Spielberg apparently wants to eliminate word "terrorist" from ET (1 Viewer)

[RobertR]

Just read that eliminating guns from the film is apparently not enough for him. He's having the word "terrorist" looped out in a scene involving trick or treaters. This PC "sensitvity" never seems to stop...
------------------

 

[Dan Brecher]

Didn't he already do that?
Dan (UK)

 

[Ken Seeber]

Where did you read this? There have been more than enough rumors floating around the Internet without knowing the source.

 

[Tino]

Dan is correct. Spielberg did edit out the word "terrorist" from ET.
However, this was done before it was released on home video more than 10 years ago, and NOT due to the recent tragedys.
I noticed this immediately when I watched the VHS version so many years ago for the first time.
------------------
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.

 

[Bill Huelbig]

I can still remember the big laugh that "terrorist" line got in the theater in 1982. Times sure have changed.
--Bill

 

[Scott Weinberg]

In 1,000 years, this movie may be edited down to 43 minutes of Reese's Pieces footage.
------------------
Scott
Check out my Movie Reviews at Epinions. Help support my debilitating DVD addiction!
AOL IM: TheAngryJew29

 

[Shayne Lebrun]

Actually, it was just announced in a press release that the makers of M&Ms have just signed a substantive advertising contract with Speilburg, and that all of the Resses Pieces in the movie will be digitally replaced with chocolate M&Ms.

 

[RobertR]

And the kid dressed as Yoda will now be Jar Jar.

 

[george kaplan]

I used to think that there'd be a day when all my laser discs were replaced with dvds. Now I picture a day when I'll have 1000 dvds and 1 ld.

------------------
13-time NBA world champion Lakers: 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001

 

[Jeff Adkins]

There seems to be some conflicting info on this. I thought this had already been done, but then I read this on Dark Horizons:
"ET: The Extra-Terrestrial: Just when you thought this whole movie changing/editing thing was quietening down, it rears up again in the most ridiculous of ways. Creators reports that Dee Wallace Stone has been called in to change a line in the upcoming re-release of "E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial" due out on March 22nd. Stone says "There was some reference to one of the Halloween characters in the film looking like a terrorist, so we're going in to reloop that line". Sheesh. Nevertheless there's going to be big push for this re-release (with new footage) as Stone has been booked for several major publicity events (eg. "Oprah"). "
Jeff

 

[Jack Briggs]

I'm getting so tired of this revisionism. If Spielberg were making the film now, I could understand. But for a flick that's been with us since 1982, it's unacceptable. The word "terrorism" cannot be eliminated from the language, for goodness sake.
------------------

 

[Tino]

In the original video release of E.T. The Extra Terrestrial on VHS in 1988, the scene in question plays as follows at the 101:50 mark on the tape.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Elliot is putting on makeup for Halloween going over the plan with Gertie when offscreen this dialog takes place.
Mother:
"Listen buster, you won't get four blocks in this neighborhood dressed like that"
Son:
"Please?"
Mother:
"No and that is final"
Son:
But all the guys are"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the theatrical version, the mother says something like: "There's no way you are going out dressed like a terrorist"
That line is missing entirely so perhaps they are talking about adding a line to replace the one already taken out THIRTEEN YEARS AGO and NOT due to the recent tragedies.
Is it that hard for Dark Horizons to just pop in a tape and check their facts BEFORE spreading incorrect rumors?

------------------
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.
[Edited last by Tino on October 10, 2001 at 02:44 PM]

 

[Jeff_A]

I'm getting so tired of this revisionism...

I will echo this thought. If we are in danger of this becoming some sort of widespread trend in the industry I will dislike it...IMMENSELY.
------------------
The Dark Tower

Fearless Vampire Killers (1967)?

 

[Patrick McCart]

------------------
P.S.: There's no P.S.

 

[JamesCS]

I don't get it. Is Spielberg removing the terrorist comment from ET out of respect for victims of past and future terrorist attacks? Or is he removing it because he's concerned about offending the sensitivities of terrorists?
Let's see, we have CNN, Reuters, and now Steven Spielberg dropping the word "terrorist" from their vocabulary. How quaint.

 

[Mitty]

Like James, I just don't understand the motivation.
What purpose does it serve? Is anyone going to recoil at the word terrorist?
Shall we have it removed from dictionaries?
Maybe we should come up with a new softer, but utterly meaningless, phrase for terrorism. How about "Societal Safety Revocation?"
------------------
Do you like SCARY MOVIES?
Scary Movie Challenge: 13, 12, 11 10 to go!

 

[mark_d]

Do people bother to read the thread before posting? I am not going to allow myself to get upset at an edit that occurred thirteen frickin years ago.
Mark

 

[Tino]

Mark
I agree. I thought my above post would end this discussion so let me repeat it for the people in the cheap seats.
THIS EDIT WAS DONE THIRTEEN YEARS AGO!!
If you would like to blame Spielberg for removing it in the first place, fine, but it is NOT because of recent events.
Sheesh!

------------------
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.
[Edited last by Tino on October 11, 2001 at 06:15 AM]

 

[cafink]

If you would like to blame Spielberg for removing it in the first place, fine, but it is NOT because of recent events.

I just read through the entire thread again. I didn't see a single mention of the recent events, except in your own post.

 

[MickeS]

Carl, the first message states that Spielberg is "having" the word terrorist eliminated. That certainly indicates that the writer thinks Spielberg is CURRENTLY changing dialog. Nobody writes "having" a change done in relation to a change that was made 13 years ago. It is completely obvious that it's being discussed only because of the recent terrorist attacks.
/Mike