Sanitizing GWTW's content for filming a GOOD choice.

Rating: 7/10 (11 March 2008)

Between the release of "Birth of A Nation" and "GWTW--the Film" 25 years had passed. After "GWTW--the Film", 26 more years would pass before the Civil Rights Movement rose to prominence in the U.S.
Just why do I bring this up, you the reader asks? "Birth of a Nation" started the Hollywood Civil Rights Movement (and yes it still has a long way to go) as it sparked outrage in the civil rights groups of 1914. Selznick's removing overall content in terms of blacks from the movie's screenplay was a deliberate act. I have little doubt had he let it stand, no small controversy would've flared in parts of the U.S. It had to be exorcised & the same approach would have to be administered if a remake were produced in the future.
I read the book three times, some passages multiple times. None of the passages I re-read involved Mitchell's descriptions, viewpoints regarding white planter-class southerners & blacks. Talk about wanting to barf--Benevolent, humane approach to Southern slave-owners interacting with their "negroes" conveyed as regular thing, the unbalanced depiction of brutality meted on the white south in as opposed to sanitizing of slavery. Regarding race relations, the aspect Mitchell's book pointed out without bias that the Yankees were no better than the South in their viewpoint of blacks as children. Although the n word appears sporadically, GWTW the book is the most racist book I've ever read and I took it out my library.
Regarless of the Hollywood depicting the books racist aspects at a higher degree or not, still hope I'm not alive to see a remake.
GWTW it's a good film both technically & the script rewrites makes lots of sense. The beautiful Technicolor, and the even more beautiful "Tara's theme" rises my grading it to 5.
The abridgments in the script rises my score to a 7 for the sensible changes. Scarlett's character is the biggest example, yes, even more than the blacks. Other than her adhering to promises once she gives them and that unshakable determination, Scarlett's book persona isn't likable: finds children generally annoying for a majority of the story, irrational (Ashley), and of course, her selfishness. Women, lots of them moms, coming to watch Gable would have had a problem seeing the real kid contemptuous Scarlett on screen. Another good example of efforts of removing racist elements, no mention of the KKK's "righteous cause"--indeed no mention to the Klan by name at all.
There's a lot of excellent moments, scary moments, and above all that great cast. I think it's safe to say this movies' remake is in the far future as no major actress today could match Vivian Leigh's Scarlet. None of them. There are a small list for Melanie Hamilton. I just don't want to look at another person to play Rhett--Clark Gable is hot! Hattie McDaniel IS Mammy. The one flaw I can see in the cast major and minor character is Ashley. I'm talking physically here. Leslie Howard is too old. Leslie Howard knew he was too old but Selznick gave him an incentive and so he played Ashley. He did well with the role in terms of accuracy but looked at most twice Ashley's age (I always thought the novel's Ashley was in his mid twenties at most).
Watch it for the things I mentioned in the previous paragraph, try ignoring the traces racism of here and there. If one still detests this movie's bigotry to African-Americans, a word of advice: Read the book, especially the post reconstruction parts.