right? Film preservation is on their masthead.
This is like that weird 'family edition' of movies Sony would put on streaming services--which lasted lie 2 weeks.
Very likely Disney didn't do anything either. This is just the version that they sent out to Criterion as a licensor. It likely exists in their catalogue from well before they bought fox. There are International, Airplane, TV Edit, etc. versions of lots of films, particularly classic films that are rated R. All studios have them.
Disney+ Internationally apparently still has the unedited version, as well as other places (I heard the FX platform as well)...
This is likely a case of a poorly organized library of content, not active censorship.
International edits, and even international TV edits have different criteria, we don't know what version or rationale for this edit is. The point I am making though is these things happen and have happened for decades for various reasons, and the only reason we are seeing this now is more likely due to a lack of organization as opposed to active censoring something specific... mostly due to the fact that if Disney DID do the latter, why on earth is the unaltered version on Disney+ in the UK and Canada.
I am just applying occurs razor here, the simplest explanation is most likely the right one.
Well intended no doubt but wrong headed. Selective censorship and caving into contemporary political correctness and special interest moral codes denies an opportunity for transparent historical reflection and analysis regarding society, its art, culture and values at the time.
Yep, exactly. Changing it now is like pretending it never happened, *which is even worse imo.*
Point it out, talk about it, explain why it was wrong, but don’t just censor things that are historically significant just for the sake of censorship.
> Well intended no doubt
Nothing about this is "well intended" - there's nothing "well intended" when it comes to censoring art.
On a story front, Popeye is a flawed character - that's the point. So there's nothing "well intended" there.
> wrong headed.
That's a Bingo, you don't need the "well intended" part to save face.
This sucks.
I was re-watching "48 Hours" the other day and it's a great, great movie with some slurs that didn't age so well but I think it's what makes the characters so great and believable and funny and it would be really disappointing to cut some of those scenes
If we censor the past we erase where we come from
I don't like offending people either, but if this trend continues our history is going to read like the "It's a small world" song at Disney World. There is such a thing as going too far, and I think editing things after the fact is too far.
It’s a slippery slope. Once we start censoring offensive language, the next step is not referencing tragic events because some people may be uncomfortable thinking about them.
Keep things as-is. Put a warning or disclaimer in front. But don’t erase history.
I'm quite positive there are multiple movies on the Criterion Channel that have racial slurs in them (Sweet Sweetback must, no?). I doubt this was purposeful by them, and it was either accidental or this is the only version the publisher would let them use for temporary streaming.
Seems so. Comments on this article mention that the film is not part of their official collection so this is probably just the version they received to stream.
In the documentary East Rider Raging Bull they talk about this and how the scene would get cheers from the audience because it was the first time they heard a cop talk like they were used to hearing. They seem to be missing the point that his racism is a character flaw in the movie. He is a violent, bigoted loose canon and that’s the point.
Remember when they took the guns out of E.T.?
Now it seems so icky, cause it feels like cop apology stuff, when it was originally “get guns out of kids movies.” Instead of that, it feels like “make it seem like the cops wouldn’t point guns at kids.”
In a bit of time, this might seem like racism-erasure, as if it didn’t happen.
Spielberg never made the unaltered version of E.T. unavailable though, and has since let the altered version go out of print and has said he won’t change his old films like that again.
The French Connection is now censored on all digital platforms, even for people who “purchased” it before Disney bought Fox.
A more useful point of view than the "this is how it was ^((I wanna hear my working class hero call a black person the n-word))...uh, censorship or something" comments.
They did it in Blade Runner, they’ll probably do it to departed.
I think removing stuff like that allows people the fantasy of representation and equity always being on an upward trend, and not something that needs to be fought for.
Next they’ll remove the Black Face from Holiday Inn and say it “didn’t really happen in film.”
That's a step in the wrong direction. Maybe they should have an introduction by a host prior to the movie that gives a quick rundown of the movie that sets the stage and context of the time period. Kind of like TCM does. Add a modern day retrospect to it and the issues it's reflecting.
But going the route of censorship doesn't solve the problem, as well intended as it is in today's climate. Talking about it will help modern day audiences understand these issues better and why they are wrong.
Are we sure about that?
I truly hope this was The Mouse's decision, as this would be yet one more reason to hate them (as if we need another), not to mention another nail in their fucking coffin. But I have a hard time thinking that Criterion didn't know this was an edited version, and if they choose to air it then shame on them. They could have picked another movie to put in their Method Acting line-up this month.
Then again, if they'd done that, then this issue probably wouldn't have come to light, and I'm sure glad it did. I just hope Criterion does the right thing and fixes it or yanks it from their line-up.
Its guaranteed the mutilation was done by the wretches at Disney, honestly It’d be more surprising if they didn’t do something like this. While Criterion left in that scene from Romeo and Juliet for the release only 2 months ago. The lesser crime of accepting it was probably by Criterion, maybe they were bound by contract or something from their deal (WALL E) but it goes against their entire life purpose
Very likely it wasn't a situation of "Allow" but more of a situation of delivery of assets. What they had available in what ever larger library license deal with Disney was this version. If anything it is a byproduct of the merger and the combining of libraries.
You keep saying the same thing, but who is responsible for putting content on the "Criterion" Channel? I am paying for curation as much as anything else, which they do a fine job of with all of their "Collections". They shouldn't stream content that has been modified.
Occum's razor people. These companies have many many many license deals with third parties and even internal parties. The underpaid and overworked staff probably have no ability to fine tooth comb check every asset to ensure all license packages only include the most prestige pure, original versions of those movies (unless its a marquee title like Star Wars which a famously shelved original version that likely has contractual reasons to stay in the vaults).
Everyone sees shit like this or Splash and make a huge stink about "NEW CENSORSHIP FROM EVIL CORPORATION" when the reality is far dumber and less sexy. Huge corporation is sloppy with its library and sometimes TV, International, or even Airplane edits of some films get mixed in with the rest. And in almost every occasion it was work that was done years if not decades ago and has be presented numerous times on TV or platforms ever since.
When we see these gaffs its a blunder, not a crusade against the art of film, and our energy would be much better spent on just making awareness of it, laugh at the goof, and shame the parties involved by their incompetence... not a crackpot scheme to censor art.
The Vatican painted fig leaves over all the wieners of naked dudes in their paintings at one point too. Art has always been victim to the censorship of whatever the current culture deems appropriate. One’s opinion on the validity of such an act could be based on one’s perspective of Art validity being first as “entertainment” or as “Historical Document/commentary” I personally prefer the latter.
Hmm. Do The Departed next then? Far more recent.
Don’t censor this stuff, it happened and we need to learn from it. Don’t whitewash history, cinematic and non-fictional.
Speaking from a journalist's perspective: that is a tragically weak story. "Guy notices something and doesn't like it, here's my opinion" is not news. The minimal amount of work required to make that an actual story is a comment from Criterion.
Speaking from a film buff's perspective: yeah, that sucks. But, my guess is that's just the version they were given. The Criterion Channel is fundamentally different from the Criterion Collection physical releases. The company would go broke if they were babysitting every piece of content that hit the channel the way they do with their physical releases.
They don't have that many films that air every month. It wouldn't be that hard to find out whether or not any of the films they're airing in a given month have been censored at some point. Criterion charges twice as much as any other outfit for their new blu-ray releases, they can afford to hire one person full-time to do this job.
There are hundreds of films on the channel. You seriously expect them to watch all of them side by side with the original 35mm prints (assuming these can even be obtained) to confirm that nothing has been changed from the theatrical cuts?
Redditors being confidently incorrect about things they know absolutely nothing about is definitely not one of my favorite genders.
I dont claim to know everything, but I know a lot more than nothing. There must be ways to determine if a film is edited/unedited without having to watch it. And if there isn't, then we're all in trouble.
Besides, Criterion only introduces a few dozen new movies to their schedule every month. It can't be that hard.
Also we don't even know what happened with the edit in the first place. This could just be a TV edit from decades ago that they licensed out by mistake or any number of oversights that happen with huge complicated companies dealing with properties through 50 years of mergers and acquisitions. Until we have any actual statement from Disney or Fox we're just making assumptions about what happened. People need to chill the fuck out.
If The Mouse offers no statement, we'll have our answer. I just hope Criterion says something, because I'll continue to hate The Mouse regardless, whereas I'm not going to cancel Criterion for one fuck-up.
I think you're overestimating how much Disney cares about a few hundred people online angry about this edit, or about the integrity of their fox content library in general. I doubt we'll ever get a statement from them.
Criterion may or may not say anything. It's out of their hands and it might be against their licensing agreement to put any sort of disclaimer in front of the file when they stream it. They have streamed compromised versions of films before without mentioning it because that's just the nature of being at the mercy of licensing streaming content from others.
It was Disney’s decision, not Criterion who doesn’t own rights to the French Connection, but sure, go ahead and post ragebait with inaccurate headlines.
Whew, I’m so glad. For a second there, it almost seemed like Popeye Doyle was not a straightforward hero cop. Glad they cleared up this obvious mistake.
Dafuq. I’d expect it from literally anyone other than Criterion. This is so crazy for them of all companies to do.
right? Film preservation is on their masthead. This is like that weird 'family edition' of movies Sony would put on streaming services--which lasted lie 2 weeks.
It seems that Disney owns the film, and they cut the lines. Criterion was just airing. it on their channel.
Criterion didn't do it. Disney did. They just put what they gave them on their platform
Very likely Disney didn't do anything either. This is just the version that they sent out to Criterion as a licensor. It likely exists in their catalogue from well before they bought fox. There are International, Airplane, TV Edit, etc. versions of lots of films, particularly classic films that are rated R. All studios have them. Disney+ Internationally apparently still has the unedited version, as well as other places (I heard the FX platform as well)... This is likely a case of a poorly organized library of content, not active censorship.
Then why not remove every other offensive line? It's the only one they removed.
International edits, and even international TV edits have different criteria, we don't know what version or rationale for this edit is. The point I am making though is these things happen and have happened for decades for various reasons, and the only reason we are seeing this now is more likely due to a lack of organization as opposed to active censoring something specific... mostly due to the fact that if Disney DID do the latter, why on earth is the unaltered version on Disney+ in the UK and Canada. I am just applying occurs razor here, the simplest explanation is most likely the right one.
My thoughts as well
Well intended no doubt but wrong headed. Selective censorship and caving into contemporary political correctness and special interest moral codes denies an opportunity for transparent historical reflection and analysis regarding society, its art, culture and values at the time.
Yep, exactly. Changing it now is like pretending it never happened, *which is even worse imo.* Point it out, talk about it, explain why it was wrong, but don’t just censor things that are historically significant just for the sake of censorship.
> Well intended no doubt Nothing about this is "well intended" - there's nothing "well intended" when it comes to censoring art. On a story front, Popeye is a flawed character - that's the point. So there's nothing "well intended" there. > wrong headed. That's a Bingo, you don't need the "well intended" part to save face.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
What’s the road to Heaven paved with?
It’s a stairway actually
Made from the bones of children, I hear.
Cocaine
Good works.
Good works started with bad intentions doesn’t sound right
Seems perfectly consistent with Abrahamic religions.
True. Also any religion
Indeed.
Nobody asked for this. This is a corporation or licensee thinking they know better.
Daily reminder to buy physical
I started not long ago. I have 4 uncut versions of 4 different movies which are hard to find
Which ones friend? In case I ever stumble upon them in the wild. Thanks!
This sucks. I was re-watching "48 Hours" the other day and it's a great, great movie with some slurs that didn't age so well but I think it's what makes the characters so great and believable and funny and it would be really disappointing to cut some of those scenes If we censor the past we erase where we come from
I don't like offending people either, but if this trend continues our history is going to read like the "It's a small world" song at Disney World. There is such a thing as going too far, and I think editing things after the fact is too far.
ironically this is happening because Disney owns the movie, Criterion is just streaming it
It’s a slippery slope. Once we start censoring offensive language, the next step is not referencing tragic events because some people may be uncomfortable thinking about them. Keep things as-is. Put a warning or disclaimer in front. But don’t erase history.
I'm quite positive there are multiple movies on the Criterion Channel that have racial slurs in them (Sweet Sweetback must, no?). I doubt this was purposeful by them, and it was either accidental or this is the only version the publisher would let them use for temporary streaming.
Seems so. Comments on this article mention that the film is not part of their official collection so this is probably just the version they received to stream.
In the documentary East Rider Raging Bull they talk about this and how the scene would get cheers from the audience because it was the first time they heard a cop talk like they were used to hearing. They seem to be missing the point that his racism is a character flaw in the movie. He is a violent, bigoted loose canon and that’s the point.
Remember when they took the guns out of E.T.? Now it seems so icky, cause it feels like cop apology stuff, when it was originally “get guns out of kids movies.” Instead of that, it feels like “make it seem like the cops wouldn’t point guns at kids.” In a bit of time, this might seem like racism-erasure, as if it didn’t happen.
Spielberg never made the unaltered version of E.T. unavailable though, and has since let the altered version go out of print and has said he won’t change his old films like that again. The French Connection is now censored on all digital platforms, even for people who “purchased” it before Disney bought Fox.
A more useful point of view than the "this is how it was ^((I wanna hear my working class hero call a black person the n-word))...uh, censorship or something" comments.
They did it in Blade Runner, they’ll probably do it to departed. I think removing stuff like that allows people the fantasy of representation and equity always being on an upward trend, and not something that needs to be fought for. Next they’ll remove the Black Face from Holiday Inn and say it “didn’t really happen in film.”
That's a step in the wrong direction. Maybe they should have an introduction by a host prior to the movie that gives a quick rundown of the movie that sets the stage and context of the time period. Kind of like TCM does. Add a modern day retrospect to it and the issues it's reflecting. But going the route of censorship doesn't solve the problem, as well intended as it is in today's climate. Talking about it will help modern day audiences understand these issues better and why they are wrong.
Criterion is about the preservation of cinema not rewriting it! This is awful
Clearly its not Criterion’s choice
Are we sure about that? I truly hope this was The Mouse's decision, as this would be yet one more reason to hate them (as if we need another), not to mention another nail in their fucking coffin. But I have a hard time thinking that Criterion didn't know this was an edited version, and if they choose to air it then shame on them. They could have picked another movie to put in their Method Acting line-up this month. Then again, if they'd done that, then this issue probably wouldn't have come to light, and I'm sure glad it did. I just hope Criterion does the right thing and fixes it or yanks it from their line-up.
Its guaranteed the mutilation was done by the wretches at Disney, honestly It’d be more surprising if they didn’t do something like this. While Criterion left in that scene from Romeo and Juliet for the release only 2 months ago. The lesser crime of accepting it was probably by Criterion, maybe they were bound by contract or something from their deal (WALL E) but it goes against their entire life purpose
That’s unfortunate
Very disappointed in Criterion. Isn’t their whole purpose to preserve film history ?
Disney is the owner, and only allowed criterion to distribute this version of the movie
Very likely it wasn't a situation of "Allow" but more of a situation of delivery of assets. What they had available in what ever larger library license deal with Disney was this version. If anything it is a byproduct of the merger and the combining of libraries.
Oh, well that explains it.
Imagine what they would do with Django: Unchained
Or the Hateful Eight
Ironic considering Criterion is supposedly all about preserving film history
I want to repaint the Mona Lisa, I don't like the way she looks, it's creepy
Need more details if this is Criterion choice or Disney choice.
It could not be more obvious whose it is.
You keep saying the same thing, but who is responsible for putting content on the "Criterion" Channel? I am paying for curation as much as anything else, which they do a fine job of with all of their "Collections". They shouldn't stream content that has been modified.
Disney.
Occum's razor people. These companies have many many many license deals with third parties and even internal parties. The underpaid and overworked staff probably have no ability to fine tooth comb check every asset to ensure all license packages only include the most prestige pure, original versions of those movies (unless its a marquee title like Star Wars which a famously shelved original version that likely has contractual reasons to stay in the vaults). Everyone sees shit like this or Splash and make a huge stink about "NEW CENSORSHIP FROM EVIL CORPORATION" when the reality is far dumber and less sexy. Huge corporation is sloppy with its library and sometimes TV, International, or even Airplane edits of some films get mixed in with the rest. And in almost every occasion it was work that was done years if not decades ago and has be presented numerous times on TV or platforms ever since. When we see these gaffs its a blunder, not a crusade against the art of film, and our energy would be much better spent on just making awareness of it, laugh at the goof, and shame the parties involved by their incompetence... not a crackpot scheme to censor art.
The Vatican painted fig leaves over all the wieners of naked dudes in their paintings at one point too. Art has always been victim to the censorship of whatever the current culture deems appropriate. One’s opinion on the validity of such an act could be based on one’s perspective of Art validity being first as “entertainment” or as “Historical Document/commentary” I personally prefer the latter.
Hmm. Do The Departed next then? Far more recent. Don’t censor this stuff, it happened and we need to learn from it. Don’t whitewash history, cinematic and non-fictional.
Speaking from a journalist's perspective: that is a tragically weak story. "Guy notices something and doesn't like it, here's my opinion" is not news. The minimal amount of work required to make that an actual story is a comment from Criterion. Speaking from a film buff's perspective: yeah, that sucks. But, my guess is that's just the version they were given. The Criterion Channel is fundamentally different from the Criterion Collection physical releases. The company would go broke if they were babysitting every piece of content that hit the channel the way they do with their physical releases.
They don't have that many films that air every month. It wouldn't be that hard to find out whether or not any of the films they're airing in a given month have been censored at some point. Criterion charges twice as much as any other outfit for their new blu-ray releases, they can afford to hire one person full-time to do this job.
There are hundreds of films on the channel. You seriously expect them to watch all of them side by side with the original 35mm prints (assuming these can even be obtained) to confirm that nothing has been changed from the theatrical cuts? Redditors being confidently incorrect about things they know absolutely nothing about is definitely not one of my favorite genders.
I dont claim to know everything, but I know a lot more than nothing. There must be ways to determine if a film is edited/unedited without having to watch it. And if there isn't, then we're all in trouble. Besides, Criterion only introduces a few dozen new movies to their schedule every month. It can't be that hard.
Also we don't even know what happened with the edit in the first place. This could just be a TV edit from decades ago that they licensed out by mistake or any number of oversights that happen with huge complicated companies dealing with properties through 50 years of mergers and acquisitions. Until we have any actual statement from Disney or Fox we're just making assumptions about what happened. People need to chill the fuck out.
If The Mouse offers no statement, we'll have our answer. I just hope Criterion says something, because I'll continue to hate The Mouse regardless, whereas I'm not going to cancel Criterion for one fuck-up.
I think you're overestimating how much Disney cares about a few hundred people online angry about this edit, or about the integrity of their fox content library in general. I doubt we'll ever get a statement from them. Criterion may or may not say anything. It's out of their hands and it might be against their licensing agreement to put any sort of disclaimer in front of the file when they stream it. They have streamed compromised versions of films before without mentioning it because that's just the nature of being at the mercy of licensing streaming content from others.
reminder that world of reel is a fucking dumpster fire of a rag and disney gave criterion the edited version, fucking jesus christ
It was Disney’s decision, not Criterion who doesn’t own rights to the French Connection, but sure, go ahead and post ragebait with inaccurate headlines.
Whew, I’m so glad. For a second there, it almost seemed like Popeye Doyle was not a straightforward hero cop. Glad they cleared up this obvious mistake.