Don't buy the Fantasia DVD unless you want to waste money. (1 Viewer)

[James_M]

You don't know what a Fro is? Its short for Afro. I think Disney took it out cause the centaurette was just butt ugly!! Just be glad they left in a whole bunch of naked half breed horse/ half human mutant freaks that frolic gayly around with each other! (you can see alot of T&A)

 

[Rob Gillespie]

It still sucks compared to Bald Mountain

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I can't believe all the support for censorship here! At the very least, they should have provided the original uncensored version via seamless branching, perhaps with an intro stating that it does not reflect today's PC standards.
I'm sorry, but I find this type of revisionism deeply disturbing.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Mark-W]

Roger Ebert had some comments of a similar nature
on last week's show: The Cartoon Network
is having a Bugs Bunny marathon and has
decided NOT to present several Bugs Bunny cartoons,
that, in retrospect, present "hurtful" stereotypes.
Ebert praised the Cartoon Network for their decision,
stating,
"As adults we have the ability to
discern that out-dated, racially stereotypical
modes of representation are bad,
but we can still view them in a historical
context without taking them at face value...
...children, by-and-large, cannot make
this distincition.
In several Bugs Bunny cartoons, Indians are
stereotyped, and Bugs even is made up like a
minstrel show character [not unlike the shot
from Fantasia that was zoomed].
Most children will not be able to distinguish
that these images are not acceptable, and thus,
we reinforce hurtful cultural stereotypes in
our children."
Makes sense to me.
I applaud Disney for "zooming" the shot, and
then also having the guts to explain why they
did so on the bonus DVD.
'nuf said,
Mark
------------------

 

[Jesse Skeen]

This is one disc I have which I bought on street date which I would not have gotten had I heard the reviews of it first. Besides the zooming, the re-dubbing of Deems Taylor is just plain silly. Having "Original Uncut Version" on the cover is VERY misleading, "as-close-as-possible recreation" would have been more appropriate. I prefer the laserdisc version of "Fantasia" to this one, as it is shown exactly as the 1990 theatrical re-issue was.
As far as the 'offensive' stuff goes, I think it would be better that kids not see certain cartoons at ALL than see censored versions. As much as I hate Di$ney for not putting out "Song of the South", I'd hate them even more if they put out a censored version and have that accepted as the 'original' version. Having BOTH the uncut version AND a 'kid-friendly' version would be OK though.

 

[Bryan]

Well, after seeing those clips, I may have to change my way of thinking. I hadn't seen those clips in so long, I had forgotten. If you were to look back on past posts, you'd probably see me being totaly against censorship, but in this case, I agree that it was better to zoom in away from her. Thanks for the link.
Roger Rabbit was something else though. That they shouldn't have cut. But I'm just a dog sometimes.

Then there's our old dead horse: Song Of The South. though I want that movie bad on DVD, but maybe it isn't right to release it. I remember only good things about it and I can still get the songs stuck in my head, but I'd have to see it again to make that judgement. After all, as far as I can tell, it never effected the way I look at any other human no matter what color/creed, it's the individual screw-ups. Hmmmm.
/me searches soul

 

[James_M]

Yeah, Bald Mountain has lots of T&A also, I even recall as a kid seeing one of the female minuion's hooter fly all the way up to fill the screen! It wasn't very appealing tho. In fact it was pretty scary. You won't see that in any future Fantasias. But I agree the orginal uncut is as misleading as the literal subtitle option on Princess Mononoke. Who says Disney is G-rated? I though the hangman at Disneyland's haunted mansion was pretty scary as a kid.

 

[LukeB]

So you bought the DVD set and enjoy it, but are posting that it is a waste of money for anyone to buy. Anyone else confused?

 

[Keith Paynter]

Thanks for the links to the clips!
This does answer a lot of questions as to why Disney chose to censor the material. In its context it does look offensive, with a diminuitive black centaurette servant.
I still wish there was a way to have included this material on the DVD, with a word of educated warning, similar to the 'disclaimer' on the commentary track of 'The Emperor's New Groove'.
It's amazing that I can be somewhat put off by the characterization of blacks in Fantasia, however I still relish the humour of Bob Clampett's classic Warner short, 'Coal Black an' De Sebben Dwarfs', because even though the short features an all black 'cast', the short doesn't demean them.
------------------

"Take it easy kid...it's only a movie!"

 

[Jarode]

Thank you for the clips they were fascinating and surprising to say the least. I'm grateful to have now had the chance to watch them. I don't think Eberts comments can be applied to this film because is not a movie designed for kids. Comparing Bugs Bunny to Fantasia doesn't jive well.
Most children don't go for no dialogue movies with classical music scores. I never met a kid in school who had the slightest interest in watching Fantasia. If memory serves me correct Walt Disney actually designed this movie for adults who enjoy the concert going experience not the kiddies. My guess is Disney could have used seamless branching or put the scenes on the boxed set as deleted scenes for collectors. I'm not a big fan of this film and the second one is a ripoff clocking in at an embarrassing 79 minutes!
Anyway, supporting censorhip even when it offends me, is not something I'm comfortable with. Releasing two separate versions would have been the ideal thing to do. With the uncensored version having a warning about offensive content attached to it.

 

[Damin J Toell]

Most children don't go for no dialogue movies with classical music scores. I never met a kid in school who had the slightest interest in watching Fantasia.

FWIW, when i caught Fantasia 2000 during its initial IMAX run in NYC, there were entire families present, including a very large number of children (who may have actually composed the majority of the audience).
DJ

 

[Seth Paxton]

Part of me says "respect their sensitivity in the matter" and the other part of me says "hey, you made it that way, live with it or are you afraid to lose those sales to black customers".
I just think if more people were forced to have to deal with their darker actions, then maybe they might be a little bit more inclined to not do it in the first place.
I know this was the mood of the times, but was EVERYONE like that really? Obviously Branch Rickey wasn't at least.
See, my problem is that this isn't Disney apologising, this is Disney HIDING. Big difference there. You had no problem making the film that way in the first place, you owe it to those you offended all those years ago to now live with the consequences of your actions. Maybe the community will understand and maybe it won't, but it seems to me that Disney couldn't have been all that worried about what the black community thought back then, only now when it will cost them serious money.
I'm sure I'm being a little too harsh here and I think probably a more respectful version should be the norm, but it does twinge my revisionist nerve a bit.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Roger Ebert had some comments of a similar nature
on last week's show: The Cartoon Network
is having a Bugs Bunny marathon and has
decided NOT to present several Bugs Bunny cartoons,
that, in retrospect, present "hurtful" stereotypes.
Ebert praised the Cartoon Network for their decision,
stating,
"As adults we have the ability to
discern that out-dated, racially stereotypical
modes of representation are bad,
but we can still view them in a historical
context without taking them at face value...
...children, by-and-large, cannot make
this distincition.
In several Bugs Bunny cartoons, Indians are
stereotyped, and Bugs even is made up like a
minstrel show character [not unlike the shot
from Fantasia that was zoomed].
Most children will not be able to distinguish
that these images are not acceptable, and thus,
we reinforce hurtful cultural stereotypes in
our children."

You know what.
I can't buy that argument. They were going to show those specific cartoons in the middle of the night ONLY, and they were going to run disclaimers explaining the historical context.
Sigh.
Hopefully we can at least get a DVD some day; a DVD labled 'Cartoons for Big Kids' or something. Sell it mail order for a premium price if you are worried about uninformed parents buying them as regular kiddie entertainment. This stuff should not be supressed forever, only presented in the proper context.
Did you know that late in the year 2000 that the higher ups at Turner Broadcasting told Cartoon Network that Speedy Gonzalez promotes negative stereotypes and can't be shown any more? When is the last time you saw a Speedy cartoon?
Sigh.
All disappearing before our very eyes.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

What this type of censorship does is try to hide the fact that racism exists, and existed back when Fantasia was made. Instead of affording an opportunity for parents to explain to their children the history of racism, instead we get a coverup "oh, it didn't happen". Should we be revising everything that we now feel is not politically correct? If so, who gives a crap about film preservation, you might as well just make new ones that don't offend anybody. Forget about history too, black people WERE slaves, and had they (along with others recognising this was wrong) not fought for their rights, they would still be. By revising this historical context, you are doing a diservice to all those who fought to change the world for the better. If you really must create a kid-friendly version, then do it as an alternate.
------------------
Link Removed | Burt Lancaster is Link Removed | dOc

 

[Rob Gillespie]

Bald Mountain has lots of T&A also,

Ummm... that wasn't really what I meant.

 

[Robert Harris]

A note to the administrators, and not to bore the
members --
One area which has not been discussed re: Fantasia
is the fact that it has survived 60 years and can
be placed on DVD and manipulated as is the need.
This was an actual and proper restoration by Disney's
Scott MacQueen, a gentleman who does superb work. Some
may know him for Universal commentaries.
His work on Fantasia was extremely delicate and complex.
You might attempt to get him to do a Q and A for you,
understanding that if that is at all possible that he
would not be in a position to answer political questions.
His knowledge of this film is probably beyond anyone's
at this point.
RAH

 

[Michael Shannon]

I agree with Jeff. Personally, I would have liked to have the original version of the film with an explanation in commentary or a disclaimer. As an African American it would have served as edu-tainment for my six year old to show what it was like in the past as compared to now with "Atlantis" in film. I'm more offended that disney tried to hide it.
My 2 cents!
------------------
View MShannon's DVD Collection
If You Want "The Five Heartbeats" Go Here:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/...ML/001946.html
Petition for Eddie Murphy Films GO HERE:
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/...ML/002420.html

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

It seems like the Anthology set would have been the place to do this. I see where Jeff & Michael are coming from, but I don't think Disney would risk tainting the "Disney brand" as it is perceived today by doing this. In some ways it can be looked at as a "correction" of an "error", but it is also covering up an ugly historical fact. Reconciling this with the perception of a modern G-rated animated feature is not easy, and I can't say I expected Disney to do it.
I have an analagous reaction to Casablanca, perhaps my favorite film. Every time I have seen it since I was 15, I have cringed at the part where Ingrid Bergman inquires about the "boy" playing the piano. I'm glad they have not censored it, but then again it's not being marketed to children. I don't look forward to explaining to my kids some day why a woman would refer to a man almost 20 years older than her as a "boy", but take umbrage in the fact that maybe they will learn something via the explanation.
Regards,
------------------
Ken McAlinden
Livonia, MI USA

 

[James D S]

I'm more offended that disney tried to hide it.

Hide it by devoting a segment to explain the zooming?

 

[Michael St. Clair]

They could use seamless branching to make content like this available. To play it, you would have to enter a special code to access the hidden option. Then, when you started watching the movie, it would make you sit through a live-action disclaimer explaining the historical context (like the forced trailers and FBI warnings, you would not be able to skip this disclaimer).
If they did that, nobody could claim they were being insensitive, and nobody could claim that their children were being harmed.