Help Save the Spiderman: WTC Teaser for the DVD! (2 Viewers)

[Mike_G]

Gary,

How else could I make the statement? It's a shot from the teaser I'm so desperately trying to save from oblivion. If I show a shot from the bank robbery, would that have the same effect? I'm trying to show the readers of this forum that Sony's removing a piece of history. They're sanitizing their DVD by removing the teaser. This is a perfect example of why this shouldn't happen.

Mike

 

[streeter]

I think we should wait with a petition until Spider-Man 2 comes out on DVD. By that time, more time has passed and putting a special feature on that DVD with an introduction from the director or someone else would be appropriate.

my 2 cents.

 

[GaryEA]

Mike,

I'm trying to show the readers of this forum that Sony's removing a piece of history. They're sanitizing their DVD by removing the teaser. This is a perfect example of why this shouldn't happen.

I agree with you. Completely. It should be part of the set. And I agree that it's worth making at least some sort of statement about it.
But this is such a sensitive subject on so many levels, one has, IMO, no choice but to be more subtle and delicate in the approach. The teaser as a whole should be your focus, and rather than talking about dollars, project your honorable sentiment that this teaser is historical.
Gary
p.s, Mike, if you'd like to talk about this more, you can email me at [email protected]. I won't be available until either later tonight or tomorrow morning, but I'd like to help if you'd like, even if it's a discussion.

 

[John Berggren]

If I'm not mistaken, if you were to edit the image to show more clearly the spider web and the helicoptor as opposed to the towers with a blurred something between them, it would not be as offensive.

Currently the image is too close to what we saw on the news. Pull it back to the point where the camera is just pulling away from the web, and you'll be golden. (I think).

 

[Andrew_Sch]

Yeah Mike after making that post in your defense (sort of), I realized what the mods were talking about. Showing the Twin Towers with a blurry airborne object that could be headed into one of them probably isn't a good idea. I think there's been a little over-reaction here from both sides. And I really don't think the terrorists have won just because a couple of suits at Columbia are trying to avoid (in their minds at least) a little controversy for what they want to be the best-selling DVD ever.

 

[Jeff Pryor]

There we go with the word 'offensive' again.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Mike,

This complaint is going to cease right here

and now. After this reply, I don't want to

hear about this further.

Did it ever cross your mind that Columbia might

be very well concerned about offending people by

including that trailer on their DVD? Most people

might not think so, but as a business decision, I

think the studio heavily thought about what they

were doing here.

Your campaign makes matters even more the worse.

Putting the towers in your signature and chastising

Columbia for a probable smart business decision

only makes your campaign look completely in bad

taste.

Furthermore, do you really think Columbia is

going to care if you buy that DVD or not? Do

you think a small handful of people who are

pushing a very sensitive issue here are

going to make a difference in the thousands upon

thousands of copies that will be sold?

I suggest looking at this situation in a more

realistic manner.

I would also suggest that you end this campaign

of "censorship" rhetoric that you are posting. This

is not a public board. You are here as guests of

Parker and I who feel that what you are campaigning

for is truly not in the best interest of everyone.

 

[David Olstein]

This is ridiculous. Are we now trying to erase the Twin Towers from history? Are they going to round up all of the prints of the 1976 King Kong and destroy them? (ok that may not have been the best example, but the use of the Twin Towers is NOT the reason why this film ought to be fogotten).

I find it amazing that anyone would be offended by a trailer that included the Twin Towers. Were people offended by the Kevin Costner film about the Cuban Missile Crises? That featured another national icon that was destroyed by terrorists -- John F. Kennedy. Did the sight of a young and vibrant Kennedy bring back painful memories of the Kennedy assasination?

Sorry, but I think trying to act as if the Twin Towers never existed is THE WORST thing we could possibly do.

And as many people have repeatedly pointed out, if the thought of seeing the Twin Towers in a movie trailer offends you, DON'T WATCH IT. But to keep the 99% of Spiderman and Sam Raimi fans from enjoying a well crafted trailer because of off chance it might offend some of the faint hearted is just batty.

 

[Eric Peterson]

I just want to state again, that I think this is a terrible decision on Columbia's part. Although I may be in a very small group, I will not be buying this title. I see no reason for not putting the trailer on the disc. It could contain a warning, or be hidden for those who want to hunt it out. If it turns out to be included as an Easter Egg, I will gladly buy the disc.

I actually thought that the original trailer was far better than the movie ended up being. I honestly cannot remember another trailer that hyped me for a movie as much as the Spidey trailer. The movie never had a chance of living up to it.

I just can't grasp, how seeing the towers can upset people, anymore than driving past the house where a loved one once lived, or looking through a photo album.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Ron,

While I respect your position on the matter and equally respect your right to run this forum in the most suitable way that you can, I must agree with Mike_G on this matter. This will be my only post on the matter, so I assure you that I'm not trying to stir up further controversy on what is agreeably a very sensitive matter. However, Pearl Harbor was a tragedy on atleast the scale of 9/11. In your review of Pearl Harbor: Director's Cut, you say the following:

I found myself awakened to a remarkable 40-minute

long CGI-enhanced recreation of the attack. The

film spares no expense to show the constant carnage

where 3000 people lost their lives and the bulk of

Pacific fleet was sunk.

Not having seen the original theatrical version,

I can only guess which scenes of graphic gore were

added to this Director's cut. One scenes shows a

Captain's being blown off and standing decapitated

aboard the deck. Two separate hazy dream-like

hospital sequence shows detached limbs strewn

across tables.

This is handled quite routinely, but I think you'd agree that were such a recreation of 9/11 come out, from say, inside the building, it would be in bad taste. And the trailer for Spider-Man features nothing graphic (or for that matter related to the tragedy at all). It maybe offensive now, and I won't agrue whether it should or shouldn't be. But will it be in 5 years? Ten years? The DVD will still be around, but the nation's sensitivity won't be. I don't think the campaign is in bad taste at all, it is simply trying to preserve an effective piece of advertising from a simplier time. It's obvious that Mike doesn't want the trailer on as some sort of sick fetish with tragedy, as his posts make it clear that he was as affected by the tragedy as the rest of us. It may be a bad business decision from Columbia, and I certainly respect that, but so to would be releasing "Song of the South" on DVD and I doubt anyone thinks that campaign is in bad taste.

 

[Paul-Gunther]

I think what bothers me is the ostrich mentality. I work for a studio. After 9/11, we had to go through and remove images of the Towers from many of our projects, even stuff that had already been made public. It was as if we were trying to erase the Towers from existence. This forced revisionist history was depressing.

At the time, we thought it was what people wanted. But, as time went on, we actually started getting mail from people who'd noticed what we were doing and were complaining about it. So we stopped. We got complaints about the Towers not being there, but we've never gotten a complaint about the Towers still being there.

 

[Neil Joseph]

Adam, you may have hit the nail on the head in your response. Time is the issue here. Things are still too fresh in peoples minds and that is why Columbia probably made this decision. 10 years down the road things will be different.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Adam,

What I would like to see on a DVD and what

I think is a bad business decision are two

separate entities.

I never said I didn't want to see the Spiderman

teaser on this DVD. Fact of the matter is, I do.

I'd also like to see the graphic scenes put back

into the 9/11 documentary.

But I also have to take into account the fact

that this is a very sensitive matter. It doesn't

necessarily matter how you and I feel about wanting

graphic material added back into 9/11 or Pearl

Harbor -- it's a matter of the entire subject being

sensitive to individuals that lost loved ones in

those tragedies.

As someone has already stated, this is just too

fresh in people's minds.

Furthermore, though I have stated in my reviews

my wants and wishes, I don't make those wishes

into the type of campaigns that have been plaguing

this forum.

It's one thing to campaign for something that

benefits everyone. It's another thing to campaign

about a tragedy that obviously the studio feels is

not a good idea to make a reminder of.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Understood, Ron. You and I have slightly varying views on the matter, but I respect your view on the matter and agree that it's perhaps too soon for such matters to be worried about.
Thank you for clarifying the reasons as to your position on the matter. As promised, I'm dropping the topic.

 

[Louis-Olivier]

What i don't understand is, it's okay to broadcast footage of a plane crashing into WTC 24 hours a day on CNN (and believe me, as the dreaded date approach, we will see it again) but you can't put a CGI version with a fictional character trying to save the day on a dvd?

 

[Andrew_Sch]

The difference is that, on CNN, it's news and it's real, but on the DVD, it's just entertainment.

 

[Louis-Olivier]

i don't believe it's still "news" a year after the attack!

 

[DeepakJR]

It surprises me how people make a big deal out of it. Include the WTC trailer and be done with it. Columbia will get a lot of publicity and many fans will be happy. The people who STILL cant handle the fact that the the towers arent there should not buy the DVD then. People see planes crashing into the towers everyday and think "damn those terrorists" and whenever they see em in a movie they think "ohh no, take it away, im too hurt to look at em". Why cant people look at them in movies as they see them in the news?

l8rz,

Deepak Jr.

 

[Qui-Gon John]

Or the people who can't handle it just don't have to view the trailer. It's not like you're forced to click on everything in a DVD's menu.

 

[Paul D G]

I hate to resurrect this thread but I was hoping the WTC trailer would show up as an egg on the Spidey DVD. Since it clearly isn't now I'm looking for alternatives.

Can anyone please verify if the uncut WTC trailer does indeed exists on these DVDs:

- Men In Black Deluxe

- Ali

Other threads state that "the spidey trailer" is on them but I don't want to drop $20 to find a different trailer.

Is it in 5.1 by chance?

Thanks,

-paul