny Safdie, Josh Safdie – UNCUT GEMS
Lorene Scafaria – HUSTLERS

Best First Feature:
BOOKSMART
THE CLIMB
DIANE (should win — easily the best of these five)
THE LAST BLACK MAN IN SAN FRANCISCO
THE MUSTANG
SEE YOU YESTERDAY

Best Female Lead:
Karen Allen – COLEWELL
Hong Chau – DRIVEWAYS
Elisabeth Moss – HER SMELL
Mary Kay Place – DIANE (may lose but better than Zellweger)
Alfre Woodard – CLEMENCY
Renée Zellweger – JUDY

Best Male Lead:
Chris Galust – GIVE ME LIBERTY
Kelvin Harrison Jr. – LUCE
Robert Pattinson – THE LIGHTHOUSE
Adam Sandler – UNCUT GEMS (definitely Sandler!)
Matthias Schoenaerts – THE MUSTANG

Francis Coppola‘s The Cotton Club Encore is a longer (139 minute), blacker, dancier and allegedly better version of his 1984 original, which had a difficult production history, and for all the trouble wound up losing money and getting ho-hummed by critics. Coppola assembled the Encore version on his own dime ($500K) and premiered it at the Telluride Film Festival two-plus years ago.

Have I seen Encore? Uhm, well…no. It played at West L.A.’s Landmark last month, but something always got in the way. (It was press-screened once by Lionsgate — Monday, October 7th at 11am — but I couldn’t get there.) My next shot is snagging the Bluray (out 12.10) or streaming it — I’ll probably choose the latter.

The Encore trailer looks, sounds and feels just right – there’s no denying that.

I’ll tap out my review of Clint Eastwood‘s Richard Jewell (Warner Bros., 12.13) tomorrow, but it’s basically a good ‘un — a matter-of-fact, step-by-step procedural about how a tubby security guard who looked like a wrong one and behaved like a guy with issues….how this poor moustachioed schmuck (Paul Walter Hauser) became an officially suspected terrorist for nearly a three-month period following the Atlanta Olympic bombing of July ’96, and how he finally got past his kneejerk worship of cops and FBI agents.

The general post-screening reaction was thumbs-uppy — an aura of settled satisfaction. The 89 year-old Eastwood looks and sounds great. He has one of the warmest smiles I’ve ever basked in.

After the q & a ended I went to the edge of the stage and reached up to shake Clint’s hand.

I said something along the lines of “I can think of a certain guy in Washington who’s going to see this film about sloppy reporters who spin lies and hound an innocent man, and about an equally sloppy and unreliable FBI that isn’t on the side of truth, and he’ll say to himself ‘this is my movie, my viewpoint…it shares my beliefs about journalists and certain FBI guys.”

And in that gentle and reflective tone of voice that he’s so well known for, Clint said that “we’re living in crazy times” and that some people are going to see crazy things in Jewell’s story, but perhaps they shouldn’t. Or words to that effect.