[Editor's note: I think we've covered this one before on SEB, but I can't find the entry. It's been awhile since this first came to the forefront, but it appears the lawsuits haven't made their way through the courts yet.]Here is a link to some info about a bunch of Mormon folks who have been editing Hollywood Blockbusters for what they adjudge to be unnecessary content which includes;
1) Violence - Sometimes only Gory Violence
2) Sex Scenes
3) Profanity
4) Suggestive language
5) Blasphemy
and in some cases
6) Homosexuality
I've just seen an A&E Documentary called "Bleep: Censoring the Movies" which was very interesting. It showed these "Flick-Cleaner-Upper" companies and how they work.
They work by basically taking existing movies and editing them on their computers to remove/obscure/dub content they don't like. There inst a financial issue because they have to buy a copy of each movie every time they sell one - so they supposedly aren't schtupping Hollywood of their money, but many Hollywood Directors (at least 15 named in a lawsuit including Stephen Soderberg and other Academy Award Winners) still strongly object about their intellectual property being battered in this manner - they see this as an intellectual property and artistic integrity issue - I agree.
One company has a more hi-tech opinion which handles movies kind of like a v-chip in a TV which allows each specific category of "offensive" material to be removed "on-the-fly".
Particularly difficult for me to accept is the fact that some of the movies that were cleaned up include "Saving Private Ryan" and "Schindler's List". Both sides of my family - my own British side and my wife's American side - have survivors and victims of WWII violence - I want everyone to know the true horror of war - not a sanitized version of it.
Something I find that particularly offensive - to remove the image of a young soldier lying on Normandy Beach attempting to hold his intestines in his body whilst writing in pain so that they can be rid of a part of a movie they narrowly adjudge to be "unnecessarily violent" is truly the height of ignorance in my opinion.
Personally my opinion is that if you are not willing to accept a director's vision - sex, violence and bad language included - then you should not receive the gift of that movie at all.
Art is art.
If you find the nude male figure offensive then you should not see ANY of Michaelangelo's "David" or of Da Vinci's "Vitruvian Man". To make and sell censored copies would be as offensive to me as it is for them if I used the words "Jesus Christ!" as a curse.
Anyone else feelin' me here, homies?
Regards,
Deoxy.
That said, I agree that living in fear is a poor choice, and teaching people to live in fear often means you’re trying to sell them something.