IMDb रेटिंग
6.5/10
2 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंTwo documentary filmmakers go back in time to the pre-Civil War American South to film the slave trade.Two documentary filmmakers go back in time to the pre-Civil War American South to film the slave trade.Two documentary filmmakers go back in time to the pre-Civil War American South to film the slave trade.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
Stefano Sibaldi
- Narrator
- (वॉइस)
Dick Gregory
- Self
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Gualtiero Jacopetti
- Self
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Ernest Kubler
- Whip
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Yayoi Kusama
- Self
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Franco Prosperi
- Self
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
Shelley Spurlock
- Girl
- (बिना क्रेडिट के)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I've seen a lot of offensive films in my time, from Cannibal Holocaust to A Siberian Film, but this one is easily the most tasteless, offensive, unpleasant films I have ever seen. Yet somehow it is also riveting, like watching a car crash unfold in slow motion. Several times I was on the verge of turning it off in sheer disgust, but found myself holding off, just to see how much more depraved it could get.
The "plot", such as it is, concerns a pair of time-travelling reporters from Italy going back to the south of the USA during the heyday of slavery, to conduct a "inquest" into slavery. Presenting itself as a condemnation of slavery, it instead revels in the unpleasantness, delivering atrocity upon atrocity with a smirk on it's face. The horror inflicted on the slaves in Django Unchained pales in comparison to the never-ending parade of unpleasantries served up here. I suppose it does present a view of what slaves went through at the time, but it's hard to feel that they are condemning the acts when all the slaves are presented as little more than dumb animals.
Amongst the dubious "delights" on offer are rape, castration, paedophilia and the truly horrible scene where the poor reporter is "seduced" by a 13 year old black prostitute. It's made so much worse as everything is presented as though we are seeing it through their eyes.
It's certainly unforgettable, and if you're not easily offended or squeamish, it's worth watching once, even if it's just to see how low Italian exploitation cinema managed to stoop. You might need a good shower afterwards, however.
Rating: 7/10 just for the sheer gall of the film.
The "plot", such as it is, concerns a pair of time-travelling reporters from Italy going back to the south of the USA during the heyday of slavery, to conduct a "inquest" into slavery. Presenting itself as a condemnation of slavery, it instead revels in the unpleasantness, delivering atrocity upon atrocity with a smirk on it's face. The horror inflicted on the slaves in Django Unchained pales in comparison to the never-ending parade of unpleasantries served up here. I suppose it does present a view of what slaves went through at the time, but it's hard to feel that they are condemning the acts when all the slaves are presented as little more than dumb animals.
Amongst the dubious "delights" on offer are rape, castration, paedophilia and the truly horrible scene where the poor reporter is "seduced" by a 13 year old black prostitute. It's made so much worse as everything is presented as though we are seeing it through their eyes.
It's certainly unforgettable, and if you're not easily offended or squeamish, it's worth watching once, even if it's just to see how low Italian exploitation cinema managed to stoop. You might need a good shower afterwards, however.
Rating: 7/10 just for the sheer gall of the film.
Many people who have claimed to see this film have not. Most of those who have seen it, have not understood. GOODBYE UNCLE TOM was directed by Gualtiero Jacopetti & Franco E. Prosperi, the two men who pioneered the documentary movement that came to be known as the "Mondo" film, a term the two dislike immensely. Hot on the heels of their controversial and still-relevant AFRICA ADDIO, it was meant to exonerate them from accusations of racism. Ironically, it would do the exact opposite. It was developed as an idea to adapt the novel "Mandingo" as an historical, documentary style drama. What emerged was a shocking, difficult-to-watch-at-times, treatise on the horrors of slavery, and the source of racism in America, if not the world, today. It was the filmmakers' intention not to pander to a politically correct theory that slaves of the 1840's had a 1970's awareness of their situation. The events are all historically correct. Many of the characters are people who actually lived. The dialogue is verbatim from true manuscripts of the day. The racism is a genuine depiction of plantation life of the day. It was felt that glossing over the African experience in America would be an insult to the pain and suffering of the millions who survived the "middle passage' only to welcome a life a slavery, no different from an animal or piece of property.
Years after it's initial release, the directors have expressed a regret at not opening the film with an explanation stating that this was a film about the emotions of that bygone era, not of the filmmakers themselves.
The controversial final scenes, which take place in contemporary America, are based on "The Confessions of Nat Turner", and are meant to represent an angry, reactionary vengeance on behalf of the millions, with whom the character identifies. Malice for sure, but not unmerited malice. This film should cause strong emotions. Any film that tackles a moral issue must cause debate and conjecture if it is to succeed. What makes the film even more extraordinary is that it succeeds without claiming a moral superiority, or taking a moral stance. What appears on screen are the most graphic, realistic depictions of the North American slave trade of the 19th century, and this film should be required viewing in Black History classes on college campuses, and high schools all over the world, particularly in America. This film preceded ROOTS by six years and stands as a much harsher indictment of the evils of human bondage. This is one of the bravest works of cinema and remains a misunderstood humanitarian masterpiece.
Years after it's initial release, the directors have expressed a regret at not opening the film with an explanation stating that this was a film about the emotions of that bygone era, not of the filmmakers themselves.
The controversial final scenes, which take place in contemporary America, are based on "The Confessions of Nat Turner", and are meant to represent an angry, reactionary vengeance on behalf of the millions, with whom the character identifies. Malice for sure, but not unmerited malice. This film should cause strong emotions. Any film that tackles a moral issue must cause debate and conjecture if it is to succeed. What makes the film even more extraordinary is that it succeeds without claiming a moral superiority, or taking a moral stance. What appears on screen are the most graphic, realistic depictions of the North American slave trade of the 19th century, and this film should be required viewing in Black History classes on college campuses, and high schools all over the world, particularly in America. This film preceded ROOTS by six years and stands as a much harsher indictment of the evils of human bondage. This is one of the bravest works of cinema and remains a misunderstood humanitarian masterpiece.
Anyone thinking of checking this film out: be warned, words can not express what an awesomely brutal experience it is to sit through. I'm a big fan of horror films, but nothing I ever saw came close to the feeling of revulsion this 30 plus year old film gave me. Trust me, you will have to use the fast forward button on your remote control several times sitting through this one.
A group of Italian journalists goes back in time to America during the time of slavery and documents what they see. The viewer is spared no amount of detail as we are shown what it was like to travel aboard a slave ship, be sold in market as common livestock, be raped, tortured hunted and killed, and basically denied even the slightest bit of human empathy or compassion at every turn.
While Roots covered the same subject matter a whole lot better, it came nowhere near delivering the visceral reaction of this film. For that reason, I recommend people watch Goodbye Uncle Tom. While by no means a great film, if society is truly never to forget the injustices and wrongs of the past, work like this is necessary viewing.
A group of Italian journalists goes back in time to America during the time of slavery and documents what they see. The viewer is spared no amount of detail as we are shown what it was like to travel aboard a slave ship, be sold in market as common livestock, be raped, tortured hunted and killed, and basically denied even the slightest bit of human empathy or compassion at every turn.
While Roots covered the same subject matter a whole lot better, it came nowhere near delivering the visceral reaction of this film. For that reason, I recommend people watch Goodbye Uncle Tom. While by no means a great film, if society is truly never to forget the injustices and wrongs of the past, work like this is necessary viewing.
Addio Zio Tom: 7/10: Well they don't make them like this anymore and lets face it they never really did. This is really three separate films brought together in a blender set on random. The first film is a highly effective expose on slave treatment and the slave trade in the old south (the slave ship scenes blows Hollywood fare like Armistad out of the water). Using a cast of thousands and exposing practices such as selective breeding that are politely not discussed on American shores (just ask Jimmy the Greek) it simply is one of the most realistic display's of 18th and 19th century slave life ever shown on film.
Then there is a second film which is a dated, and looking back rather silly collection, of news footage from the late sixties and early seventies that documents race riots with all the participants speaking in Italian creating an almost Woody Allen feel to the dub (It gives What's up Tiger Lilly a run for its money complete with ragtime music cementing the silliness of what should be serious proceedings.)
The last movie is a sexploitation film dealing largely with Mandingo fantasies and containing a copious amount of child porn. (I guess National Geographic rules apply when showing thirteen year old black children naked). Needless to say tasteful does not enter into the conversation. Political correctness is shattered so badly one must feel for those sensitive souls that can't laugh at ridiculousness of the manipulation.
Making matters worse the three films are intertwined together seemingly at random with comic buffoonery breaking out during serious scenes (A slave auction is apt to turn into a Benny Hill episode for no apparent reason) and poorly done black revenge fantasies coming, narratively at least, out of nowhere. Anti-white, anti-black and for the sake of inclusion anti-Semitic they once again simply don't make them like this anymore. (It's highly illegal for one thing)
Overlong by at least an hour and very poorly thought out in places Addio Zio Tom wears out its welcome but for a short while at least it exposes the truth and makes one think.
Then there is a second film which is a dated, and looking back rather silly collection, of news footage from the late sixties and early seventies that documents race riots with all the participants speaking in Italian creating an almost Woody Allen feel to the dub (It gives What's up Tiger Lilly a run for its money complete with ragtime music cementing the silliness of what should be serious proceedings.)
The last movie is a sexploitation film dealing largely with Mandingo fantasies and containing a copious amount of child porn. (I guess National Geographic rules apply when showing thirteen year old black children naked). Needless to say tasteful does not enter into the conversation. Political correctness is shattered so badly one must feel for those sensitive souls that can't laugh at ridiculousness of the manipulation.
Making matters worse the three films are intertwined together seemingly at random with comic buffoonery breaking out during serious scenes (A slave auction is apt to turn into a Benny Hill episode for no apparent reason) and poorly done black revenge fantasies coming, narratively at least, out of nowhere. Anti-white, anti-black and for the sake of inclusion anti-Semitic they once again simply don't make them like this anymore. (It's highly illegal for one thing)
Overlong by at least an hour and very poorly thought out in places Addio Zio Tom wears out its welcome but for a short while at least it exposes the truth and makes one think.
The story goes that when this played Times Square it caused a riot. I have no idea if its true or not, but if it did happen I can see why.
The film is an examination of race relations that focuses on slavery. As an indictment of the institution of slavery this film can not be topped. This is a nightmarish look at what slave mills must have been like almost 200 years ago.
The film exists in two versions that are very different different, and if you ever wanted to see how one film could end up as two different films, look no farther than this film (both versions are in the Mondo Cane box set)
Both films contain much of the same footage cut for different effect.The original Italian cut deals more heavily with race relations now, while the American version deals more with the slavery aspect. The final moments of both versions makes more sense in context of the Italian version since in the final moments we see that in many ways things have not gotten all that much better for the black race. Both films also have a good amount of footage unique to that version. I doubt seriously that the footage could be combined to make one super film since you'd end up with a third film with a third point of view.
I like both versions of the film. I think that right or wrong this is a film that will get you talking and thinking and wondering, which is what the film is suppose to do. I can't say that one is better than the other, both are flawed, however both should be seen, preferably with in a day or so of each other since the duel versions play off each other in unexpected ways.
See these films., But be prepared to get angry. You may not get through them, you may not like them, but you will be provoked into a reaction on some level. For better or worse you will be challenged and moved which is what the point of the film is.
9 out of 10.
The film is an examination of race relations that focuses on slavery. As an indictment of the institution of slavery this film can not be topped. This is a nightmarish look at what slave mills must have been like almost 200 years ago.
The film exists in two versions that are very different different, and if you ever wanted to see how one film could end up as two different films, look no farther than this film (both versions are in the Mondo Cane box set)
Both films contain much of the same footage cut for different effect.The original Italian cut deals more heavily with race relations now, while the American version deals more with the slavery aspect. The final moments of both versions makes more sense in context of the Italian version since in the final moments we see that in many ways things have not gotten all that much better for the black race. Both films also have a good amount of footage unique to that version. I doubt seriously that the footage could be combined to make one super film since you'd end up with a third film with a third point of view.
I like both versions of the film. I think that right or wrong this is a film that will get you talking and thinking and wondering, which is what the film is suppose to do. I can't say that one is better than the other, both are flawed, however both should be seen, preferably with in a day or so of each other since the duel versions play off each other in unexpected ways.
See these films., But be prepared to get angry. You may not get through them, you may not like them, but you will be provoked into a reaction on some level. For better or worse you will be challenged and moved which is what the point of the film is.
9 out of 10.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe movie was originally released in Italy in a 119-minute version and immediately withdrawn when the directors were sued for plagiarism by writer Joseph Chamberlain Furnas. It was re-released in March 1972 in a re-cut 136-minute version under the title 'Zio Tom.'
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिट'Questo film è un documentario. I fatti sono storicamente avvenuti ed i personaggi sono realmente esistiti.' Which translates to: 'This film is a documentary. The facts historically happened and the persons really existed.'
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनBefore receiving a UK cinema certificate in 1973 the film was extensively cut by around 30 minutes by the BBFC with heavy edits to rape scenes, footage of sexual experiments, graphic violence, the fantasy murder sequence, and the opening scenes on the slave ship.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Adam & Yves (1974)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Goodbye Uncle Tom?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Addio Zio Tom
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Port-au-Prince, Haiti(Majority of interiors and exteriors)
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें