Predator 2 Special Edition is censored!!! (1 Viewer)

[Ronald Epstein]

Incredibly funny Romier!

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I'm sure we have better things to
bring to the studio's attention than this.

 

[ElAhrai]

I remember there being a conversation during the commentary on Jason Goes to Hell where the director said that he was told that an, ahem, non-aroused male was okay, but an aroused one was not. He then went on to describe the situation on set as saying "we can't have angry pickle".

My wife and I still laugh about that.

 

[John Sullmeyer]

Please, no side by side screen shot comparisons.

 

[Adam_WM]

Re: the screen shot of blurring...

Who notices this stuff? GEEZ.

 

[Malcolm R]

Generally someone with a poorly calibrated display. The only time these blurs are usually popping off the screen is when the brightness is turned up way too high.

 

[David_N]

The shot is so quick how would you even notice this?

 

[Tom Brennan]

Playboy Playmate Teri Weigel is unblurred, right? I'm amazed it took two pages for this question to be asked. Of course Predator 2 is tame compared to some of the stuff she's done now. American Bukkake 7, anyone?

 

[TravisR]

It still sounds like it's not the Predator 2 DVD special edition that's 'censored'. It seems like that Predator 2 has ALWAYS had that shot blurred in order to get an R rating.

 

[ErichH]

As long as Teri's floping around is clear, I'm good.
Forget the Cuyans already!

JMO

E

 

[Sean*O]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned Harvey Keitel on this thread yet..

 

[Charlie O.]

Bad Lieutenant was NC-17 so it doesn't count.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I've seen this film more times than I care to remember and it's always looked like that. But even if it were altered, I don't care, it's a dude and it goes by in a flash, no pun intended.

Now, having said that, if they get within ten feet of either Kiera Knightley or Laura Harring with that blurr thingy i'll be the first to cry fowl!

If this makes me a hipocrite than lock me up, cause i'm guilty as sin!

 

[Steven Piquet]

So that would be 'hypocrite' and yes it does - but at least you have the balls to admit it and I gotta' respect that.

I have to wonder what kind of porn you guys have ever pleasured yourself to (as I am certain some of you have) as I doubt it only ever involved girls. Rhetorical question to such readers: when you watched the porn who's p.o.v were you getting off on? Who or perhaps more precisely what were you identifying with? My bet it was a penis.

As to the reasons for the taboo around male full-frontals in popular cinema (however unreasonable it may be) I've tended to share the same opinion as suggested above by WillG - with a woman you see pubic fuzz, with a man it's the package deal. While my wife and other women I know have strongly disagreed, the female equivalent to a male full frontal would be legs akimbo for the camera.

But I despair at the nonsense above re works of art and utilitarian form. By this measure straight women are deprived of feeling physical attraction because us guys are functional rather than aesthetically pleasing. So I'm no David but not all women are Venus De Milo and there are some very attractive men out there, they're just not attractive to me.

Personally I find women to be very beautiful works of art but I know this opinion is ultimately motivated by the same impulses which prompt a dog to chase a bitch, a bull to chase a cow etc. Just 'coz a cow never painted a Mona Lisa doesn't mean we're not animals at heart at the very least influenced if no longer governed by the remnants of our instinctive behaviour (especially when it involves watching beautiful women).

sPk

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Hey, my man, fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly.

Guy naked in movies = bad.

Girl naked in movies = good.

Simple equasion.

Steven,
I mean this completely without harmful intent believe me, but it's just not cool to correct someone's spelling error.

Just a freindly FYI. But, for what it's worth, thanks, i've made the correction.

Also, on a serious note, straight-up porn disgusts me, I know that those of you that know me here may be surprised to hear that coming from me of all people, but it's true. Give me a great photo or film with Madchen Amick in it FULLY CLOTHED and that'll do it for me, I don't necessarily need to see the nudity and all that it implies.

Hell, an attractive face is usually sufficiant for me, I think that Calista Flockhart has a beautiful face, the body though...nah.

 

[Aaron Reynolds]

Yeah, that scene in Monkey Trouble scarred me for life.

 

[Travis Brashear]

Originally posted by Steven Piquet:
the female equivalent to a male full frontal would be legs akimbo for the camera.

Hey, let's put this guy in charge!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Even if it's ?

 

[TravisR]

That pic is broken for me.

And I have a feeling that's a good thing

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I really shouldn't have to answer your question, Colin, but fine, no, I don't think Kathy Bates would be very attractive naked. BTW, I also couldn't open the link, thank God!

Surely you know what I meant, right? I'm a typical guy, I like to see the occasional hot naked woman in a film, despite what I said above. It may not be necessary, but it is nice when it occurs.

Just to reiterate, it's porn that I can't stand. Give me Dream Lover over Forrest Hump any day. However, I realize that there are varying degrees of porn, it's the hard stuff that just does nothing for me. Now, if you pop in a film like Mulholland Dr. and cue up that scene between Naomi Watts and Laura Harring...oh boy.

If someone had told me that a thread about a Predator film would mutate into a discussion about the pro's and con's of nudity in film, I would have thought they were nuts!

 

[Eric_B_C]

In Wild Things, Kevin Bacon steps out of a shower naked, and appears to have... Shall we say, partial wood. I remember it vividly (sadly) as my wife quite liked it