MovieChat Forums > Lady and the Tramp (2019) Discussion > Mixed race couple in the 20s accepted in...

Mixed race couple in the 20s accepted in a suburban area?


More rich black people in the 20s than white and more black than white in the 20s in rich part of town?? Yeah right

reply

Just like black people living in a 18th century French mountain village (BatB).

I guess racism has been a myth all along...

reply

So true lol they only got it right in the Princess and the frog lol

reply

Of course, there were Black people living in France in the 18th century. Aprenez l'histoire, mon copain. Houp, j'ai oublié! Vous ne pouvez pas lire. Pardon.

reply

My advice to you as always: YOU should learn how to read.

reply

Le Code Noir existed because there were many black people in France.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_noir

Thomas-Alexandre Dumas Davy de la Pailleterie (moved to France in 1776), the famous French general and yes, a black man, who was also the father of Alexandre Dumas, the famous writer of The Three Musketeers and The Count of Monte Cristo.

Learn history.

reply

Like I said, please learn how to read:

Territoire d'application

1er édit :
Martinique et Guadeloupe en 1685, Saint-Domingue en 1687 puis Guyane en 1704.
2e édit à La Réunion en 1723.
3e édit en Louisiane en 1724.
N'a jamais concerné la colonie du Canada


Also, read back what I said in my first post.

reply

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louise_Marie_Th%C3%A9r%C3%A8se_(The_Black_Nun_of_Moret)

reply

You can post that one again and again, but it doesn't change the fact that you simply can not read. Please go back to school, then try reading my first post again.

reply

Black people arrived in France from the colonies in the 18th century. You need to learn history.

reply

Good lord, you are truly the biggest moron on this site. Go back to school (if you ever went there in the first place), learn how to read and then read my first post. Perhaps then you'll finally see how moronic your responses are.

reply

Easy there, Strat. There is titanic competition for the title of Biggest Moron On This Site.

reply

Of course, there were rich black people and mixed race couples in the 20s.

reply

Some rich black But not open and legal mixed race couples walking down the street like it's not an issue back then in the west of USA it was illegal

reply

Don't bother with him, he's a complete moron.

reply

So fact and truth about the history of USA is moronic???

reply

You did not understand I was talking about Keelai???

reply

Sorry I misunderstood

reply

👍

reply

People married in the west, anyway. One of my grandparent's first marriage was biracial in the west at that time.

Anyway, the movie takes place in New Orleans. Plenty of biracial couples, the very definition of Creole, n'est-ce pas?

reply

It's not in new Orleans

reply

The 2019 version:

"Meanwhile, a homeless Schnauzer-mutt, who later goes by the name Tramp, spends his days wandering the streets of New Orleans "

reply

The city where the movie was set was never specifically stated but was said to have been based on the place where Walt Disney grew up which would have been in Missouri. In Missouri interracial marriage was not legal until 1967... which is also when it was made legal in New Orleans. So it really doesn't matter which place it was set in it was illegal.

As for your example of Creole people, a Creole isn't necessarily a mixed race person the word was used for people born in Louisiana rather than someone born outside the area. Now there were lots of Creole people that were of mixed race, black and some other race... however in the south a person that was in any part black was considered black from a legal aspect, the so called one drop rule. So a Creole person may have been technically a mixed race person but from a legal standpoint they were black. In short Creole wasn't a pure racial designation and was more akin to the term carpetbagger which simply applied to someone in the south that was from the northern states. Simply because the majority of Creoles were mixed race didn't mean they all were.

reply

I googled the 2019 movie. It takes place in New Orleans.

I was addressing stewartp1987 comment about mixed-race couples. it would've been fairly common in a place like New Orleans where there are so many Creoles.

reply

No it wouldn't. You missed what I said. Interracial marriage was illegal in the entire state of Louisiana until the late 60's. If she was Creole wasn't a race it was more of an ethnic group of which you had different races within the Creoles though it wasn't even technically an ethnic group.

She was clearly part black though in the South she would would have been considered simply black. He was not black making their marriage illegal. And it was entirely possible for him to have been Creole as well but not be black. That is where you are misinformed, Creoles are simply people that could trace their heritage back to the area prior to the Louisiana purchase you could have found Creoles of different races.

Now could a what man have taken a black wife in Louisiana? Yes but he would have had to stay out of the public eye and live in outside of towns. To have lived in the open in New Orleans would have been inviting arrest or worse.

reply

I doubt if a sheriff would be stupid enough to arrest a rich guy who likely has plenty of influence and power.

BTW, I believe all of you are taking this movie way too seriously considering that it's about two talking dogs.

reply

Interracial marriage was such a taboo thing in the south during this time it would have been enough for a rich family to disown their own kin folks. And a sheriff would have had no qualms of arresting the man for this, had he not done it the other reality of life at that time in the south is such that the KKK would have been very likely to get involved and at the very least running him out of town.

People get so upset about it because it is revisionist history for no reason beyond placating a few diversity nut in Hollywood. The past with all its problems should never been whitewashed which is what Disney is doing. And yes the movie is about talking dogs, but it also choose to set itself in a particular part of America and in doing so should not monkey with the reality of that setting.

reply

Fairly common? In 1920s America?? That's legal?? Lol

reply

This is supposed to be an idealized version of the 20s, not a historically accurate version. That's what one of the cast said in one of the behind the scenes videos....

reply

They're complaining about accuracy in a movie about two talking dogs. Go figure!

reply

Meh. They did sanitize this one too much. And the race thing wouldn't be that big of a deal had it not been for the rest of the sanitizing.

The original was a great film for kids and adults. It also had layers that people would discover when they rewatched the film as they got older. This 2019 version will be the same for people who watch it as kids or adults. There's nothing to discover. They've taken all that away.

The dogs were adorable though....

reply

A talking dog is more believable than a legal mixed race marriage in the 1920s,a dog can at least bark as a response to sound like talking,a legal mixed race marriage in the 20s is nowhere near a real thing lol

reply

I just don't get why they had to remove every adult themed issue from this version. There's nothing for kids to newly discover as they rewatch at older ages. It will be the same every time?

And why is it OK for the Scotty dog to still have a stereotypical Scottish accent, but they removed the Mexican Chihuahua?

reply

Obviously it has to be idealized to be politically correct.

reply

Tulsa race riot anyone?

reply