MovieChat Forums > The Groove Tube (1975) Discussion > Alternative Offensive Poster?

Alternative Offensive Poster?


I've never seen this movie. However, a collegue of mine says that there was an alternative VHS cover poster for this film that featured a 'penis' (photograph, not illustration) turned upside down with eyes drawn on the testicles and the penis made to look like a nose. This was in the UK, so it may be that this cover version was not seen in the US.

I can't find anything confirming this 'penis' cover online, but it is an old movie, and I wondered if anyone else remembers this alternative cover?

reply

I've never seen the commercial VHS cover as my copy of TGT was taped from Cable. But I can tell you that the "object" you describe appears (and talks) in the movie.

reply

yep, that was the original 80's VIPCO VHS release; the version they released in the 90's had a cover more akin to the US version.

reply

Thanks for clearing that one up. Other people in the office thought he'd gone mad or was thinking of a 'different' movie (if you know what I mean!). Now his reputation is somewhat restored. :)

reply

Not Safe For Work.

http://www.pre-cert.co.uk/cgi-bin/cms/Film/63690

reply

LOL I love how they used the title for the penis's eyes!

reply

Haha, that made my day!

"That is the whitest white part of the eye I have ever seen; do you floss?"

reply


"I love how they used the title for the penis's eyes! "

I should not reply to anyone who starts their sentences with "LOL".. but maybe this once.

They didn't use the title for the penis' eyes. They used the eyes of the penis for the "o" characters in the title. How can a whole title be used for eyes? It can't. Your logic is wrong.

As far as your spelling goes, it's not "penis's" (the one time someone actually tries to use the apostrophe, they do it wrong, sheesh). It's "penis'"

You know, when there is a word that ends in an "s" (or apparently even "x"), you only put an apostrophe after it for plural meaning - you don't add another "s" to it.

And is it really LOVE you are talking about? I'd say that doesn't even qualify as emotional lust, which is what most people really mean when they use the word 'love'. That word should be used sparingly and carefully, because it has a very specific, delicate meaning, that is otherwise trampled on and eventually destroyed altogether, to the point where it has to be thoroughly explained every time someone wants to use it correctly.

I could ask about the exclamation point, and ponder whether your statement really warrants it, but going back to what I said in the beginning - I don't think I will bother.

reply

"I love how they used the title for the penis's eyes! "

I should not reply to anyone who starts their sentences with "LOL".. but maybe this once.

They didn't use the title for the penis' eyes. They used the eyes of the penis for the "o" characters in the title. How can a whole title be used for eyes? It can't. Your logic is wrong.

As far as your spelling goes, it's not "penis's" (the one time someone actually tries to use the apostrophe, they do it wrong, sheesh). It's "penis'"


For the record, there was only one penis involved, and that penis possessed eyes. Hence, referring to the "penis's eyes" is entirely correct.

OTOH, the only proper use of "penis'" is to refer to a plural possessive - e.g., "...he felt like all the penis' eyes were on him" would refer to the collective eyes of a collective of penises.

I hope I cleared that up. You're welcome.

reply

[deleted]