Toy Story 2 Censored Scene (1 Viewer)

[David Norman]

I found it amusing that The Wizard of Oz was rated G when ratings first started and has stayed that way, but the 3D conversion had to be submitted again for rating and got a PG that time- so the back cover of the 3D Blu-Ray shows a PG rating for the 3D version and a G for the original 2D, even though both are the same content-wise.

Back to Toy Story 2, for anyone who has any sort of digital copy of it- was the offending 'outtake' included in that, and if so are you still able to view it with that intact or has it still been cut?

The digital had the scene intact UNTIL early June when it was changed about the same time as the 4K UHD disc showed up

 

[Jesse Skeen]

Well then, that’s a good reason not to switch to buying digital.

 

[Brandon Conway]

I found it amusing that The Wizard of Oz was rated G when ratings first started and has stayed that way, but the 3D conversion had to be submitted again for rating and got a PG that time- so the back cover of the 3D Blu-Ray shows a PG rating for the 3D version and a G for the original 2D, even though both are the same content-wise.

And this really shows how useless the variation between the G/PG ratings has become. If The Wizard of Oz - a film that has been shown to toddlers without incident for nearly a century - needs to be PG for "some scary moments" we have truly entered an era where coddling had gone way, way too far.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

Well, I’ve always considered the G rating to mean that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. Anything that would be scary to kids should merit a PG, even if it’s a classic.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Well, I’ve always considered the G rating to mean that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. Anything that would be scary to kids should merit a PG, even if it’s a classic.

But scary is in the eye of the beholder. Basically you're arguing that a movie has to be completely inoffensive in every possible way to be "G", and that's essentially impossible. A story needs some form of dramatic tension to survive!

 

[RobertR]

But scary is in the eye of the beholder. Basically you're arguing that a movie has to be completely inoffensive in every possible way to be "G", and that's essentially impossible. A story needs some form of dramatic tension to survive!

Correct. Many people have said that they were scared by Disney animated classics, which are the very definition of G rated. Bambi's mom being killed, Maleficent turning into a dragon (scared me as a kid!), the witch in Snow White, etc.

 

[BarryR]

The G rating has been brutalized over the years, so to speak. It used to encompass way more frankness and fright without spilling into anything genuinely more mature--though that of course may always be a subjective call. The G rating has been made almost useless because of an almost impossible criteria now. But of course the real reason is marketing. G has the unfair mark of only being suited for small kids, but even then the recent Mary Poppins sequel gets a PG. So it's pretty ridiculous. The new MPAA ratings board person (I forget her name), says she wants to address the overlooked G rating. As it is, dozens of PG movies, including animated ones of recent years, are virtually G rated, but get some sort of gratuitous nudge ("rude humor"!) to make it more marketable, I guess.

I like how two G rated releases this year, APOLLO 11, and the Aretha Franklin documentary AMAZING GRACE (albeit from 1972, but finally made viable after a tech issue), show that perfectly good movies >for all ages< are possible.

 

[Dick]

Disney doesn't care about historical preservation.

I totally disagree with that statement. Whatever else they might rightfully be chastised for, certainly Disney is among the most comprehensive archivists in Hollywood. We get compromised Blu-rays that are scrubbed of grain and sometimes censored, but I do not doubt that the original, unexpurgated versions of all of their films, grain and "offensive" material inclusive, sit well-preserved in their vaults. We just might never see them at home.

 

[Rodney]

The new MPAA ratings board person (I forget her name), says she wants to address the overlooked G rating. As it is, dozens of PG movies, including animated ones of recent years, are virtually G rated, but get some sort of gratuitous nudge ("rude humor"!) to make it more marketable, I guess.

I like how two G rated releases this year, APOLLO 11, and the Aretha Franklin documentary AMAZING GRACE (albeit from 1972, but finally made viable after a tech issue), show that perfectly good movies >for all ages< are possible.

It is true that the G rating is stigmatized as "kiddie fare", and I've heard that is why some movies deliberately put something in them to make sure they are not cursed with a G rating.
I think it might just make sense to make a new rating, possibly AA (all ages), and designate films that really are for young kids the G rating. This at least could get them away from adding that gratuitous nudge you spoke of and truly having an All Age experience.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Correct. Many people have said that they were scared by Disney animated classics, which are the very definition of G rated. Bambi's mom being killed, Maleficent turning into a dragon (scared me as a kid!), the witch in Snow White, etc.

I think Jesse argues that if a movie has anything violent/scary/unsettling at all, it shouldn't be "G".

Which basically means like 5 movies ever made could be "G"!

 

[BarryR]

Exactly. There has got to be some realistic latitude, as there used to be. Right now PG is the de facto G rating, since it covers even the most minimal cause for alarm.

 

[MatthewA]

The G rating was invented partially for Disney's benefit, but even they soon outgrew it and had to lose a generation of kids' hearts and minds to George Lucas and Jim Henson to realize that. The ratings system started in 1968, Disney gave up its G-only policy in 1979, and the ban on R-rated movies was the last domino to fall in 1986. Then TV started instituting a similar system, and I've seen 1980s sitcoms with little to no sex, violence, or profanity* get slapped with TV-PG in reruns, so they're not much better. It was always inconsistently applied. And the lack of self-awareness is staggering: the rating they give Family Guy created an inadvertent drug joke in practically every other episode since it's usually TV-14: VLSD.

And this really shows how useless the variation between the G/PG ratings has become. If The Wizard of Oz - a film that has been shown to toddlers without incident for nearly a century - needs to be PG for "some scary moments" we have truly entered an era where coddling had gone way, way too far.

I agree. When I was a kid, the thing about The Wizard of Oz that scared me most of all was the M-G-M lion! The Wicked Witches, Talking Trees, Lions, Tigers, Bears, Haunted Forest, and Flying Monkeys were a breeze by comparison. I bet even Judy Garland had nightmares about him!

*Compared to the 2 damns, 2 Goddammits, and multiple punches, karate chops, and Panavision panty shots that got Columbia's Annie slapped with a PG rating in 1982, similar profanities in E.T. that same year, or what Grease got away with four years earlier. The aforementioned Never Cry Wolf got away with the same rating despite showing even more, but 12 years later Color of Night had to cut Bruce Willis' full frontal nudity out of the film or face the dreaded NC-17. Yet Michael J. Fox's backside in Greedy that same year got off with a PG-13!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

The G rating was invented partially for Disney's benefit, but even they soon outgrew it and had to lose a generation of kids' hearts and minds to George Lucas and Jim Henson to realize that. The ratings system started in 1968, Disney gave up its G-only policy in 1979, and the ban on R-rated movies was the last domino to fall in 1986.

Though not under the "Disney" name. While they did release "Black Hole" as a PG "Disney" movie in 1979 - and basically all animation for years has now been PG - the R movies were under Touchstone and other subsidiaries.

Has there ever been a movie released explicitly under "Disney" that's R? I can't think of any.

Nitpicking? Maybe, but I think it's a legit distinction...

 

[MatthewA]

No, that's the one line they still have yet to cross, and It is worth discussing because it's one way the studios have determined the content of mainstream movies for the past 50 years. The G rating wasn't originally intended for movies aimed at children. The original Airport from 1970 was rated G despite one of the subplots being about Dean Martin's character getting Jacqueline Bisset's character pregnant. Even Gone With The Wind got a G rating as well as the heavily edited 1971 reissue of Lawrence of Arabia. Yet Disney's 1950 Treasure Island got cut to get a G rating for a 1975 reissue; that cut-by-nine-minutes version got released on video in the US, and those cuts weren't restored until the 1990s when it got bumped up to a PG. But those cuts were only for the US, apparently*. How many movies that are PG or PG-13 today would have been rated something lower 35 years ago when the interim rating between PG and R was created for Gremlins?

*By contrast, the two 1970s hybrids were only available in ultra-cut versions outside of North America for years.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

No, that's the one line they still have yet to cross, and It is worth discussing because it's one way the studios have determined the content of mainstream movies for the past 50 years. The G rating wasn't originally intended for movies aimed at children. The original Airport from 1970 was rated G despite one of the subplots being about Dean Martin's character getting Jacqueline Bisset's character pregnant. Even Gone With The Wind got a G rating as well as the heavily edited 1971 reissue of Lawrence of Arabia. Yet Disney's 1950 Treasure Island got cut to get a G rating for a 1975 reissue; that cut-by-nine-minutes version got released on video in the US, and those cuts weren't restored until the 1990s when it got bumped up to a PG. But those cuts were only for the US, apparently*. How many movies that are PG or PG-13 today would have been rated something lower 35 years ago when the interim rating between PG and R was created for Gremlins?

*By contrast, the two 1970s hybrids were only available in ultra-cut versions outside of North America for years.

Of course, X wasn't intended to mean porn, either!

BTW, PG-13 came as a reaction to "Gremlins" and "Temple of Doom" in 1984 - your post makes it sound like they invented it as the rating to be used for "Gremlins"...

 

[ahollis]

No, that's the one line they still have yet to cross, and It is worth discussing because it's one way the studios have determined the content of mainstream movies for the past 50 years. The G rating wasn't originally intended for movies aimed at children. The original Airport from 1970 was rated G despite one of the subplots being about Dean Martin's character getting Jacqueline Bisset's character pregnant. Even Gone With The Wind got a G rating as well as the heavily edited 1971 reissue of Lawrence of Arabia. Yet Disney's 1950 Treasure Island got cut to get a G rating for a 1975 reissue; that cut-by-nine-minutes version got released on video in the US, and those cuts weren't restored until the 1990s when it got bumped up to a PG. But those cuts were only for the US, apparently*. How many movies that are PG or PG-13 today would have been rated something lower 35 years ago when the interim rating between PG and R was created for Gremlins?

*By contrast, the two 1970s hybrids were only available in ultra-cut versions outside of North America for years.

What’s Up Doc Rated G.

 

[MatthewA]

Of course, X wasn't intended to mean porn, either!

BTW, PG-13 came as a reaction to "Gremlins" and "Temple of Doom" in 1984 - your post makes it sound like they invented it as the rating to be used for "Gremlins"...

That is true, but the other one had slipped my mind. Both had Spielberg in different capacities so his clout made it possible, but Red Dawn, which he had nothing to do with, was the first PG-13 movie. It came out two months later. Disney relented there with the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie. That was nearly two decades later, after Eisner had started to turn from savior to pariah. I'm not honestly sure whether an uncut Black Cauldron would have been PG-13, but if so they would have been going straight to that from G, like The Fox and the Hound was despite the somber tone.

 

[Worth]

A lot of Spielberg films were on the edge of PG and R. I think Jaws and Poltergeist received PGs on appeal, and Raiders had to done down the exploding heads to earn its PG.

 

[ahollis]

It was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom along with Gremlins that more or less brought about PG-13. The argument was it’s not an R and it’s not PG. But they both received a PG for the MPAA ratings board could see giving either one an R. This is from a rating board member that has since retired.

 

[BarryR]

What i find ridiculous is twofold--tons of movies are G in spirit, but have maybe a smidgen of cussing or innuendo to push into PG or PG13. And such inconsequential additions somehow make it more worthy of teen or adult viewing!

The other thing is nowadays the nebulous "thematic" or "action" PG labeling can cover everything from a hint of controversy or a kitten tumbling off a sofa. I mean, c'mon! No wonder the G rating has been eviscerated, and not having any real substance anymore.

In 1968 at the dawn of ratings, the musical Oliver! got a G rating without a thought. Yet now it'd no doubt be a PG13 since it runs the gamut of violence, smoking, "thematic elements" and Lord knows what else. Yet it's perfectly suitable for all ages, albeit with the deftly handled elements described. And just think--Kubrick's 2001 still retains its G rating--one of the most sophisticated, thought provoking movies ever made, yet today if given a chance it'd be slapped with a PG for some crazy reason. Apes hitting each other?

This may all sound like a bunch of hooha to discuss, but I think it's a legitimate topic the way perceptions can be unfairly distorted for essentially marketing purposes, and not actual content.