Hollywood Balks at High-Tech Sanitizers

The New York Times ^ | September 19, 2002 | RICK LYMAN

[syriacus]

"This is all new to us," said Alan Horn, president of Warner Brothers. We're all trying to understand it. But it doesn't sit well with me, frankly, because these people could go the other way, too, with more sex and more violence."

R-r-i-i-g-h-t. I'm sure his his main worry is that people will edit in more sex and violence. (/sarcasm)

For many years it has been acceptable to edit films for television.

Why is it so wrong, now, to edit film for particular audiences--as long as the viewers are advised the film has been altered and permission is granted by the people with the rights to the film?

And, come to think of it, the anti-tobacco people could get rid of some of the cigarettes in scenes.

[Grig]

These *beep* jokers would recognize a *beeping* new market if it bit them in the *beep*.

[Under the Radar]

As a consumer, I think this is wonderful! However, the companies should be required to place an obvious warning that the content of the work has been altered from its original format.

[Feiny]

What if they decided that certain art pieces were not clean enough for them...is it OK to go and change them? If the directors are not invloved in the cut or edit...it should not take place.

[Feiny]

Perhaps they should put a shirt on this?

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

Maybe they can 'sanitize' the WTC footage and show people gently bouncing off the pavement, to go on and lead happy, productive lives. < /sarcasm>

[chriservative]

I don't like this. Not one bit.

[Grig]

If someone wants to see it shirted and is willing to pay for it, the smart thing to do is slap on a shirt and take the money.

I'm not saying censor everything, I'm saying there is a market out there of people who would like cleaner versions of some movies, why not provide them and sell them? They already make cleaned up versions of movies to show on airlines and there is no reason that a DVD could have both the uncut and the 'airline version' of a movie on it.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Oliver Stone.

[Redcloak]

A burqa perhaps?

[Feiny]

The market is already being taken care of, it is called "G" or "PG" rated movies. There are plenty available.

Maybe you don't realize how hard some writers and directors work and agonize over their films to get them exactly as they want them. They spend tons of money and time on their work and then some yahoo decides that parts of his movie are offensive and cuts them out. And, as I understand it....these rogue film editors are not paying the film owners anything.

I consider this to be vandalism.

[Nephi]

Once again, the market answers the demand before the government even noticed.

The next question is how long will it take movie makers to react to the market's response?
Perhaps, CBSCNNABCNBCMSNBC will finally learn what the market is trying to teach them about Fox?

No, its about the agenda, stupid! That's why they'd rather legislate than accomodate.

[I still care]

Instead of buying the version from the store we wait for it to come on the TV, because the store versions have terrible language in them. I personally, when I watch "A Christmas Story" like the TBS version where the kids say "Smarty" instead of "Smarta$$". I wince when they say that, because it is a kids movie and we watch it together. And besides, in the 40's kids WERE more likely to say "Smarty.".

The only version of a movie I was able to buy PG instead of R was Excalibar. There is no way I would have the R version in a house full of kids, but the PG version is a great movie. I wish the studios would offer them, but I guess it is a side thing like them making all those R movies all those years when PG did much better at the box office- they would rather ram their twisted morality down our throats than give us what we really want. But I won't have that stuff in the house. I wait for it on regular TV.

[I still care]

I think many of them do pay. The movie club mentioned beforehand (I went to their website a while ago and checked them out)you pay a premium for the movie because they buy it at full price and then edit what you want for a fee. So the artists get their cut. And the consumer should decides what he wants in his home. If I want a couple of curse words taken out of a product I have already bought, why should anyone care?

If I buy a book and tear out a page because I don't like it, it's my book. If I buy a picture of the statue "David", and paint underware on it, and paste it on my fridge door, Michelangelo and you may deplore my taste, but it is my right to do it.

[mrjeff]

I am not going to weep for the poor directors and producers. Who cares about their wishes? If people want to see a movie without the filth, why shouldn't they be able to? By your lights, it should be illegal to hit the fast forward button on the VCR to get through the boring bits, because that would destroy the "artistic integrity" of the piece.

[Grig]

"Maybe you don't realize how hard some writers and directors work and agonize over their films to get them exactly as they want them."

So? If they want me to pay to see it, they should be more accomodating to my tastes.

"and then some yahoo decides that parts of his movie are offensive and cuts them out"

then they enjoy the movie their own way and the guy who made the original can't even tell it happened. I see no harm to anyone in this if the person is paying for the edited version.

"And, as I understand it....these rogue film editors are not paying the film owners anything."

But if they met the market demand themselves they would get paid for it. Like I said, the edited versions are already made for TV and airlines, why not include them on the DVD of the original and so increase sales?

[gcruse]

You mean like draping the bare breasted statue in
a government building in DC to spare Ashcroft's
sensibilities? Nah, that could never happen. We
aren't that...wait a minute.

[Feiny]

I know, wasn't that retarded?

[Oztrich Boy]

The scene from "Titanic" (1997) of Leonardo DiCaprio sketching a nude Kate Winslet has been altered by covering her with a digital corset

I've always suspected that censors and bluenoses have their own weird sexual kinks and fetishes.

[Bernard]

My biggest disappointment in renting a movie was, "My Cousin Vinny". The movie was hilarious, but the language was atrocious. With three teenagers watching it, my wife and I had no idea how bad the language was.

I would have gladly rented a cleaner version, but we had no idea how bad it was. This technology can allow for parents to actually share a good movie with their kids without the violence or language or nudity. Just let me know which version I'm buying or renting.