According to Wikipedia: "According to Sin in Soft Focus: Pre-Code Hollywood by Mark A. Vieira, Gold Diggers of 1933 was one of the first American films made and distributed with alternate footage in order to circumvent state censorship problems. Busby Berkeley used lavish production numbers as a showcase of the female anatomy that were both "lyrical and lewd". "Pettin' in the Park" and "We're in the Money" are prime examples of this. The state censorship boards had become so troublesome that a number of studios began filming slightly different versions of censorable scenes. In this way, when a film was edited, the "toned down" reels were labeled according to district. One version could be sent to New York City, another to the South, and another to the United Kingdom. Vieira reports that the film had two different endings: in one, the rocky romance between Warren William and Joan Blondell – whom he calls "cheap and vulgar" – is resolved backstage after the "Forgotten Man" number. In an alternate ending, this scene never takes place and the film ends with the number." I believe the scenes that showcase the female anatomy are intact. One scene on the DVD shows nude women in silhouette behind a curtain. I don't know what they might be referring to in "We're in the Money". However, there is no scene after the "Forgotten Man" number. However, backstage before the number when Warren William gives the $10,000 check as a wedding gift, Dick Powell says"What a Brother" to which William replies " What a sister-in-law" giving credit to Joan Blondell and indicating they will marry. Sounds pretty resolved to me. Perhaps the author mixed up when the scene took place. Anyway does anyone know anything definitive about this? By the way this is a really excellent movie, one of the few movies where the rest of the movie is as good as the Busby Berkeley numbers.