Warner Bros. Eliminates Peace Image from 'What A Girl Wants' Film Ads

Sacremento Bee ^ | April 1, 2003 7:32AM | wire staff report

[ewing]

'What a Girl Wants' is to avoid making a political statement.

Print advertisements for the teen comedy orginially featured a photograph of star Amanda Bynes wearing an American flag T-shirt and flashing the peace sign with her fingers as she stands between two Royal British Guards.

With the war in Iraq sparking anti war protests in the United States and abraod, however, Warner Brothers quickly changed the ad. The studio Monday said it feared the peace sign would be viewed as a political message.

New versions of the image feature Bynes with her right hand at her side, although many of the original posters had already been placed on billboards and buses before the change.

[ewing]

Isn't it a sign for victory as well?

[ewing]

[Centurion2000]

Hollyweird is getting the message .... entertain us ... don't lecture us on politics.

[Guna]

Every time I see that sign, I think of the famous photograph of Winston Churchill flashing the Victory sign. Big difference.

When did it become a symbol for peace, anyway? I wonder if it devolved, like the word "gay" did?

[ctdonath2]

The official website still shows the V-sign promo poster.

[martin_fierro]

Oh. Now I'll go see it. < /sarcasm >

[ewing]

Me too. Victory, not peace.

[ctdonath2]

The peaceniks forget that the V-sign indicates peace achieved thru military victory.

[ewing]

I can't find the 'new' poster..

[kdmhcdcfld]

Well, it is the peace sign and the sign for victory, but over in the United Kingdom (and parts unknown), it's also the equivalent of the middle finger.

[ewing]

And Hollywierd is scared out of it's mind with 75% of the public supporting the Presdient (even in the See-BS polls)

[ctdonath2]

That's my point. They only show the old poster.

[AnAmericanMother]

You mean old Winnie was actually flipping off Hitler?

[trebb]

Since when does the Warner Brothers shy from making political statements? This is just an opportunity to make us think that Warner really cares. My guess is that they've seen the reaction to anti-war, anti-Bush statements and want to put up a facade of respectability.

[Maximum Leader]

IIRC, if you're shooting someone the bird in England, it's the V sign, but the palm is facing you. In the "peace sign", the palm faces out.

Of course, only MadIvan can answer this authoritively. :o)

[kdmhcdcfld]

Could be, could be...

I do have to qualify it a little, though. In the poster, the palm of her hand is facing the viewer. The backside of her hand is facing the guard on her right. I believe the backside of the hand has to be facing the intended target of the gesture in order for it to be construed as such.

41 ran afoul some years back down under on a state visit to Australia. He was departing a function of some sort, and from the back of the limo he waved the "V" sign to the crowd he was passing by. Those in the crowd who saw this thought they were on the receiving end of another type of salute.

[kdmhcdcfld]

See Post # 16...

[Sgt Hulka 123]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz........

[AnAmericanMother]

OK, then, how do we explain this?

Of course, we don't know who he's gesturing to . . . he looks very pleased but who knows?

[Argus]

As I recall, Churchill made the V-for-Victory sign with his palm facing inward, which in Britain is also the equivalent of our "Up yours", thus delivering a double message to the Axis. Adopting the Churchill method is a good way to avoid any confusion with the so-called "peace sign".