Josie & Pussycats-PG VERSION announced-STUPID STUPID idea!! (1 Viewer)

[JohnS]

Like I've said in my previous posts.
All I wish is that Universal spends time/$$ on editions and movies, catalog titles we want to see, than releasing a PG version, a PG-13 VERSION an ULTIMATE PG-13 version.
Personally, it's a waste of shelf space.

Take your cries of censorship to another cause, please...

I'm being VERY NICE when I say this......
I can talk about censorship and about any movie I want(THAT'S WHY I'M HERE!), if I'm not offending someone personally or attacking them personally. I didn't see a smiley face next to your statement. You not my mother, so please don't tell me what to say or not to say. I'm making my statements in the nicest way possible, and stateing how I feel on a certain subject.
------------------

 

[Mark Cappelletty]

You tell 'em, John. It seems like some people share Universal's beliefs in freedom of expression.
This whole debate is pretty dumb. It's not like I'm going to watch the film in the first place -- not my cup of tea -- but studios are so weird about ratings anymore-- I mean, it's one thing to edit really objectionable material for airlines and whatnot but turning a PG-13 movie into a PG? Was the material THAT strong to warrant a change? Did people REALLY complain? (I'm being half-rhetorical/sarcastic, half inquisitive here) Doesn't Universal have better things to do with their resources-- like put out Legend, fer crying out loud?

 

[JohnS]

Mark,
I'm glad somebody else see's that this is a waste of our time and Universal's time and $$.
I've said my bits, now I'm finished!

It's not like I'm going to watch the film in the first place -- not my cup of tea

I STILL LIKE YOU!
------------------

 

[PerryD]

As a father of a 6 & 8 year old, I would love if every PG-13 movie could come with a PG version with the language/sexuality cut out. But, I'd want both versions accessible from the same disc, because I'd rather own the original uncut version. I'd also like it if a G version were included too.
There was a time throughout the 80's and 90's that G movies were taboo for family movies and studios added a few blatant shouts of profanity in the movie until it got a PG rating, against the original intentions of the filmmakers (e.g. Fly Away Home). I wouldn't mind at all if the director's would be allowed to go back and create a non-profanity G version.
That said, I'd be the first in line for an R rated version of Coyote Ugly.

 

[Mark Kalzer]

I'm curious, have any of the studios thought of turning to seamless branching for this? We already know that this features works seamlessly, (See The Abyss, Terminator 2), and all DVD Players have options to set parental restrictions to lock out certain content. Why not just include both versions of the movie on one disc? Then you can watch it censored for the kids, but still have the original un-cut version available to watch on your own! As much as I hate censorship, it's a good compromise where everybody gets what they want!

 

[Seth Paxton]

1) more is not always better, nor the artist's intent - Blade Runner for example.
2) I don't agree with "I would like nicer versions so my kids could watch" though. Not one bit.
We could make a G version of any film, say Basic Instinct, but then what the hell is the point?? Seriously. You kids WON'T be seeing anything remotely like the REAL Basic Instinct, and neither will you. Do your kids really need to have "nice" versions of "naughty" films??
No they don't. Just like I don't need dirty versions of nice films. Kids have KIDS FILMS to watch, made with them in mind. Keep in mind that language and nudity AREN'T THE ONLY THINGS that make a more adult film "adult". Concepts that interest them, themes of human relationships on all levels, etc. If the target was a 15 year old, then maybe the film just isn't for a 7 year old, period.
I mean, let's edit Catcher in the Rye just a tad so all 7 year olds can delight in reading it. I'm sure they wouldn't find it dull for one second since it exceeds the vibrant excitement of Teletubbies and Pokemon.
Now, if the director intended something nicer and the studio thought there was a good reason (more money, for example) to throw in some nudity, swearing, etc. then I would be 100% behind a lower rated director's version.
As it happens, most studios don't push for a higher rating so we rarely find ourselves in that situation.
But the basic point is the same - WHAT IS THE POINT of watching Dumbo curse anymore than watching the kiddie version of any harsher film??
And if it's a fine line between PG and PG-13 then here's a thought...maybe crossing that line with your child ISN'T NEARLY AS BAD AS IT'S BEING MADE TO BE.
If it's no big deal for it to be cut, then it's no big deal for it to be there. Either it does or does not make a difference. Pick a side and stick with it. If it makes a diff. then it's not the same film (so why even watch it), if it doesn't then go ahead and watch it with the kids.

 

[Adam Tyner]

To reiterate a point I made earlier that apparently everyone glossed over:
The version of the film rated PG was submitted to the MPAA as a director's cut.
------------------
My DVD list | My personal site

 

[Tom-G]

I won't be seeing this film either, but if a DVD contains two different cuts of a movie, e.g. theatrical and director's cut, then that is fine with me. As long as it contains a choice and retains the theatrical version as well, we are all better off.
I do agree with Seth. Making a film more "family-friendly" is completely asinine. Part of the responsibility of a parent is deciding on what a child has access to. If a movie has an "R" rating, it is there for a reason--it was intended for adults. Angry parents trying to have the studios capitulate to their demands is quite annoying. Why should I have someone else determine what is good for me to watch, just because "little Johnny" shouldn't be exposed to something offensive? That's horseshit.
Parents: do your job. Don't expect the government, movie studios or anyone else to do it for you. That is absolutely ludicrous.
------------------

[Edited last by Tom_G on September 01, 2001 at 11:33 AM]

 

[Robert Crawford]

Take your cries of censorship to another cause, please...

Andy,
Your comment was not necessary!
Crawdaddy
------------------

 

[Brian Lawrence]

Damn it! I wanted the NC-17 version with the hot lesbian Pussycat lovefest

[Edited last by Brian Lawrence on September 01, 2001 at 06:48 PM]

 

[NickSo]

quote: Damn it! I wanted the NC-17 version with the hot lesbian Pussycat lovefest[/quote]
Since i just watched it just 15 minutes ago, i wholeheartedly totally agree, and so do my raging teen hormones...

Man, Rachel leigh cook is close 2nd after Mena Suvari.. Hmm... maybe i shoudl make a sig pic of me and Rachel...
Man, Tara Reid was hilarious... i love the dumb blond stereotype...
Uh oh, i just saw the post... SMILIE ABUSE!

[Edited last by NickSo on September 02, 2001 at 12:29 AM]

 

[Peter Avellino]

I don't get it. I just don't get it. Look, putting aside anyone actually getting upset over this, what is the point of this PG version. I saw Josie in the theater, so what was all that objectionable to warrant the expense and trouble of something like this, months after the film was pretty much a box office disaster?
Hypothetical situation that would warrant an angry response: when There's Something About Mary was in theaters, there was talk that Fox might release a re-edited PG-13 version of the film. Now, I have no idea what this version would have been like, and the idea was ultimately abandoned, but if this did happen or there was a similar release with, say, the American Pie movies, then I could almost understand this from a business standpoint, even if I was totally against it actually happening. But with Josie, which hardly contained the leads frolicking around naked for 90 minutes, what is the point? Anyone? Anyone?

 

[Adam Tyner]

what is the point of this PG version.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/Forum15/HTML/030124.html#13
------------------
My DVD list | My personal site

 

[Joe McKeown]

The "Stupid Idea" question can really only be answered by the sales figures. So long as the original versions are available, that's great. To use the previous example; if a million people were willing to shell out the $20 for a G-rated version of Basic Instinct then cutting a G-rated version would be a good idea. (I would agree with the previous post that there would be no point to this; but the customer is always right.)
Releasing a more-censored version is really no different than releasing an un-censored version. In both cases the content is being tweaked simply to expand the available market. OK maybe I'm just cynical, but are the extra few seconds of "boobs" or whatever, really attributable to the "Director's artistic vision" in the unrated cuts of American Pie or Roadtrip??
So long as I can get the version I want; I don't care if the studios release G or PG-rated pan-and-scan versions. I ALWAYS retain the option of not buying the studio's offerings.
In the case of Josie specifically: After watching the movie, my criticism was that the movie didn't seem to know what demographinc it was intended for. The language and the afore-mentioned sign-joke target the movie at a higher age group than the mind-control plotline which would insult the intelligence of some pre-teens. I gather they were trying to make a kids movie that would appeal to adults; but weren't subtle enough to keep the jokes over the kids' heads. If that is the case; I think cutting back a hair might be closer to the actual intent.

 

[Edwin-S]

---Damn it! I wanted the NC-17 version with the hot lesbian Pussycat lovefest ---
Now you're talking. I'll buy that for a dollar!!
------------------

 

[derek]

Congrats Universal on giving the family-oriented consumer more options for their DVD viewing. To herald dvd's arrival before its release the seemless branching option was often touted as an option for various cuts to be made available on a single dvd. It would be very nice to have more director or studio approved edited (ie airline/tv cut) DVD for those concerned about objectionable material.
------------------
Derek
Surround EX FAQ: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/P...urroundex.html