BVHE Press Release: Fantasia and Fantasia 2000 Special Edition (Blu-Ray) (1 Viewer)

[dana martin]

 

Originally Posted by WillG

 

Still though, what if a kid started going around imitating the stereotyped dialect or started drawing blackface pictures in school or something. Suppose the media got ahold of something like that. It would be a shit storm.

 

[COLOR= black]Ok so to put this delicately, lets see hum, Ebonics comes to mind on the dialect issue and the fact that states and schools were willing to accept that totally baffles ones mind, or the fact that people actually talk and spell like they text, the way it becomes a problem, is if people make it a problem, while not right for today’s general public, I still find Manhattan Moreland funny as hell in the Charlie Chan films, which are not right in themselves, closest thing to blackface in the past 15 years is Spike Lee's Bamboozled look at the cover, where was the public out cry at that, I don’t think this will ever be a dead issue in the public eye, I just find it odd that we completely and continually try to sanitize the past, but most of what is available to day, via general media, internet, music has pumped up the violence and sex. and I will pose a question straight to the quote, so if a kid in school shaves his head and has a swastika, makes it less offensive, its called parenting, I have a large collection, and when I would allow my children to watch something with me, I made sure they understood, what was going on. If I felt they were not ready, it could wait; remember that rating system is merely a suggestion. At the same point, I do believe that as and adult in this country, we are dumbing down as a society, and I know the normal thing that is thrown around, well its for the kids, how many kids do you see going out and dropping $50 or so for this title. [/COLOR]


My respect to all on this forum, it is not my intention to offend anyone, race; creed; or sex, ony to state some of the facts. If anyone was offended i do appoligize.

 

[Edwin-S]

Originally Posted by WillG

 

Still though, what if a kid started going around imitating the stereotyped dialect or started drawing blackface pictures in school or something. Suppose the media got ahold of something like that. It would be a shit storm.

I doubt 25 seconds of a stereotypical depiction would cause any kid to start drawing blackface pictures in school. For most of them it would hardly even register as something offensive; although, I have to ask myself what they were thinking to have a character in there like that in the first place. The other two black centaurettes that you see in the film are drawn without obvious blackface or "pickaninny" stereotypes. Still, studios are forever putting out dual editions of films. I cannot see why Disney cannot put out an edition for collectors and a family friendly (censored) version for the easily offended.

 

[dana martin]

Brandon,

As for song of the south, I do have a memory of seeing this as a child, it was a school field trip, cant remember think it was second grade or something like that, in Columbus OH around 1972, and if it serves me correctly, there was a large mix of kids in that theater at that time. It just goes to show how things change,

 

Here is what I could find

 

Rereleases The movie premiered on November 12, 1946 to mixed reviews. Disney has re-released the film several times since then in 1956, 1972, 1980 and 1986. There has been no talk of another re-release, theatrically, since then. In March 2007, the CEO of Disney, Robert Iger, talked about Song of the South publicly for the first time since its 1986 re-release. He addressed the fact that he often fields questions concerning the eventual re-release of the film. He said that a re-release would be tricky with a film made so many years ago that dealt with very sensitive issues, but that the film was being reviewed by the Disney team and was being considered for redistribution

 

Back to Fantasia,thre should be a option to see it complete and uncencored, sad fact is i can see a lot worse in 30 second or less on the internet. and some times, that just pops from a google search.

 

[WillG]

 

its called parenting, I have a large collection, and when I would allow my children to watch something with me, I made sure they understood, what was going on. If I felt they were not ready, it could wait

I agree, and my posts are really just Devil's Advocate (but as I said, I can understand the position that Disney is in). And yeah, it would be cool if they could release two versions, but it just doesn't make sense from a marketing standpoint, because how would the do it? How would they market the difference between the two releases?

 

And also, I will say, there are plenty of shitty parents out there that would not educate on this kind of subject.

 

Again, I'm not endorsing censorship of these things, but I can understand the position that Disney or other studios are faced with when it comes to these types of cartoons.

 

 

[COLOR= #000000]Ok so to put this delicately, lets see hum, Ebonics comes to mind on the dialect issue and the fact that states and schools were willing to accept that totally baffles ones mind[/COLOR]

The difference here is that the acceptance of Ebonics is seen as a concession to African American cultural standards. That's the filp side of the coin when it comes to race issues when you start getting into "culture" it's felt that cultural standards have to be accepted whether it's positive or not. That's a reason why, for example, "Thug life" seems to be promoted and accepted in media.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by WillG

That's a reason why, for example, "Thug life" seems to be promoted and accepted in media.

To some degree, I think that is today's more subtle version of a minstrel show. By no means is it all media (look at a show like The Wire that has black characters who are well-drawn and 'real' rather than just the stereotypical black criminal) but alot of media still reinforces negative stereotypes. They just do it in different ways from 50 years ago.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S


I cannot see why Disney cannot put out an edition for collectors and a family friendly (censored) version for the easily offended.

Because the sales of the uncensored versions would not allow for a profit. We're talking maybe a few thousand people buying a release that would cost six figures to produce. Not a keen business move. Plus the awkward PR that could potentially hurt other business (cruises, theme parks, toys, merchandise, etc.).

 

25 seconds isn't gonna make kids start drawing racist stereotypical pictures in school, but it could hurt their bottom line. Again, people called for a boycott of Disney product over Aladdin's "good teenagers take off their clothes" line - and that isn't even what's in the audio!

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by dana martin

Back to Fantasia,thre should be a option to see it complete and uncencored, sad fact is i can see a lot worse in 30 second or less on the internet. and some times, that just pops from a google search.

One can see the shots from Fantasia on youtube right now, too.

 

[Ron-P]

I'll wait until I can get just Fantasia, Fantasia 2000 is horrible.

 

 

 

[cafink]

Originally Posted by Craig Beam


Please tell me you're fucking kidding with this.

 

 

????

 

No kidding here--Brandon's original figure (99.9999999999999999999999999999%) leaves less than a single frame of the film unaccounted for. The controversial footage in question amounts to nearly half a minute. That's a difference of several orders of magnitude. That's like estimating the distance between New York and LA to be a few inches.

 

The Fantasia changes might not be the end of the world, but they're not unnoticable, either. I don't think anyone would be upset if only a single frame of the film were changed. Writing out a figure with that many nines suggests that the changes are completely trivial, and indeed, they wouldn't be worth fretting over if they were actually that minimal. But they're not actually that minimal, so let's talk about the changes that were actually made to the film, the ones that affect an appreciable, perceptible amount of the film.

 

Brandon has since corrected his figure, so all's well.

 

[Edwin-S]

This kind of modification of old films because of now offensive stereotypes reminds me of the themes in books such as Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and Orwell's 1984.

 

[Edwin-S]

Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
 

25 seconds isn't gonna make kids start drawing racist stereotypical pictures in school, but it could hurt their bottom line. Again, people called for a boycott of Disney product over Aladdin's "good teenagers take off their clothes" line - and that isn't even what's in the audio!

The kind of behaviour demonstrated by these people is exactly why film studios shouldn't be acquiesing to demands to change the content of films, especially those from another era. If a bunch of fanatics with hearing problems want to boycott a film then that is their right; however, just because a minority of nutters hoots and hollers doesn't mean that everybody else is automatically going to take them seriously. That is why Disney never should have changed the lyrics in the opening song to "Aladdin". If someone doesn't like it they have the right not to listen to it or watch it, but they don't have the right to dictate or force their preferences onto others. I think that some of these new TV shows like Sons of Anarchy go too far in depicting depraved acts of violence and sometimes feel like they are glamourizing the lives of low-life, criminal scum; however, I'm not about to start demanding boycotts or excision of images and themes that I may find offensive. If it offends me that much, I'm just going to turn it off and not watch it. I always think that is the best solution.
 

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

This kind of modification of old films because of now offensive stereotypes reminds me of the themes in books such as Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and Orwell's 1984.

Except for the fact that they're totally different. Did you even read either of those books?
 

 

[bigshot]

THe Deems Taylor footage was added. It was part of the roadshow version of the film, not the standard version. Some dialogue tracks were missing, so they recreated them. The last thing that Fantasia needs is more introductions. They should let the film play in its standard form and include the additional Deems Taylor material in the supplements. Disney monkeys around with this film too much.

 

[Edwin-S]

Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow

Except for the fact that they're totally different. Did you even read either of those books?
 

If I hadn't read them, do you think I would have mentioned them? I said it reminds me of some of the themes in those books. I didn't say they are one to one analogues.

 

[bigshot]

By the way, the cuts in Pastoral were made in the 1950s, not 1969.

 

[cafink]

 

Originally Posted by Jesse Blacklow

Except for the fact that they're totally different. Did you even read either of those books?
 

I think it's an apt analogy. Destroying literature/art, suppressing critical thought, etc. No, what Disney's doing with Fantasia isn't exactly like Fahrenheit 451 in every conceivable way, but Edwin didn't say that it was. I think it's just as wrong to say that they're totally different. Different in many ways, yes, but nevertheless with some common elements.

 

[Brian Borst]

Originally Posted by bigshot

THe Deems Taylor footage was added. It was part of the roadshow version of the film, not the standard version. Some dialogue tracks were missing, so they recreated them. The last thing that Fantasia needs is more introductions. They should let the film play in its standard form and include the additional Deems Taylor material in the supplements. Disney monkeys around with this film too much.

The Deems Taylor were supposed to always be there, but Disney cut the movie down soon after it wasn't doing as well as he hoped. And they didn't recreate some of the dialog tracks, but all of them, since Taylor's voice can't be heard in the new version. I agree that the introductions are long, and pretty abundant (no need to explain everything to your audience), but they're part of the movie and need to be left alone. Just like the censored bits, whether Walt Disney cut them out some years later or not. He put them in there when it was made, so they should be there.

 

[cafink]

Originally Posted by bigshot

THe Deems Taylor footage was added. It was part of the roadshow version of the film, not the standard version. Some dialogue tracks were missing, so they recreated them. The last thing that Fantasia needs is more introductions. They should let the film play in its standard form and include the additional Deems Taylor material in the supplements. Disney monkeys around with this film too much.

 

The problem as I understand it is that while only some of the dialogue is missing, Disney has replaced all of it. I somewhat understand this, as there's no ideal solution--there'll have to be either wholly replaced dialogue or an inconsistency between different bits of dialogue.
 

Still, you'd think Disney could find someone who could do a passable enough Deems Taylor impression that his newly-recorded dialogue would closely match the genuine Deems Taylor dialogue. And even if it's not perfect, DVD and Blu-ray support multiple audio tracks--why not simply include both versions and let viewers watch whichever one they prefer?

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwin-S 30#post_3726943

If I hadn't read them, do you think I would have mentioned them? I said it reminds me of some of the themes in those books. I didn't say they are one to one analogues.

Then you missed the point of those themes, especially in regards to the guilty parties and the reasons behind their actions.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by cafink 30#post_3726952


I think it's an apt analogy. Destroying literature/art, suppressing critical thought, etc. No, what Disney's doing with Fantasia isn't exactly like Fahrenheit 451 in every conceivable way, but Edwin didn't say that it was. I think it's just as wrong to say that they're totally different. Different in many ways, yes, but nevertheless with some common elements.

Your second sentence had it mostly right: 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 are indeed about the destruction and suppression of not only the materials but the knowledge thereof. The important distinctions are (1) that the novels had the government pursuing and enforcing the policies (not a private institution with ownership of a product), (2) that Disney is neither destroying existing material nor suppressing knowledge about it, and (3) you're still allowed to acknowledge the existence. I'm no fan of censorship, but making every instance from a intellectual owner into just an either/or construct that is somehow state-supported is just buying into the hysteria of the extremes of both censors and the politically correct.

 

[ahollis]

 

Originally Posted by bigshot

By the way, the cuts in Pastoral were made in the 1950s, not 1969.

I talked to a long time Disney animator sometime in the early 80's (I recall that it was in just prior to the 1982 re-release) and he said the cuts were for the 1969 re-release. He also said that the re-release was talked about before Uncle Walt died, but nothing was firmed and the decision to make the cuts came after his death. He did not know if Donn Tatum, who ran the studio after Walt died until 1971 had talked with Walt before his death on the cuts or not. Mr. Tatum, Roy O. Disney and Card Walker, all of whom were in various executive positions at the time and after Walt's death are also gone. The one person who could solve this question could be Ron Miller, who ran the studio after Card Walker, was also an executive at the time of Walt's death and of course he was Walt's son-in-law. I also wonder if Leonard Maltin ever discussed this during his interviews with Disney people.

 

Other bits of information from my pounding the guy with questions in my youth have proved to be correct, so I am not going to doubt this one, but there is still no proof, just hearsay. The reason that I brought this up was that I was booking film for a theatre circuit at the time and wondered about the difference in the re-releases and what changes might be in the 1982 release beside the re-recording of the soundtrack, which was big news at that time. Dolby Stereo was the thing then and the old stereo tracks were to deteriorated. The replacing of Deems Taylors narration and the cutting of most of the live-action footage was the other big changes. Seems lilke the 1982 release was the biggest change since the original 1941 RKO release that had major cuts in it from the 1940 Roadshow.

 

I have always understood the 1950's re-release was the same as the late 40's but with the addition of 4 track mag stereo which had become common with the advent of Cinemascope. Of course the 1956 release was handled by Buena Vista Distributing since their agreement with RKO ended in 1953. Previously, RKO had handled the Fantasia releases, except for the initial Roadshow in 1940.