Who Framed Roger Rabbit censorship question
 

It is known that the LD is not censored, but what about the VHS version? How is that censored in relation to the LD? Cause I’m considering trying to get the VHS version transferred to DVD in the event that the upcoming DVD will be censored.

The reason it's a LD thing is because of three little letters CAV. I believe on VHS it went by to fast for you to even notice or do anything about it to stop it where as in the CAV you could go frame by frame.

LD still has some stuff cut out of it that were a little edgy. Also, I wouldn't consider it Censorship because no one Made Disney remove the scenes they did.

Jesus Christ people. Go to www.google.com and do a search on NAKED JESSICA RABBIT PICS, get your fix and stop whining about a FRAME of animation. Nothing in this movie was changed that affected the movie.

I cry.. :(

Re: Who Framed Roger Rabbit censorship question
 

....I can't even imagine what your reaction would be to any <i>Betty Boop</i> releases.

This is kinky....

You can't even tell the difference betwen the "censored" and the "uncut" version unless you are going through frame by frame. It doesn't change the plot of the movie in any way.

It’s not just the Jessica vagina frame; it’s several other things. Including but not limited to dialog being changed.

Get a dictionary and look up the meaning of the overused word "censored." You'll learn this isn't even close.

What specifically? Got a link?

I think the only "real" change ever made to this movie was the scene in the beginning where Baby Herman puts his hand up a woman's skirt. And to be honest, if that is going to affect you buying the DVD, then you're better off without it. The rest of us will be happily entertained by this wonderful movie.

And if you read the Snopes link, that was never changed (at least for video...I don't know about television broadcasts).

Well.. I remember hearing that it WAS changed for the DVD release. I sold mine ages ago when I was desperate for cash, so I can't confirm at this time. There's also no mention of it on www.imdb.com, so it might've just been speculation.

here's something

more @ http://us.imdb.com/AlternateVersions?0096438

Damn I hope the upcoming DVD isn't butchered :(

None of those changes you listed have anything to do with "censoring" the video release of the film. They are about changes made to the television release. If you are going to label every film where the television version is different than the home video version as "censored" on home video, you're going to have a pretty long list.

OK, you want to see this woman naked?

http://www.nitestar.com/images/batmanjess.jpg

I’m throwing them in as potential censorship for the video, dvd, etc.

It’s really sad that with DVDs we have to worry about censorship. We're supposed to BUY those and they censor them????

uh.. please do what some said above and LOOK UP CENSORSHIP. You are using it when it's not suppose to be used.

Today's over used word of the day is CENSORSHIP. -rolleyes-

Well, you could make that argument about every DVD that's released. "What IF this is censored?" Let's wait and see IF the disc is actually cut in someway before we get all excited, mmm'kay?

Altering dialog and scenes qualifies as censorship. Period.

No it’s not like saying “what if the second Lord of the Rings will be censored”. Because Who Framed Roger Rabbit was censored on DVD once. So odds are pretty good it’ll be censored again.

You still haven't demonstrated that.

Well the pictures small but the lady in red looks pretty attractive:)

Or is there something i'm missing here?

WFRR was not censored on dvd once, it just got a bad treatment in transfer and extra's. Besides being totally barebones it's still watchable. Further more, it's not censored, it's edited by the choice of the makers. No Government came in and DEMANDED disney to change it. they changed it on their own.

By your account on what is censored and what isn't EVERY MOVIE ever made would be considered "CENSORED" simply because and Editer came in and did what he is suppose to do, Edit the film in the way the studio/creator Wanted it to be edited. No one forced Disney to make the changes to the movie. It's like saying Lucas Censored himself by removing the line where Luke yells out "CARRIE" in ANH. it's not called censorship, it shouldn't even be considered censorship. The misuse of the word censorship by bands, televisions, movies and more cheapens the words power and meaning.

Frankly, this is not any sort of case on censorship but a choice made by the studio (and yes, a movie is Owned by a studio, I don't care what right a director should have, once they make a contract with a studio, it's both their movies) to edit out scenes they felt needed to be removed.

Disney in the same token did not CENSOR song of the south, they just don't wish to release it because of certain issues they have with it and how they don't want to DISNEY name attached to such controversy. Now saying WHO FRAME ROGER RABBIT is censored is like saying "Rescuers" was censored when they removed the scene that showed a nude lady in the window. It's not censorship, it shouldn't be considered censorship.

Further more, this does nothing to ruin the plot/story/film of who framed roger rabbit so why even care?

Jack, I was going to put you my ignore list after learning that you hated Punch-Drunk Love, but your wise words on the subject of censorship stayed my hand.

Well said Jack.

Disney censoring cartoons by is censorship. Not government imposed censorship, but censorship no less! Just like digitally masking sex scenes in Eyes Wide Shut is censorship!

Now in cases like taking out a nude picture is The Rescuers or that “take off clothes” line in Aladdin or Luke yelling “Carrie” that’s not the same thing. Just taking out stuff that’s not supposed to be there. Now editing sex scenes, dialog or racial slurs that are actually supposed to be there that’s censorship (Regardless of it effecting the plot or not)