Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Archives > Archives > DVD Talk Archive
Reload this Page >

Dogma Commentary?

Dogma Commentary?

 
Old 04-24-03 | 10:19 PM
  #1  
Chad's Avatar
Thread Starter
DVD Talk Legend
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 12,671
Received 1,244 Likes on 458 Posts
From: Somewhere Hot Scoville Units: 9,999,999 Zodiac Sign: Capricorn
Dogma Commentary?

I know there was probably a thread regarding this but couldn't find anything.

Of course it was a great all around commentary, but why were certain Kevin Smith comments geared towards certain people constantly being bleeped out? Isn't that pretty much the reason for having a disclaimer, so that everyone can say what they want, while conveniently covering the studio's butt? Anyone know what was bleeped out and for what possible reason?
Chad is offline  
Old 04-24-03 | 11:04 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,177
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: Friartown
I think the comments referred to Disney/people associated with Disney subsidiaries (i.e. the distributor that dropped the flick), and Dogma's distributors wanted to avoid action by Disney, who, historically, a very litigious company.

My $.02 on the subject.
cupcake jesus is offline  
Old 04-25-03 | 12:15 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: KC, MO
There was a court order towards mentioning Disney people and 'symbols'

Most of the bleeps are the names of the Weinstein brothers, heads of Miramax. the Disney subsidiary who bought the flick from Miramax themselves, and resold it to Lions Gate Films, who released it.
ScottReynolds is offline  
Old 04-25-03 | 01:09 PM
  #4  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Columbia/Tri-Star is just afraid of Disney's legal team. If you watch "An Evening with Kevin Smith", you'll find that Kevin Smith goes on at length on a bunch of subjects but Disney remains unbashed, although he definitely did have stories about Disney at his college Q&A's.
GuruAskew is offline  
Old 04-25-03 | 05:27 PM
  #5  
slop101's Avatar
DVD Talk Hero
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 44,034
Received 472 Likes on 327 Posts
From: So. Cal.
Most of the edited info in the Dogma commentary had to do with Linda Fiorentino, who apparantly was a royla bitch to work with. Some comments made it in, though. One of my favorite lines was when Smith says this about a certain scene: "Oh, Linda wasn't talking to me on the day we shot this scene".
slop101 is offline  
Old 04-25-03 | 10:51 PM
  #6  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's no flat-out court order against talking about Disney. It's just that by opening your mouth to anything that could be even remotely considered to be slander or libel towards Disney, you're opening yourself up to a lawsuit by a company that has the best lawyers in the world. Of course, Columbia/Tri-Star is owned by Sony, which most likely has equally impressive lawyers, but they obviously just wanted to avoid the *possibility* of any legal woes.

Last edited by GuruAskew; 04-25-03 at 10:54 PM.
GuruAskew is offline  
Old 04-25-03 | 11:44 PM
  #7  
Josh-da-man's Avatar
DVD Talk Hero
 
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 49,193
Received 4,420 Likes on 2,913 Posts
From: The Bible Belt
To borrow a phrase from Harlan Ellison, "Nobody ****s with The Mouse."
Josh-da-man is offline  
Old 04-26-03 | 04:35 AM
  #8  
aam
Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: UK
Check out the bits of commentary with the video option - They forgot to beep that!
Though I think its just one reference that gets through.
aam is offline  
Old 04-27-03 | 01:12 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: KC, MO
My fault, I meant 'contractually' rather than 'court order'. I should have searched NewsAskew first.

Q: And how about the bleeps in the disc's commentary tracks?

Kevin: It's not "bad" at all- I've already explained that as a part of the deal wherein Columbia Tri-Star licensed the rights to DOGMA from Beauna Vista Home Video, Disney and none of it's affiliates could be mentioned in relation to DOGMA. So, we had to bleep any references to Disney of Miramax, and specifially JUST the words "Disney", "Miramax", "Harvey", "Bob", and "Weinstien".
ScottReynolds is offline  
Old 04-29-03 | 02:11 PM
  #10  
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah, I forgot about that. That's also the reason why "Judge Not: In Defense of Dogma" was removed from the DVD. In any case, the lack of Disney-bashing on "An Evening With Kevin Smith" proves that whether Disney forces them to or not, they're still deathly afraid of lawsuits.
GuruAskew is offline  
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.