What's new

Roger Rabbit: VISTA review up! (1 Viewer)

GuruAskew

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2001
Messages
2,069
I was willing to forgive the Jessica Rabbit and Betty Boop edits if the Baby Herman stuff was intact but after seeing the screenshots I'm still going to boycott this release. The Baby Herman animation is entirely noticeable during normal playback so the censorship is entirely unacceptable.
 

Matt Broeska

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jun 18, 2000
Messages
132
i don't care if people get mad at me for this, but i've never heard a bigger group of cry babies in my life. this is one of my favorite movies of all time and i'll be at my local b&m first thing to pick it up whether it's edited or not. are you really not going to enjoy the movie because some frames are missing? give me a break.
 

Shane Dodson

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 7, 1999
Messages
118


My thoughts exactly.

Life is entirely too short and too precious to get bent out of shape over a few missing frames from a movie.

Save your anger and indignation over something that deserves it.

-S.D.
 

Roy Batty

Second Unit
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
293
Real Name
Jose M Mendez
C'mon!

There's no reason to call "crybabies" to those still complaining about the altered parts! Censorship is censorship, no matter how minor.

Nevertheless, everybody is entitled to proceed as they see fit here.

In my case, I guess I'll be buying it, because I'm afraid is this or nothing. But I still find this censorship unacceptable, and I'm tempted to choose "nothing".

If you happen to be not that much bothered about it, ok, go ahead, buy it, that's perfectly right.

But there's no point in arguing whether it is or it is not censorship. It definitely is. A piece of art (or entertainment, whatever it suits you best) altered from its original presentation due to moral and/or profit issues.
 

Carlo_M

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 31, 1997
Messages
13,385
You can't dictate to others how much they should care about these things.
AMEN BROTHER!

However it seems to be a growing practice here...

My personal take is this: I am against censorship (i.e. shame on Miramax for censoring Malena). But w/ regards to the frames altered for Jessica Rabbit's, um, crotch shot, that to me is more of an "animator's prank" and I don't think Zemeckis would intend that to be in there. As such I don't miss that alteration at all.

However the Baby Herman part was clearly supposed to be like that, and then censored for whatever reasons (PC no doubt). That I would have had more of an issue with, but since it seems to be restored, I am more than happy with this upcoming release (assuming the rumors of its inclusion are true).
 

Beast

Second Unit
Joined
Oct 12, 2001
Messages
483
Real Name
Michael Cameron
How do we know that the extended finger wasn't a crude "easter egg" that the animator added into the picture. Similar to the Jessica Rabbit crotch shot and Naked Betty Boop. Or Michael Eisner's telephone number on the bathroom wall. It's not like it's the version with the arm altered to appear at his side.

This could be the way it was always intended to be. If that is the fact, it's not censorship at all, but the removal of somthing that some animator slipped into the picture. I for one, have no problem with somthing so minor, and will be purchasing this on the day it comes out. Be happy that they didn't use the arm down at the side version. :)
 

Matt Broeska

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Jun 18, 2000
Messages
132
okay okay... so i agree this is a form of censorship, however to say you won't buy this movie because it's missing a little finger slip is, in my opinion, silly. it's not a plot point. it doesn't change the story. you can't equate that to what's-his-face shooting first in star wars.

at any rate, i think it's funny that, as usual on this forum, this thread started off with "9 out of 10! i can't wait!" and turned into "missing frames!? i'm not buying!"
 

Rain

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2001
Messages
5,015
Real Name
Rain
it doesn't change the story.
Completely irrelevant.

I could write out the "story" of any classic novel, that doesn't make it the same as the novel.

It's a principle thing. It's about the sanctity of art. Either you get that or you don't.

It is one thing to tolerate an accidental ommission from a film or something removed solely due to rights issues, but deliberate censorship is impossible to condone.
 

Tony-B

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2002
Messages
3,768
Sigh, you guys turn a good Roger Rabbit thread into the usual shouting match. Let me just state my opinions. First off, I will be buying it. I do understand where all of you people who will not be buying it are coming from, but the censoring is not major!!! You should be thankful that Disney moved the arm back up! Big deal about the finger, it is not very noticeable. I found that commercial that BrettB mentioned earlier in the thread, and yes, that scene is in the ad. It is at the very end. I will say this, Baby Herman CLEARLY sticks his arm up in the air. Whether or not the finger is there is still up in the air. It goes by so quick that you can't even see it. By the way, you can watch the commercial at this website.
How do we know that the extended finger wasn't a crude "easter egg" that the animator added into the picture. Similar to the Jessica Rabbit crotch shot and Naked Betty Boop. Or Michael Eisner's telephone number on the bathroom wall. It's not like it's the version with the arm altered to appear at his side.
Exactly!!! All I want to know is Robert Zemeckis' take on the situation, and if he intended it to be in there. If Ron, or any other reviewer reads this, please listen to the commentary, and find out of Zemeckis makes mention of this. Chances are that if he does not, then it is fine. I think that if it was edited, he would make a point about it.

By the way, does anyone have a picture of the LD/"unedited" version of the Baby Herman scene?

Update: I tried rapidly pausing the commercial to get a shot of it. I honestly think that THE FINGER IS THERE!!! I wish I could get a screen capture uploaded to the net.
 

Edwin-S

Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Messages
10,000
I don't think the missing finger will stop me from picking up a copy of this disc, but I sure think the people who make decisions to censor films are bizarre. I mean take a look at the posted screen shot. Baby Hermann is getting an eyeball full of a piece of female anatomy which seems to be perfectly okay, but a single upraised digit is going to corrupt the youth of America who watch this film? If they were going to freak out and digitally erase a finger, it is amazing that they didn't digitally erase his face as well.

To paraphrase a famous saying....who knows what logic lies in the mind of a censor....only the sorry ass who censors knows.
 

Jacinto

Second Unit
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
450
Location
Littleton, Colorado
Real Name
Jacinto
There were instances when Michaelangelo had to alter sculptures for the Medici tomb to better please his patrons, not to mention alterations that were made between his drawings from the Sistine ceiling and the final painting in order to get approval from the Vatican. What most of you guys would be saying then, is "those fucking Medici's! That damn Vatican! How dare they have final say in the artwork they commissioned! Censoring assholes!"

As an artist, all I can say is, when I'm creating art for me, because I want to, it will look like whatever I choose. When I'm creating art for a client, the client has final say. Every time. Period. Call it censorship if you will, but I say whoever's footing the bill has the right.

That said, I'm glad I still have the original CAV LD release of it, even if it's just to show people the footage once in a while, because I sure as hell am going to buy the Vista Series DVD for regular viewing...
 

Jeff Jacobson

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
2,115
There were instances when Michaelangelo had to alter sculptures for the Medici tomb to better please his patrons, not to mention alterations that were made between his drawings from the Sistine ceiling and the final painting in order to get approval from the Vatican. What most of you guys would be saying then, is "those fucking Medici's! That damn Vatican! How dare they have final say in the artwork they commissioned! Censoring assholes!"
But Disney allowed those things in the theatrical version. The alterations were made much later.

If someone tried to alter the one of Michelangelo's works today, I'm sure there would be a lot of protests.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,657
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top