indianajdp wrote:BasilOfBakerStreet427 wrote:Screw 9/11! That should have been the ending!
You can't be serious.
That would have been a PR nightmare the likes of which even Disney would have been hard-pressed to recover from anytime soon. If this is indeed how things happened then I not only support the decision to revise but I also applaud it.
Well, no doubt I'm stepping on toes here - but you know, terrorists use bombs all over the world? They always have and always will. London (and other areas) were repeatedly bombed by the IRA. But it doesn't stop Hollywood from releasing a glut of "action" movies each year where the main plotline is to stop terrorists with bombs. And in some films terrorists with bombs
do bomb a few buildings in the course of the story (just to show how EVIL they are). You could almost say Hollywood celebrated such real world tradagies so extreme and exagerated the action films became.
But what's most important is the fact that London did have periods of high terrorist activity and none of them stopped people in the UK from wanting to see such films FOR ENTERTAINMENT (in general, some did complain at certain films).
Hell, even "24" on the television has such plots. And that's post 9/11.
I don't know the context of the plane scene, but I understood it to be mostly down a canyon. Wasn't the whole "look" of Lilo and Stitch that of a sort of small town area? Wouldn't they be wanting to stick to this through-out the film? I've never heard the skyscraper reference before when reading about the deleted scenes.
The fact that Disney (apparently) feel as though they can show the deleted sequence now, show that it was probably a reaction on the side of caution to delete it in the first place.
Update
After reading through the second page of posts I've decided to clarify my statement a bit more:
You (as a nation) will
never come to terms with the Twin Towers attack unless you move on. Lots of things happen every day which although smaller affect families just as much. Drive by shootings, muggings, car crashes... the list is almost endless. But nobody would suggest dodging these issues in films or other forms of entertainment. More people die from gun deaths each year, but I don't see anyone trimming guns from movies.
Disney may or may not have been right to remove the sequence from Lilo and Stitch - we won't know until we see it (or at least as much of it as was completed), but were Disney right to remove most of the swords and knifes from Treasure Planet in a reaction to 9/11?
That, plus the hypocrisy of the media worldwide where it was wrong to show any film or television series with the slightest possible connection to the twin towers attack (in case of offence) but it was okay to keep showing the actual real-life footage sometimes on an endless loop when
everyone would have already seen it repeatedly (even if they didn't want to see it again for whatever personal preference - grief, disgust, wanting to protect their children from the images, whatever) it was hard to avoid.
What's going to offend or upset the American public more? Endless reruns of the actual event showing
real people loosing their lives or a cartoon fantasy with a sequence that's probably 20% connected to the event? (If that)
