MovieChat Forums > Cats Don't Dance (1997) Discussion > racial subtext

racial subtext

posted 18 years ago by mamacaraig
35 replies | jump to latest

Has anyone else noticed that this movie is probably an allegory about blacks in Hollywood?

Like the talking animals in this movie, they had to settle for supporting roles to white stars like Shirley Temple. Their real talents were hidden. Ironically, while "cats don't dance" in this movie, in real life, blacks were relegated to just dancing in the background.

The animals rallying to finally show what they can do could be symbolic of blacks finally bringing their own talents to the mainstream.

By the way, this is not intended to imply that Shirley Temple was racist. From all I've read, she was quite polite and civil to her black co-stars. The Darla Dimples character is clearly just a joke, complete with a Sunset Boulevard-Frankenstein butler.

[–] xxangelxofxmusicxx 18 years ago

Umm I think thats a bit overanalized...? It's a kids movie. It's just a bunch of animals whose talents were overshadowed by a dominating spoiled brat. I dont think it has anything to do with racism at all.

"I can't think of nothing but boiling your shorts and drinking the broth." _Greg Proops<3

[–] callmecrazy341 18 years ago

I don't believe it's over-analyzing at all. Just because it's a kids movie doesn't mean it can't have a deeper meaning.

No, the overt message of the movie is not that it is meant as an allegory for blacks in Hollywood, but one has to admit that there are a lot of parallels in the story to the struggle of blacks in Hollywood, especially considering the time period it is set in.

I feel the movie does have a more universal message of discrimination in general, whether it be on account of race, gender, etc. But I also always thought it a bit allegorical of blacks being discriminated against in Hollywood.

[–] Jnbfwc 16 years ago

Normally, I would agree, but for this movie I must object.

I don't believe, mind you, that it is SPECIFICALLY about black people, but about unfounded prejudice in general, though it does, in a manner, particular elicit thoughts of the oppression of black people.

I don't think it's quite as SIMPLE as you claim, though it may not be extremely 'deep.'

I cannot believe I did not see this sooner. It's awesome, and hints a lot at old style movies in the manner in which the characters talk quickly and the scenes keep moving forward.
The little monologue he gives to the girl cat about the signs of rain where he comes from is reminiscent of black and white movies of old.

[–] TheSonomaDude_Returns 9 years ago

No dude, it is absolutely an allegory for racism. Shirley saying stuff like "I don't want to be seen near those animals" and when she shouts "I...HATE...ANIMALS!" it sounds completely race driven. Even the bus driver says "animals don't know their place, they should just go back to farms".

[–] Rebel__Scum 18 years ago

This is basically the same argument that was used when "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" came out, referring to the role of toons in Hollywood. The book on which it's based, "Who censored Roger Rabbit", is even clearer in this regard, and much darker than the movie ended up being.

[–] mochamonkey42 18 years ago

grrr... not EVERY movie has a freaking racial subtext!!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MsDeTamble 18 years ago

However much they were created for children many animated movies have a hidden subtext that is only noticable to the older viewers. For instance The Lion King was meant to be a paralell to Shakespeare's Hamlet and it's squel The Lion King 2: Simba's Pride was meant to be a paralell to Romeo and Juliet. So do not be so quick to judge. All GOOD and worthwhile children's movies do indeed have some sort of subtext, sometimes it's not even something appropriate for children. Oh well.

[–] CanadianInsomniac 18 years ago

hey yeah i thought everyone figured there was some subtext.

Live Life Like a Sitcom...
...Always Make 'em Laugh

[–] vv-veryvery 18 years ago

people are actually arguing with this? I thought it was very obviously about African-Americans in Hollywood!

[–] teh_darkcloud 18 years ago

I was reading through this thread before and I just read the description for Cats Don't Dance and it said something like "only humans get the good roles in Hollywood."
Then in my head I'm like "Ooooh, I see the racial subtext now."
Yeah, I agree that this movie probably has a deeper meaning (I've never seen it, though [or at least I don't remember seeing it], just sorta stumbled upon it.)

[–] bdunbar89 18 years ago

"In the 1930s it was almost impossible for anyone who looked different from the mainstream or had an accent to succeed in Hollywood, and those who did found themselves largely typecast. We wanted to refer to that struggle for recognition in this story, using the animal characters as a metaphor."--David Kirschner, the Producer of Cats Don't Dance.

You can confirm this quote at http://www.cdd4ever.com/ in the section for the mirror site. I'd give you all a direct link, but for some reason the URL stays the same no matter where you go on that site.

[–] Jnbfwc 16 years ago

Ah hah, then I was right.

Man, I love being right.

[–] nikita_5952 18 years ago

Yes, I have noticed that. I don't think you've over-analyzed it all as some seem to think. All animated films (or most of them) are written on 2 levels. There's the part for the kids, and then the subtext and "grown-up" jokes so that adults will sit through it as well. Note movies like Shrek--too many examples to enumerate, but we'll go with the Matrix references. Or what about Aladdin when the snobby prince rides off and Aladdin says, "look, Abu, it's not every day you see a horse with 2 rear ends!" I say all of this to say, I'm totally with you. In fact, that's always how I describe this movie to friendds. So not only could this movie be representative of Old Hollywood (and sadly, often times current Hollywood as well), but that's exactly what it IS. Anyone who can't see that needs to look beyond the surface of things. And this film accomplished that without being preachy or taking away from the fun and light-heartedness of the story.

[–] xxangelxofxmusicxx 18 years ago

*feels like an idiot*
Well, I just saw the movie again after a bagillion years and of course I saw the subtext. I guess I was just not really looking for it before, but yeah. *dumb*
^^

"HOUSE would do WILSON before you would do Chase."

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Kartoon_Wurley 18 years ago

I thought it was pretty obvious what the parable was from the get go. It's just more of a 'cuter' way of presenting it.

They could have gone one further and had the humans dressing in animal faces, just like when asian and mexican roles were portrayed by white actors in those days, but then it'd end up being as subtle as a sledgehammer.

[–] hazelly 17 years ago

is it necissrily like racist against dark skinned people though

although i always got the impression it was like discrimination, it might have been about something else maybe ???

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Vivacious-Virgo 17 years ago

I was just thinking that. You're right. And the creators probably knew that. Not only did blacks have to go through this struggle, but the music and everything embodies what I'd imagine it to be like. You arent overanalyzing it at all.

Popular!
You're gonna be popu-u-lar!

[–] braiden45 17 years ago

I see what your saying, buy I think your analysis is going a little too deep into it. It not so much about african americans, but more of a generalization of alot of people. It is a kids movie afterall