For example, scenes in Splash have been digitally altered from the original version to get rid of brief rear nudity.
Any issues with altering original content? This is open to whomever has Disney+ or whomever wants to chime in on their feeling or non feelings about censoring movies.
None what so ever.
To be frank, I've never thought nudity is ever needed.
I think it was used to show vulnerability and sexuality at the same time. Sometimes movies try to convey parts of life that require nudity. You're just too stupid to realize that.
Also, when couldn't kids handle seeing a bare ass? They know what butts look like. In Splash, it wasn't overtly sexual or anything. Just someone's butt for 1 sec. I think a kid can handle that better than a kissing scene.
"require" nudity.
Wow, your an idiot.
There is no role that "requires" nudity....unless you are doing porn.
I look at it from the other angle. Are directors so talent-less that they can't tell a story without requiring someones wife and daughter to go nude just to get the point across.
My daughter becomes an actress...suddenly directors think up 1000 different scenes that somehow have to have her naked for no apparent reason.
"Required".....yeah, you've swallowed the pretentious Hollywood, producer, director crap that always thinks up some "crucial", "required" scene that has her naked in front of a film set and recorded for eternity.
You seem to think I've fallen for the movie BS premise that almost all pretty actresses need to get naked to capture the feeling of the scene.
Rhett Butler carried Scarlett up the staircase....they went into the bedroom.....shut the door.
Cut to morning.
Every adult on the Earth knows they had sex.
Producers and directors just want to make up any reason to get a girl naked. Movie didn't need the scene at all.
Pervert directors do.
I'm sure you are of the ilk that believes they got it wrong because it "required" a semi-nude, 3 minutes make out scene and some simulated sex.....it was just...."required". It needed to show...."vulnerability"
You are so full of crap.
I agree that there are some directors out there, probably even a majority, that are looking to do as you said. I don't believe that EVERY director has a sinister agenda though. I also disagree with when you say that nudity and sexuality have no place in movies.
Movies are an art form and we can compare them to classical paintings if you wish. Did Michaelangelo really HAVE to show a person naked? By your reasoning no.
There are plenty of movies where nudity and sex are exploitative and entertainment. That's a staple of an entire genre, horror. A majority of action movies as well. However, nudity and sex CAN show character development, personality, mood, all of that stuff. If you disagree that it can't be done I don't think you can be reasoned with.
And by the way, before you throw a bunch of insults at someone, you may want to learn the correct usage of "you're." If you don't you just sound like an idiot.
Really?
The "your", "you're" typo?
How mind numbing you felt you needed to point out that typo as some sort of gotcha, as a way to completely deflect from the point.
Typos on message board comments. Oh dear, the horror.
Wasn't my first.....won't be my last.
You just come across as extremely condescending, rude and stupid. Thought I would treat you similarly to how you treated me.
"There is no role that "requires" nudity....unless you are doing porn"
Queen Victoria would agree! Only perverts want to see naked girls.
As I recall the scene of Darryl as the mermaid walks among the panting men on Liberty Island all naked. It was very similar to many incidents of college streakers dash among laughing women or men looking shocked or panting like dogs in hunger. We all know the mermaid as very naive so that scene was not needed. It is more of Ron Howard getting horny than the characters.
shareYes I do.
I want the movies uncut as they were intended. I still can’t watch movies on regular television due to the editing and censoring.
Censoring movies is bullshit, and if you can’t handle the full unedited movie on your channel, then it shouldn’t be on your channel.
Meh. That's not bothersome. Movies were edited for general audiences on TV and it didn't make things worse. You can usually find an original copy on DVD.
shareYes I have a problem with these tweaks designed to make the film even more family-friendly than it already is. Does everything have to be sanitized with Disney? Touchstone produced a number of R-rated movies that should be readily available on Disney+ because not everybody who watches it is a child. I personally would love to see Down and Out in Beverly Hills again but that would never happen right now. I'm sure many people would love to see one of Touchstone's biggest hits, Pretty Woman.I have had Disney+ for two months and initially enjoyed it until I noticed it has very limited content and doesn't refresh its library often. That coupled with the self-censorship of Disney's own movies make me question whether or not I will continue to subscribe to it.
shareDisney sucks. This particular point is a small one.
shareYep, just like I hate how George Lucas "updated" the star wars trilogy.
I have a big issue with it. Save that censored bullshit network television. If it’s too risqué for the childish Disney +, just get rid of it completely.
share