Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

As if the Warner debacle wasn't enough!!


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 of 36 OFFLINE   Kevin Coleman

Kevin Coleman

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1999

Posted August 17 2001 - 11:59 AM

Can you believe this:
http://ap.tbo.com/ap...GAR3EPLIQC.html

I can't believe the studios and the artists are allowing this. Well I guess I can beleive it now since WB still alters it's own movies. I say we get an E-mail address for this "club" and let them know how we feel.


Kevin C. Posted Image

#2 of 36 OFFLINE   Michael Boyd

Michael Boyd

    Second Unit



  • 278 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 19 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 12:10 PM

A video store up there in Utah tried this with Titanic back when it was the hot VHS rental and sale. At that time the studio was pretty angry and threatened a lawsuit if I recall correctly.

Sort of ironic they have these hang ups on sex in Utah when their religion was advocating bigamy a 100 years ago.

------------------
Michael Boyd
Michael Boyd

Currently enjoying movies in China via itunes on a 13 inch Macbook.

#3 of 36 OFFLINE   Tom-G

Tom-G

    Screenwriter



  • 1,646 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 31 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 12:15 PM

I remember reading about this back when Titanic was released on VHS. Although said movie wasn't given an "R" rating, the brief topless scene was edited to make it more family friendly.

I have no qualms with people who wish to censor inappropriate material for their kids and choose this method. I do have a problem when that desire encroaches on my freedom to choose to watch a movie with adult content.

I don't need anyone telling me what I should and should not watch. I'll be the judge of that.

------------------
Posted Image

#4 of 36 OFFLINE   HalS

HalS

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 77 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 06 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 01:17 PM

Hollywood does not like this policy. As someone else noted, when it first started with Titanic, there was a big controversy. Now nobody makes a big deal over it. Pretty obvious reason why I think....there's just no benefit on the PR front to fighting this battle. If 200 Mormons in Utah want to buy a VHS tape and chop it up, that's their business. To go in there and fight a lawsuit over it, I don't see how the industry would benefit from that.

#5 of 36 OFFLINE   Glenn Overholt

Glenn Overholt

    Producer



  • 4,207 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted August 17 2001 - 01:31 PM

Oh, that's Utah! I heard the other day that you can be arrested for possessing any of the Harry Potter books.

#6 of 36 OFFLINE   David Lambert

David Lambert

    Executive Producer



  • 11,386 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 03 2001

Posted August 17 2001 - 01:53 PM

Quote:
"We're going to have no comment on that," said Cheryl Glenn, a spokeswoman for DreamWorks studio which made "Gladiator."

How much do you want to bet that it's "no comment" because their legal departments are working on this issue? Posted Image

------------------

DAVE/Memphis

My 3-year-old enjoying Superman - The Movie in widescreen:
Posted Image

(Some of my DVD's are to the left side of the picture)
DAVE/Memphis, TN

...Want to see your favorite show on DVD?

#7 of 36 OFFLINE   John_McKittrick

John_McKittrick

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 226 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 09 1999

Posted August 17 2001 - 02:13 PM

Typical mormon crap.

John
Long Live XBox and DVD!!

#8 of 36 OFFLINE   Justin Lane

Justin Lane

    Screenwriter



  • 2,149 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 02:49 PM

If someone wants to watch a movie in an edited manner that is their perogative. Who am I or anyone else on this to tell another indivdual how they should or should not view a film? I myself would not watch a film in this manner, but that once again is my "own" decision.

"Typical mormon crap."

This comment made by John is particularly discouraging, not to mention against forum rules. I am not a mormmon, but there could be members here who take such a comment to be a major insult. Why such hostility against others who do not have the same exact beliefs as you? Sheesh.

J

------------------
Don't be a luddy-duddy! Don't be a mooncalf! Don't be a jabbernowl!

#9 of 36 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer



  • 3,043 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted August 17 2001 - 02:54 PM

Quote:
I myself would not watch a film in this manner, but that once again is my "own" decision.

That's exactly the problem — it should NOT be your decision. The manner in which I watch a film should not be my decision, nor should it be the decision of Wal-Mart, Blockbuster, or the market research guys at Warner Bros. It should be up to the filmmakers, and no one else.

To suggest otherwise is insulting; a slap in the face to those who invested months or years of their lives into making the film what it is.
 

 


#10 of 36 OFFLINE   Kevin Coleman

Kevin Coleman

    Supporting Actor



  • 500 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1999

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:07 PM

IMO they are not even watching films. It is my opinion that once the movies have been molested they are no longer a film they are just worthless pieces of shit. I can't imagine trying to watch a film that some no hack yahoo has hacked all to hell.

Kevin C.




#11 of 36 OFFLINE   Mark Lee

Mark Lee

    Second Unit



  • 337 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 04 1998

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:09 PM

Hippocrates??? Posted Image (or did you mean "hypocrites"?) -- from someone who once took the Hippocratic oath....

------------------
Mark K. Lee

"Life is like a sewer -- what you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Tom Lehrer

[Edited last by Mark Lee on August 17, 2001 at 10:11 PM]
Mark K. Lee

"Life is like a sewer -- what you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Tom Lehrer

#12 of 36 OFFLINE   CharlesD

CharlesD

    Screenwriter



  • 1,495 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 30 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:19 PM

Quote:
The manner in which I watch a film should not be my decision, nor should it be the decision of Wal-Mart, Blockbuster, or the market research guys at Warner Bros. It should be up to the filmmakers, and no one else.

Absolutely. If they don't like part or all of a given movie, then they shouldn't watch it! There's plenty of "family friendly" movies without nudity (I've never understood the objection to casual nudity in non-sexual contexts) or profanity.

If they feel that even those movies don't reflect their "values" then they are free to make movies that do.

Why butcher a movie because you don't approve of what's in it? If you don't like a movie just don't watch it!

------------------
-- Will Work for Five Million Dollars

#13 of 36 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:34 PM

The guys who run the store OWN those videos. If a bunch of easily-offended people wanna mangle movies and pretend they're still watching the real thing, let 'em.

They're not hurting me. As a matter of fact, this story gave me a nice laugh. So thanks, Mormon movie butcher guys!


------------------
Scott

Check out my Movie Reviews at Epinions. Help support my debilitating DVD addiction!
AOL IM: TheAngryJew29



#14 of 36 OFFLINE   Ben Tallen

Ben Tallen

    Agent



  • 37 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:36 PM

This article left me speechless for a full ten seconds before it left me howling and gibbering in impotent rage for a full ten minutes. This is theft, censorship, and the rape of our celluloid resources! Posted Image I must stop typing now or this will turn into one giant flame of the state of Utah.

Ben Tallen


------------------

"The Mob is run by murdering, thieving, lying, cheating psychopaths. We work for the President of the United States of America."

How do you spot an extroverted Minnesotan?
He stares at your shoes when he talks.

#15 of 36 OFFLINE   Tom-G

Tom-G

    Screenwriter



  • 1,646 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 31 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 03:38 PM

Quote:
Why butcher a movie because you don't approve of what's in it? If you don't like a movie just don't watch it!

I concur! Like Scott said, if someone wishes to watch the mangled version of a movie, let them. I wish that parents would just trust the MPAA ratings on movies (as fallible as can sometimes be) and either restrict their kids from seeing the film, or simply accompany the kiddies to explain what is right and what is wrong.

You want hypocrisy? When I used to work at Blockbuster Video, I would regularly get drilled as to the content of a film in regards to sex, violence and foul language. As long as the movie didn't contain sex, the parents were always ok with letting their kids view the film.

If parents wish to have their movies censored by a third party, that's fine with me. Do what you like. I would suggest using the rating to ascertain the appropriateness of the movie. I absolutely do not want people forcing me to watch the movie in the way that they deem acceptable.

------------------
Posted Image

[Edited last by Tom_G on August 17, 2001 at 10:39 PM]

#16 of 36 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,395 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted August 17 2001 - 04:39 PM

Quote:
And "Saving Private Ryan." Its 90 profanities are silenced, but the powerful portrayal of World War II combat remains.
I'd disagree. Spielberg was going for a REALISTIC portrayal of WWII life. And believe it or not, people said the "Seven Dirty Words" back then. This is a true slap in the face to the filmmakers. Who are these people to second guess those who have invested years into the craft? To think you can edit a film and preserve it's meaning and intent is narrow-minded and arrogant. I mean, nothing you see or hear in movies is something new. You watch graphic (real life) violence on CNN. That kid on the bus in elementary school introduced you to all the major profanity. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it go away. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. Yet the evil's still there. Deal with issues instead of bitching until someone protects you from them.

This seriously reminds me of 1984. Next thing you know we'll have these guys running the Ministry of Truth.

------------------
My DVD Collection

#17 of 36 OFFLINE   Lannie Lorence

Lannie Lorence

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 76 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 20 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 04:42 PM

If a group of people want to watch a movie altered in some way, as long as their not forcing it on the rest of us, let them watch it. If they're deeply offended by certain words to the point it disrupts their enjoyment of a movie, it isn't hurting me to let them view it in a way that doesn't disturb them every five minutes.

Would you want a lawsuit put upon anyone who satirizes a work of art? Who takes a picture of the Mona Lisa and draws a mustache on it. What about the Phantom Menace re-edit? No one was calling for their blood.

Let them be. Lighten up. There are more important things to worry about.

#18 of 36 OFFLINE   Adam Lenhardt

Adam Lenhardt

    Executive Producer



  • 14,395 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 16 2001
  • LocationAlbany, NY

Posted August 17 2001 - 04:59 PM

Quote:
What about the Phantom Menace re-edit? No one was calling for their blood.
Go to http://boards.theforce.net/ . Enter The Phantom Menace forum. There is/was a several page rant condemning the Phantom Editor for desecrating George Lucas' work. I know. I was one of them. Think if you will. You've spent six months working on a painting. It is your master work. Somebody makes a print of it, and then puts mustaches on all the women, and starts circulating it around. Sure, your original painting is still there, but the work than was the product of months of sweat, blood and tears has been tainted because some people will always remember it as "the funny picture with bearded women."

#19 of 36 OFFLINE   Chris Bardon

Chris Bardon

    Screenwriter



  • 2,071 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 04 2000

Posted August 17 2001 - 05:04 PM

Look, how is this any different from editing a movie for television. Personally, I think that this is an something that studios should be seriously looking at. The "multi rating" feature could finally be given a workout... I'm sure that there are parents out there who would be extatic with this feature. There are a lot of films that can be taken to a PG or PG13 rating quite easily with minimal edits (done on TV all the time)-why not on disc. As long as the original version is there, I'm happy. Go choice!
XBox Live Gamertag:ChrisBardon

#20 of 36 OFFLINE   SteveMc

SteveMc

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 230 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 03 2001

Posted August 17 2001 - 05:49 PM

Great, good for them. I don't like it ,but if they want it that way that's ok and they have a right to I guess. But somehow to me, censoring and telling people what they can and can't read, watch, or listen to is a lot more dangerous than hearing a bad word. The mormons wouldn't want people to start thinking on their own now would they? UGH! End of rant before I go to far...

------------------
Crash

"I don't even own a gun, let alone many guns that would necessitate an entire rack."

Help us get the Friday the 13th films-UNCUT. Click Here or here



 

 



Back to Archived Threads 2001-2004


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow