What's new

cover altered: "What A Girl Wants" (1 Viewer)

Brenton

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 25, 2002
Messages
1,169
It appears that the cover for the just-announced What A Girl Wants DVD has some censorship. The original poster showed Amanda Bynes holding up a peace sign, while the new DVD clearly does not. I heard that this is because the studio was afraid of the peace sign being misinterpreted as an anti-war statement.



Anybody know if this change was made fresh from the DVD, or if there was actually a censored "B" poster that this cover image is from?
 

Randy A Salas

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 25, 2002
Messages
1,348
The poster was changed just before the movie came out:

1 April 2003
AP Online
English
Copyright 2003 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Warner Bros. wants to avoid making a political statement in its ads for the movie "What a Girl Wants."

Print advertisements for the teen comedy originally featured a photograph of star Amanda Bynes wearing a tank top with an American flag on it and flashing the peace sign with her fingers as she stands between two British royal guards.

But with the war in Iraq sparking anti-war protests in the United States and abroad, Warner Bros. quickly changed the ad. The studio said Monday it feared the peace sign would be viewed as a political message.

New versions of the image feature Bynes with her right hand at her side, although many of the original posters already had been placed on billboards and buses before the change was made.
The movie came out April 4. WB announced the change on March 31.
 

JohnAP

Second Unit
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
264
Yeah, this was done on the theatrical posters a couple months ago too. I remember John Stewart making fun of it on the daily show. It is a pretty stupid thing when a peace sign is considered controversial, especially in the context of such an inconsequential movie.
 

Julian Lalor

Supporting Actor
Joined
Oct 5, 1999
Messages
975
Is the movie about an American peace protester in London? Looks like another one of those "spoiled brat looking for their father (who happens to be some rich, stuffy Lord with disapproving relatives) and finding herself while at the same time changing everyone's attitude of her so that, by the end, all landed gentry in England falls in love with her brash American spunk and elect her Queen" type of trash. The peace sign has, I suspect, little to do with any political beliefs of the protagonist or filmmakers (as if!) but rather is merely a mindless gesture that looked cool at the time. Warners decision to remove the peace sign is not censorship; it is merely a corporate decision not to upset some people over a misleading statement which wasn't a statement at all.
 

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
13,222
Warners decision to remove the peace sign is not censorship; it is merely a corporate decision not to upset some people over a misleading statement which wasn't a statement at all.
That's about the most reasonable description of this sort of statement I've seen. People love to toss around the word "censorship" when it doesn't apply. I mean, if I print something in one of my reviews and then decide I don't like what I wrote and change it, is that censorship? No different here. No one's rights were oppressed by the alteration of the poster...
 

David Lambert

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
11,377
I agree with Colin that Julian's description of the gesture is pure genius.

I also agree that this isn't worth getting upset about, there were probably multiple shots taken in the photo shoot, these two looked identical other than the hand being up vs. on her hip, and they originally went with the one that made her look "hippy-er" until the gesture became an issue.

In the end, this is better anyway. Really, they should have saved the two-fingered shot to indicate any sequel they decided to make! :wink:
 

ThomasC

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2001
Messages
6,526
Real Name
Thomas
The horror!
:laugh:

Daphne Reynolds (Amanda Bynes's character) isn't sure Henry Dashwood is her father after all. She has a DNA test run to see if her suspicions are true, and indeed they are. Her mother, Libby, admits to having an affair while being married to Henry, and that her father ran off to Cambodia after a brush-in with the law. Libby makes Daphne promise not to run off again and go to Cambodia, but in the end, Daphne can't resist. She secretly boards a plane to Cambodia, where she will track down her real father and find out his deepest and darkest secrets.

The horror! The horror! :D
 

MarkHastings

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
12,013
there were probably multiple shots taken in the photo shoot, these two looked identical other than the hand being up vs. on her hip
The 2 shots may have also been composited. Look at the belt on the guard (on the right). In the shot with Amanda giving the peace sign, his belt is in line with her breast (and the flag). But in the shot without the peace sign the belt is below the flag (just under her breast).
 

Colin Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2000
Messages
13,222
The 2 shots may have also been composited. Look at the belt on the guard (on the right). In the shot with Amanda giving the peace sign, his belt is in line with her breast (and the flag). But in the shot without the peace sign the belt is below the flag (just under her breast).
Thanks for giving us justification to spend hours staring at her breasts! :D
 

David Lambert

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
11,377
Oh, I'm certain there was some compositing going on. After all, do you think her hair ALWAYS flys out like that? :D
 

JohnDMoore

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Aug 16, 2002
Messages
191
I have no interest in this film, but it looks like the pose change leaves some serious space empty in the composition in the shot.
 

Dan Rudolph

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
4,042
They could have just put one of the fingers down. No more political message and composition isn't affected.
 

Jonathan Dagmar

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
723
Well I do not think is was censorship. Censorship is responsible for the American cut of "American Psycho" being several minutes shorter than the Canadian release. Not altering a movie poster to remove a peace sign.

I do hwoever think that it does qualify as politically correct bull****. But what do I care, it's not like I am going to buy this silly movie anyway.

*sigh*. PC. I really hate PC.
 

Inspector Hammer!

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 15, 1999
Messages
11,063
Location
Houston, Texas
Real Name
John Williamson
I don't really like the fact that they altered the artwork, Warner was too sensitive about the issue IMO, but at the same time i'm not really concerned with it that much either.

I find Amanda Bynes to be utterly charming and funny on her sitcom What I like About You, so i'll probably give this a spin.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,497
Messages
5,114,330
Members
144,103
Latest member
sajidjadoonisbb
Recent bookmarks
0
Top