I just read this on another website, and I truly can’t believe the ignorance of the PC movement. Where & when will this end??? Hollywood is waaaayyyy to liberal for me. Especially since they have such influence over public opinion via the media.
*Here’s the quote:
According to the “DVD Sewer” website, the soon to be released E.T. DVD edition contains digital editing to make it more PC. The sight shows two pictures, one of the VHS version, and one of the (editied) DVD version. As E.T. & Elliot escape the FBI on the bicycle, moments before they go into flight, the FBI have theirs guns drawn, now they’re holding walkie talkies.*
Arrrgh.
I’m so sick of all the PC crap–it’s one thing to remove something overtly and understandably offensive, but come on!! Sometimes we just don’t need to be so damned thin-skinned!
Changing that scene is just plain stupid, IMO. I thought the point of the whole thing was that they were in danger and that the Feds planned to capture them, come hell or high water. Now what–“Hurry, run, they’ve got walkie-talkies!”? Sheesh.
Well…as you know, IMHO, E.T. sucked to begin with, so this movement couldn’t really hurt it.
I agree…it is way too PC. What’s next? Dumbo doesn’t get drunk? The “As Good as It Gets” dog is declared too ugly for television? (I think he’s adorable, btw.)
Let’s not blame Universal for this one, since, from what I’ve heard, the decision to edit out the FBI agents’ guns was entirely Spielberg’s. See this Fox News article, which refers back to this Ain’t It Cool News article.
I can’t believe we’re actually thinking that Speilberg might not have perfect artistic integrity! sarcasm OFF
Usta be, when a filmmaker finished a film it went into the can and it was DONE. Finis. This current wankery is not a reflection of Speilberg’s new social responsibility - it’s a symptom of his unwillingness to let go of his creation, flavored with the desire to make a few bucks without all the trouble of a new piece of work. This way, rather than taking all the trouble to write a film that reflects his current feelings, he can take one that already exists and, jerk it around a little and say, “There! NOW it’s what I meant! Buy it again, please.”
Steve, Steve, Steve (sigh). Take a look at what real artists do. When Woody Allen finishes a film, he cuts it off and lets it loose in the world while he goes out to play clarinet somewhere. He doesn’t do publicity tours for it, he doesn’t even attend awards ceremonies to inflate it in the public’s view. He certainly doesn’t attempt to sell it twice. If he has another idea, he makes another film.
A film is more than an artistic statement. It’s also a historical document. If you changed your views since the film was made, good for you - your mind still has some stretch in it. Don’t try to claim it never happened by going back years later and “fixing” it.
It’s like Lucas “fixing” Star Wars so that the green guy shot first - thereby qualifying Han Solo to wear the white hat. It’s embarrassing to watch.
Y’know, there’s something wrong with the Pieta? Yep. If Mary in the statue were to stand up she’d be about eight feet tall. Knowing that, how would you feel about Michaelangelo’s going back in there with a chisel?
Steven Spielberg, I’m not impressed. Perhaps in the context of this thread I can say that Schindler’s List was not very good. I think Spielberg has gotten lucky with some scripts and is an average director. He’s been known to make decisions that have lessened many of his films. He is a decent writer and I’d honestly rather see him write scripts directed by someone else.
Folks, an artist does reserve the right to self-censor his work. And don’t overinflate the importance of film. It is always re-edited or re-touched to suit sensibilities.
Miaowara, would you say the same thing about Orson Welles’ retouched version of Touch of Evil? If the studio version of 1958 was left alone, it would be forever considered mediocre work, with few highlights. With the enhanced director’s cut version out, it is now regarded as one of the best films of all time.
OF course, with films like Touch of Evil9, the studio grabs ahold of a film, doesn’t like what the director did, and re-edits it (This is also what happened to Terry Gilliam’s Brazil. The studio didn’t like the ending, said it was ‘too dark’, and tried to re-edit. (link)
Gilliam fought them tooth and nail, so the studio refused to release it. It wasn’t released until after Gilliam went public with what was going on:
Mind you, this was a film that had already been released in Europe, and was successful there. There was then a groundswell of support from critics, who gave it a ‘best film of the year’ award, even though it hadn’t been released. It finally got released.
Long story short (TOO LATE!), thanks to all of this, there are now FOUR different versions of Brazil out there.
On the other end of the spectrum, sometimes the director ISN’T happy with the way a movie came out, but the studio makes them release it anyway. The prime example of this is Star Trek, The Motion Picture, which was basically released unfinished. The new DVD of it was reedited by the director, who is now much happier with the film. (of course it is still one of the weakest of the Trekfilms).
What I’m wondering is the sequence just before the boys take off flying. IIRC there is a close up shot of an agent holding a shotgun. Actually it is just the gun in the shot and I think he works the pump action. (maybe not) So what dramatic image is going to be replaced there?
Plus if they are not brandishing guns how will his mom frantically calling out “No guns, they’re only children” make any sense?
No, I wouldn’t. I have no problem with director’s cuts. A director’s cut does not change the story or the message. It may remove “improvements” forced upon the work by producers, many of whom think that because they have money they also have esthetic judgement.
But when you change story elements after the work is signed-off, when you change the fact that the FBI agents were armed and drawn, when you make Greedo shoot first, that’s cheating and lessens the original work.
(I think he’s adorable, btw.)