WHV Announcement: Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume Two (Blu-ray) (DVD) (1 Viewer)

[cgm1013]

It's disingenuous of Warner Bros. to treat Tom & Jerry like this when they release other items with racist content from their catalog with no problem. You don't see them censoring something like "The Jazz Singer" even though it has Al Jolson in blackface throughout the movie.

 

[Greg Chenoweth]

Ron, you nailed it on the head. They are continuously releasing TOM & JERRY DVD's that are targeted for the casual fan and younger crowds with one disc compilations. I think it is good that WHV is finding every way possible to get these cartoons into a wide audience. However, with them omitting these two cartoons, they are leaving out the collectors entirely in this process. Why can't we get what we want as well? Go ahead and target the kids' groups with multiple single disc releases, I have no problem with it. But, at the same time, don't forget us collectors who have supported these characters for a long time. A sticker on the box would be a great way to go.

 

[dana martin]

Originally Posted by MHuf
I am the publicist on this title and this information is inaccurate. Sorry for any misunderstanding.

MHuf being the Publicist on this title, I have a question to pose to you, I was going to just send a pm, but felt that this needed said correctly in this public forum, has all the negative responses from the community, here and at Amazon (pre -release reviews) and on WB's own classic animation page and other various outlets, shown that this Duo in fact has a large following? And that if something is labeled as intended for the "Adult Collector" (your company's own press release) that possibly the wrong choice was made in omitting these two cartoons.
My dilemma is that I do so love the Classic Theatrical T&J shorts, HB-Dietch-Jones, but I do not care one bit about the watered down Saturday morning kid show version that has replaced it, well not so much. But I believe that they should always be presented as "Originally Intended" if WB feels the need to include the re-drawn toons as a bonus feature I am OK with that. Hopefully we will get a res ponce back, but it must be getting hard to release a set that is ticking off the core fan base, funny the people who would be buying this are the ones most up-set. Hopefuly we will get an answer....?

 

[MHuf]

Hey guys, below is our official statement. Please know that I am not ignoring your comments and questions. I do not monitor this forum regularly. Perhaps Ron Epstein can collect everyone's questions and email them to me and I'll answer what I can? Ron? Warner Bros. Home Entertainment carefully monitors all content it plans for release. While undertaking a review of "Tom and Jerry: The Golden Collection Volume 2," the company felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

If anyone has any questions you can post them here with a QUESTION: prefix.
I will be happy to collect them and send them to Warner for answering

 

[sewolawen73]

Thanks Ron for taking care of this! QUESTION: According to your press release, your reason for omitting the cartoons "Mouse Cleaning" and "Casanova Cat" in the upcoming Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume 2 are that you "felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts." Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you advertise that this series of the Tom & Jerry Golden Collection was intended for the ADULT COLLECTOR? Whom not only are very aware of the historical yet controversial content, but are demanding it preserved to be enjoyed in the privacy of our homes. We are also the same audience that have purchased and enjoyed the uncensored Popeye, Looney Tunes Golden Collections and Platinum Collections with similar content (to name a few). What puzzles me is that I along with many other loyal viewers of Warner Brothers animation, have already purchased Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume 1 which already had politically incorrect content restored in several of the shorts so why did Warner Brother change their plans and edited this upcoming second volume when it contains content that is already similar to the first volume? Especially when we were promised before the first volume was released that all the cartoons would be presented uncut and restored? Considering how many compilations there are targeted for the casual audience and/or children, I strongly feel we, the ADULT COLLECTORS (the intended audience of this T&J Golden Collection - NOT CHILDREN) should have to right to enjoy these cartoons uncut and restored as originally promised without this unnecessary act of censorship. I hope you take this and other letters into consideration and present the entire Tom & Jerry Golden Collection series as originally intended. Otherwise I will have to regrettably cease purchasing any further media from Warner Brothers.

 

[sewolawen73]

Thanks Ron for taking care of this! QUESTION: According to your press release, your reason for omitting the cartoons "Mouse Cleaning" and "Casanova Cat" in the upcoming Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume 2 are that you "felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts." Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you advertise that this series of the Tom & Jerry Golden Collection was for the ADULT COLLECTOR? Whom not only are very aware of the historical yet controversial content, but are demanding it preserved to be enjoyed in the privacy of our homes. We are also the same audience that have purchased and enjoyed the uncensored Looney Tunes Golden Collections and Platinum Collections with similar content (to name a few). What puzzles me is that I along with many other loyal viewers of Warner Brothers animation, have already purchased Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume 1 which already had politically incorrect content restored in several of the shorts so why did Warner Brother change their plans and edited this upcoming second volume when it contains content that is already similar to the first volume? Especially when we were promised before the first volume was released that all the cartoons would be presented uncut and restored? Considering how many compilations there are targeted for the casual audience and/or children, I strongly feel we, the ADULT COLLECTORS (the intended audience of this T&J Golden Collection ) should have to right to enjoy these cartoons uncut and restored as originally promised. I hope you take this and other letters into consideration and present the entire Tom & Jerry Golden Collection series as originally intended. Otherwise I will have to regrettably cease purchasing any further media from Warner Brothers.

 

[cgm1013]

QUESTION: How is it that Warner Bros. can justify removing "Mouse Cleaning" and Casanova Cat" claiming "that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience"? It is widely understood that the main audience for the Golden Collection is the adult cartoon fan. The Golden Collection: Volume 1 contains a lengthy disclaimer (that cannot be skipped or forwarded through) at the beginning of each disc. It also states on the back "Tom and Jerry: Golden Collection Volume 1 is intended for the Adult Collector and May Not Be Suitable for Children." "Mouse Cleaning" and "Casanova Cat" do not contain anything that is more offensive than the other theatrical shorts that were released on Volume 1. I would love to support this Tom & Jerry release, but will not as long as it is being censored and the chronology of the theatrical shorts is presented as incomplete. This issue will also make me much less likely to purchase Volume 3 if/when it is released because I don't feel like Warner Bros. is treating the longtime adult Tom & Jerry fans with any respect. (Thanks, Ron!)

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Folks...
We are going to be moving this site within the next 3 days. Our efforts will
be concentrated on those efforts.
For that reason, I will accumulate your questions through the end of today
and submit them to Warner.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by cgm1013
It's disingenuous of Warner Bros. to treat Tom & Jerry like this when they release other items with racist content from their catalog with no problem. You don't see them censoring something like "The Jazz Singer" even though it has Al Jolson in blackface throughout the movie.

Hell, the bonus short A Plantation Act on The Jazz Singer Blu-ray may be the most racist film in the Warner catalog.
But the difference is there's no perception of little Joey possibly seeing The Jazz Singer or Gone with the Wind, or asking their mom to buy it for them. That's when you get silly decisions like this one to for the classic cartoon shorts, despite the now misnomer of "adult collector" intentions.
Also, note that The Jazz Singer or Gone with the Wind discs don't even have to bother with content disclaimers.

 

[Ruz-El]

I don't have a question, since my concerns have been addressed by the members above. I offer a solution: Include the "controversial" cartoons completely restored but in the "Extras" section so that they wont play automatically when "Play All" is selected. It's a compromise that I'm sure many of us would accept as opposed to not having them there at all, and it takes the onus off Warners since the viewer has to specifically select the titles to view them. As it stands, I will not only not purchase the remaining Tom & Jerry blurays as long as they continue to be censored, but no further Warner Brothers classic animation releases in SD or Bluray period. If Warner Brothers will not respect the legacy of theatrical animation, then I wont support Warner Brothers in any of their theatrical animation efforts.

 

[Greg Chenoweth]

QUESTION: How come you put out multiple single disc collections of TOM & JERRY material all the time for children and for stores but ignore the buying needs of the collectors? This set is intended for the Adult Collector and we should be able to get all the cartoons with a set that is geared specifically for the adult collector. I don't mind disclaimers and I don't mind the endless re-collections that come out but something like this GOLDEN COLLECTION should have an intended target group. 2nd QUESTION: Did Warner Home Video receive complaints from TOM & JERRY GOLDEN COLLECTION VOLUME 1 with similar cartoons with characters in black face or what might have been deemed "racial stereotypes"? How much negative feedback was there? If there wasn't any negative feedback, then what were the determining factors in omitting CASANOVA CAT and MOUSE CLEANERS from VOLUME 2?

 

[Escapay]

QUESTION: To continue with Greg's question, can you further explain what the company considers the intended audience to be? Obviously, Tom & Jerry has a wide range of fans, but this specific set of releases had initially been targeted towards the "adult collector." Does the company now feel that the "adult collector" is no longer capable of determining what is offensive to their own varied tastes, and thus makes the decision for them?

 

Hey guys, below is our official statement. Please know that I am not ignoring your comments and questions. I do not monitor this forum regularly. Perhaps Ron Epstein can collect everyone's questions and email them to me and I'll answer what I can? Ron? Warner Bros. Home Entertainment carefully monitors all content it plans for release. While undertaking a review of "Tom and Jerry: The Golden Collection Volume 2," the company felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts.

I'm not addressing MHuf directly (thank you for posting, however ), but I did notice that the last portion of this quote is verbatim what WB Classic Animation posted on Facebook several days ago, and the logic seems very faulty to me. The "intended audience" as described by WB on their packaging, is the "adult collector", and to repeat what others have said, it makes no sense to say that certain content is inappropriate for adults. Also, WB has made other, equally "inappropriate" titles available uncut, like the 1930s Popeye cartoons. The biggest problem I have with these situations, and this release in particular, is that omitting or otherwise censoring these cartoons is tantamount to denying the extent of racism. The argument is that, because Tom and Jerry was originally intended for a family audience, it must be altered or updated to remain in line with a a changing family audience. What I would say, however, is that it is far more important to present them as is, because people (really even including children) need to remember that racism was once so common and natural, that it happened in Tom and Jerry cartoons that the whole family would have seen. Cartoons do not breed racism, but ignorance does, and with the removal of these shorts, WB is simply enhancing that ignorance, when instead, they could use these cartoons and this release to help educate about racism. I cannot understand why disclaimers (forced, if need be) cannot be used before these cartoons. Please do reconsider your position and release these cartoons restored and uncut with the others

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by Sean Greenwood
I'm not addressing MHuf directly (thank you for posting, however ), but I did notice that the last portion of this quote is verbatim what WB Classic Animation posted on Facebook several days ago, and the logic seems very faulty to me. The "intended audience" as described by WB on their packaging, is the "adult collector", and to repeat what others have said, it makes no sense to say that certain content is inappropriate for adults. Also, WB has made other, equally "inappropriate" titles available uncut, like the 1930s Popeye cartoons.
The biggest problem I have with these situations, and this release in particular, is that omitting or otherwise censoring these cartoons is tantamount to denying the extent of racism. The argument is that, because Tom and Jerry was originally intended for a family audience, it must be altered or updated to remain in line with a a changing family audience. What I would say, however, is that it is far more important to present them as is, because people (really even including children) need to remember that racism was once so common and natural, that it happened in Tom and Jerry cartoons that the whole family would have seen. Cartoons do not breed racism, but ignorance does, and with the removal of these shorts, WB is simply enhancing that ignorance, when instead, they could use these cartoons and this release to help educate about racism.
I cannot understand why disclaimers (forced, if need be) cannot be used before these cartoons. Please do reconsider your position and release these cartoons restored and uncut with the others

Good words.
RAH

 

[Ejanss]

I don't have a question, since my concerns have been addressed by the members above. I offer a solution: Include the "controversial" cartoons completely restored but in the "Extras" section so that they wont play automatically when "Play All" is selected. It's a compromise that I'm sure many of us would accept as opposed to not having them there at all, and it takes the onus off Warners since the viewer has to specifically select the titles to view them.

I'm all for the "Bonus" idea, since that's where Warner's Looney boxes put the Private Snafu cartoons, which contained wartime ethnic depictions and adult-GI humor. The parent wants to show the cartoons, the collector wants to HAVE the cartoons, it's just a matter of Having without necessarily Showing. Disney's "Chronological" Disney Treasures shorts of Donald Duck and Pluto, etc., used to hire Leonard Maltin to personally disclaimer each particular questionable short, and took the collectors' view of defending them. (In Donald's "Autograph Hound", for example, he defended black and Italian-waiter caricatures by saying that they represented specific well-known 30's actors, who had successful careers.) Other times it might be "Donald may be carrying a gun and going hunting in this one, but in the end, we see he's just too kind-hearted to shoot anything." The next set, however, Disney got a bit lazy, and simply exiled questionable shorts off to their own Bonus Shorts area, with one coverall Leonard Maltin "We don't write 'em, folks..." disclaimer.

 

[CDCB]

I'm all for the "Bonus" idea, since that's where Warner's Looney boxes put the Private Snafu cartoons, which contained wartime ethnic depictions and adult-GI humor.

I really don't see why the same can't be done for Tom & Jerry. Heck, might as well put that in question form... QUESTION: Disney released several controversial cartoon shorts under the explanation that the racial stereotypes in them were wrong then and wrong today but included under the justification that omitting them and treating them as if they never existed would be just as bad as the stereotypes themselves. It's better to include these shorts and "learn from our past" to quote Leonard Maltin from one of his introductions. My question is why can't the same thing be done for Tom & Jerry Golden Collection Volume 2? ----- On the same note, I've gotten several people to sign the petition to include these shorts, and I'm continuing to get plenty of support. Is everybody else doing the same?

 

[JoHud]

Hey guys, below is our official statement. Please know that I am not ignoring your comments and questions. I do not monitor this forum regularly. Perhaps Ron Epstein can collect everyone's questions and email them to me and I'll answer what I can? Ron? Warner Bros. Home Entertainment carefully monitors all content it plans for release. While undertaking a review of "Tom and Jerry: The Golden Collection Volume 2," the company felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts.

Yeah, that was posted weeks ago. Yet I still wonder what they mean by "intended audience" here. WHV is marketing this as a set for adult collectors like Vol. 1, right? If so, what audience are these appropriate for if not adult collectors, the sort of customer that is more aware than most of these sorts of unflattering and dated content in the films of T&J's vintage?

Hell, the bonus short A Plantation Act on The Jazz Singer Blu-ray may be the most racist film in the Warner catalog

Also noteworthy is that short has been released in two separate releases, The DVD and later blu-ray release of The Jazz Singer. Though I dispute that later claim, there are others that easily rival it in the WB catalog, even in the Al Jolson filmography.

 

[TomandJerry91]

Question: Doesn't WHV find it the least bit hypocritical to remove Mouse Cleaning and Casanova Cat when shorts just as bad or worse have been released uncut and restored in the Popeye and Looney Tunes sets?

 

[sewolawen73]

Warner Bros. Home Entertainment carefully monitors all content it plans for release. While undertaking a review of "Tom and Jerry: The Golden Collection Volume 2," the company felt that certain content would be inappropriate for the intended audience and therefore excluded several shorts. Hopefully Warner Brothers will provide more answers to our questions as opposed to continually slamming us with this ridiculous, ignorant press release, which at this point is starting to feel like Chinese water torture. Aside from seeing this on the WB Classic Animation Facebook page (buried in the comments announcing a Dr. Seuss collection oddly enough), I got the exact same response when I received a letter from WHV CEO Jim Noonan responding to my letter complaining of the missing cartoons. Not to mention my favorite part of the letter: We hope that the exclusion of these shorts will not diminish your enjoyment of this set. It's almost comical, haha!