MovieChat Forums > Cimarron (1931) Discussion > Racist Movie - spoilers

Racist Movie - spoilers

posted 9 years ago by best_of
4 replies | jump to latest

Ultimately this is a very racist movie. The way they refer to, and talk about American Indians is awful. Worse than that, the way the young black kid was treated. Recall he got all dressed up to go to the church service, yet the whole town laughed at him. Yancy insists that he stay behind, don't go to church. He wasn't good enough is what Yancy thought, he was a joke. Then the young black kid gets shot, mortally, by the bad guys. We see him writhing in the gutter and Yancy struts by, not noticing him. It was just horrible. Also, let's not forget that Yancy is basically a jerk, a horse's ask. He gets a big reward for killing another bad hombre, and he just gives it up for no good reason, even though his family needs the money. If this film were made today, Irene Dunn would have poisoned him. Or at least sued Yancy for abandonment!

[–] nesxp 9 years ago

Look at the year mate, they didn't have the conception we do have now about racism, that's the interesting part of the film, although I think the black kid is a representation of the black community at the time, he is more like a victim. Also, is a very loyal adaptation of the novel, in that case the one to blame is its writer.

[–] [email protected] 8 years ago

I think you're missing a lot. Isaiah, the black kid, was depicted as brave and loyal, which is hardly a negative depiction. Yes, he was treated badly. That's the point, he was treated badly despite his virtues, just like black people in the real world were treated badly regardless of their virtues.As for Yancy getting a reward for killing "another bad hombre" it seems to have escaped your notice that the "other bad hombre" was someone who Yancy had known for a very long time and considered to be a friend. He didn't want to accept reward money for killing someone he cared about. The theme there was the same as with Dixie Lee--"people don't go bad by choice, they're forced into it by circumstance".As for "the way they refer to and talk about American Indians", note that Yancy had a fight with his wife over an editorial in defense of the Indians and the movie lost no opportunity to show how badly they were treated. And note that it ended with Yancy's son married to one with his mother's evident approval.Sorry but this was "racist" only in the manner that "Huckleberry Finn" was "racist"--it depicts the situation of black people in society with some accuracy and then tries to show how that's a bad thing.By the way, if you want to see racism, check out the career of Eugene Jackson, who played Isaiah. You'll find that he was playing shoe-shine boys right to the end, although he did get some better roles interspersed.

[–] best_of 8 years ago

Thank you for your comment. Nonetheless, this movie and the book it is based on is no Huckleberry Finn. I still think the black kid was treated like a dog, given no dignity at all as he writhed in the gutter. So far as the actor who portrayed him, his further roles as a 'darkie' was solely the fault of the studios that stereotyped everything.

[–] corriganville 8 years ago

Yeah, I felt bad for Isaiah when Yancy talks him out of going to church. But I do think Yancy loved him as a friend. Remember Yancy's line of "loyalty money couldn't buy". Maybe Yancy talked him out of going to church so no one would make fun of his outfit while in church. Yancy did promise to buy Isaiah a suit when he sent Isaiah home.
I have to disagree with your statement that Yancy "struts by" the wounded Isaiah. Yes, he didn't notice Isaiah, but Yancy was shot thru the arm (losing a lot of blood while speechifying) and was agonizing over the fact he had to shoot The Kid. Yancy staggered past Isaiah whom he didn't see down off the "boardwalk" and behind the barrel.