3 Questions
- Matty-Mouse
- Special Edition
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 7:51 am
- Location: UK
That scene with the priest is even funnier when you watch it in the film because it moves and everything! My sister and I used to laugh our socks off at that scene, my mother was so shocked when we told her why we were laughing.
Dust? Anyone? No?
Dust? Anyone? No?
Dust? Anyone? No?
Well thats actually low in fat so you can eat as much of that as you like.
Dust? Anyone? No?
Dust? Anyone? No?
Well thats actually low in fat so you can eat as much of that as you like.
- MickeyMouseboy
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3470
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:35 pm
- Location: ToonTown
Laserdisc? what's a laserdisc?Maerj wrote:People said the same exact thing about the Sultan in Aladdin. I remember hearing that rumor back in the laserdisc days, they even gave a frame number for it! I went to it and it did look like what they said. But when you hit play, the camera went around him, revealing again that it was just a knee. Maybe they need to stop animating these short male characters? Or maybe audiences need to concetrate on the story and not the short character's crotches!



- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
Oh... GOD!!! Why did you have to tell me that!!!! Ewww, I can't believe that, well since I've never seen it hopefully, it won't effect my watching it... Althought if it is on I-MAX, it might be very obviuos... YUCK!Maerj wrote:People said the same exact thing about the Sultan in Aladdin. I remember hearing that rumor back in the laserdisc days, they even gave a frame number for it! I went to it and it did look like what they said. But when you hit play, the camera went around him, revealing again that it was just a knee. Maybe they need to stop animating these short male characters? Or maybe audiences need to concetrate on the story and not the short character's crotches!
- herman_the_german
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:49 pm
- Location: 1313 Mockingbird Lane in Mockingbird Heights
- Contact:
- MickeyMouseboy
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3470
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:35 pm
- Location: ToonTown
- Choco Bear
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 473
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 12:36 pm
- herman_the_german
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:49 pm
- Location: 1313 Mockingbird Lane in Mockingbird Heights
- Contact:
Disney Conspiracy
The whole Disney conspiracy gets tired pretty quick.
If the thing is real (and undeniable), like the nude lady in Rescuers, the photo is merely annoying if you just see it every time (since it interrupts the flow of the story). It is not arousing or shocking, and it is not going to pervert you or your kids in any manner.
If the thing is just subject to interpretation, then, SO WHAT!, get on with your lives. I've seen lots of stuff in lots of movies that is a lot more disturbing than the word SEX or a guy with a woody under a robe, or even a phallus shaped tower (aren't ALL towers phallus shaped, anyway?).
Nothing will happen to your kids and nothing will happen to you. I bought Kirikou And The Sorceress for my kids and we watch it all the time, it's got full male and female frontal and rear nudity, and let me tell you: It's no big deal!
A Fairy Tale shows mutilated soldiers coming home from the war in a graphic manner (as graphic as any splatter film, say), but also shows them as human beings underneath their mutilation. A potentially disturbing scene becomes humane, after some discussion with your kids.
Any nature show will have more sex than any Disney feature, and ANY TV commercial is more suggestive and corrupting than a Disney feature.
And personally, I have nothing against sex or sexuality. My only concern would be that my children learn correct and responsible attitudes towards it (and I'll take care of that when the time comes). And there certainly isn't any real message in these items other that the actual images (or phrases) by themselves (since they are outside of any context).
Being nude is no big deal, we are all nude under our clothes. Teens taking their clothes off is no big deal, they take them off to bathe or to change clothes. Erections are no big deal, even my one year old boy gets them all the time. There is no meaning to these items, other than what we assign ourselves.
And if you wanna complain about the violence on TV or movies, well, my daughter saw the whole 9/11 thing and the subsequent war develop in front of her 3 year old eyes. If having previously seen fictional violence in movies helped her to understand some of it, or to cope better, then the fictional violence did some kind of good. Real violence is disturbing, fictional violence can be didactic and useful.
Even if the animators did their little gag and got away with it, there is nothing disturbing about it. If it was a joke, take it as a joke. There is no need to look for subversive reasons for the joke. The kids will not notice. There is no need to make mountains out of molehills, even if those molehills really are there.
There are plenty of little things that disturb me more in some of the Disney films than these little items. We can discuss those if you want.
If the thing is real (and undeniable), like the nude lady in Rescuers, the photo is merely annoying if you just see it every time (since it interrupts the flow of the story). It is not arousing or shocking, and it is not going to pervert you or your kids in any manner.
If the thing is just subject to interpretation, then, SO WHAT!, get on with your lives. I've seen lots of stuff in lots of movies that is a lot more disturbing than the word SEX or a guy with a woody under a robe, or even a phallus shaped tower (aren't ALL towers phallus shaped, anyway?).
Nothing will happen to your kids and nothing will happen to you. I bought Kirikou And The Sorceress for my kids and we watch it all the time, it's got full male and female frontal and rear nudity, and let me tell you: It's no big deal!
A Fairy Tale shows mutilated soldiers coming home from the war in a graphic manner (as graphic as any splatter film, say), but also shows them as human beings underneath their mutilation. A potentially disturbing scene becomes humane, after some discussion with your kids.
Any nature show will have more sex than any Disney feature, and ANY TV commercial is more suggestive and corrupting than a Disney feature.
And personally, I have nothing against sex or sexuality. My only concern would be that my children learn correct and responsible attitudes towards it (and I'll take care of that when the time comes). And there certainly isn't any real message in these items other that the actual images (or phrases) by themselves (since they are outside of any context).
Being nude is no big deal, we are all nude under our clothes. Teens taking their clothes off is no big deal, they take them off to bathe or to change clothes. Erections are no big deal, even my one year old boy gets them all the time. There is no meaning to these items, other than what we assign ourselves.
And if you wanna complain about the violence on TV or movies, well, my daughter saw the whole 9/11 thing and the subsequent war develop in front of her 3 year old eyes. If having previously seen fictional violence in movies helped her to understand some of it, or to cope better, then the fictional violence did some kind of good. Real violence is disturbing, fictional violence can be didactic and useful.
Even if the animators did their little gag and got away with it, there is nothing disturbing about it. If it was a joke, take it as a joke. There is no need to look for subversive reasons for the joke. The kids will not notice. There is no need to make mountains out of molehills, even if those molehills really are there.
There are plenty of little things that disturb me more in some of the Disney films than these little items. We can discuss those if you want.
Last edited by herman_the_german on Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
I completely agree w/ u on a lot of your points, and I think to an extent all kids should be exposed to that as it prepares them for the real world, and the Lion King thing doesn't bother me because I don't really see it, but I personally find the preacher thing disturbing, and I can't help but notice it 99% of the times I watch the movie. I would rather see the nude characters as it would be natural, and it would be open and honest, "OK they're naked", but to try and hide something like the preacher thing and make a joke out of it in a kids movie, is in my opinion BAD TASTE, and I think how obvious and sick it is, can be a lot worse, than a "misinterpreted" message, or a small plot hole.
I am not a stickler for these kind of things and usually find their hidden things funny, like Belle walking in the town square in Hunchback, or Mickey Donald and Goofy, in the Little Mermaid, but the Priest thing is just not something I can laugh about, and am disturbered whenever I see it. (In addition to the action being un called for, it's a decrepit old man performing it, which makes it that much worse! IMO) And, not that it would make it any less disturbing, but say if it happened at a time when Eric saw Ariel or something, then I might be able to see the humour in that, because it could be considered a normal reaction. And I am going to stop there...
I am not a stickler for these kind of things and usually find their hidden things funny, like Belle walking in the town square in Hunchback, or Mickey Donald and Goofy, in the Little Mermaid, but the Priest thing is just not something I can laugh about, and am disturbered whenever I see it. (In addition to the action being un called for, it's a decrepit old man performing it, which makes it that much worse! IMO) And, not that it would make it any less disturbing, but say if it happened at a time when Eric saw Ariel or something, then I might be able to see the humour in that, because it could be considered a normal reaction. And I am going to stop there...
- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
- herman_the_german
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:49 pm
- Location: 1313 Mockingbird Lane in Mockingbird Heights
- Contact:
Bad Taste in Disney movies
Let's agree that the gags and some of the writing is in bad taste. Would you rather:
a) Leave it alone.
b) Censor it on future releases.
Personally I'd rather leave it alone, as bad as it may be.
Again, I do not mind my children seeing Mickey smoke or drink or Donald cuss, seeing big boobs on a toy mermaid, seeing Jessica Rabbit's crotch for a split second, seeing black centaurs, hearing about capital punishment in the Middle East, seeing Song Of The South, etc. (BTW do we have a complete list of Disney censorship on Home Video?). I'd rather them see it all, and learn something, than not see it at all.
Please bear in mind that Disney is doing this censorship for of me and my children (demographically we are precisely the family audience they seek to entertain). I would rather Disney didn't do that and left the parenting to me & my wife.
a) Leave it alone.
b) Censor it on future releases.
Personally I'd rather leave it alone, as bad as it may be.
Again, I do not mind my children seeing Mickey smoke or drink or Donald cuss, seeing big boobs on a toy mermaid, seeing Jessica Rabbit's crotch for a split second, seeing black centaurs, hearing about capital punishment in the Middle East, seeing Song Of The South, etc. (BTW do we have a complete list of Disney censorship on Home Video?). I'd rather them see it all, and learn something, than not see it at all.
Please bear in mind that Disney is doing this censorship for of me and my children (demographically we are precisely the family audience they seek to entertain). I would rather Disney didn't do that and left the parenting to me & my wife.
- Prince Adam
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:44 pm
- Location: The Great, Wide Somewhere (Ont, Canada)
[quote="Choco Bear"][quote="MickeyMouseboy"]That's a Disney first herman!
[/quote]
wouldnt that be a first for ne thing ive never seen a person or a thing with two erections(i said a bad word
) before
u know that woulkd be sick and disturbing and it would take years of therapy to get a image like that outa my head
[/quote]
Have I told you how glad I am to have started this topic
?????

wouldnt that be a first for ne thing ive never seen a person or a thing with two erections(i said a bad word



Have I told you how glad I am to have started this topic

Defy Gravity...
- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Bad Taste in Disney movies
I agree with you Herman, but unfortunately there are a bunch of Loud mouth parents that want their children sheltered from the world, and that is why disney and threst censor... though sometimes I can understand some of the censoring...herman_the_german wrote:Please bear in mind that Disney is doing this censorship for of me and my children (demographically we are precisely the family audience they seek to entertain). I would rather Disney didn't do that and left the parenting to me & my wife.
- herman_the_german
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 218
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:49 pm
- Location: 1313 Mockingbird Lane in Mockingbird Heights
- Contact:
Re: Bad Taste in Disney movies
Which is precisely the reason why somebody with a balanced and reasonable attitude (such as minePrince Phillip wrote:but unfortunately there are a bunch of Loud mouth parents that want their children sheltered from the world...

Last edited by herman_the_german on Wed Jul 16, 2003 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Bad Taste in Disney movies
Yes Herman. How dare you think for yourself? Who do you think you are? How are you going to survive in the 21st Century with an attitude like that? Luckly we know what to do with troublemakers around here...herman_the_german wrote:Which is precisely the reason why somebody with a balanced and reasonable attitude (such as mine) needs to be just as vocal as those loudmouths. Which is why I am stating these opinions, and take any opportunity to do so (though sometimes it doesn't make me too popular).
We ties them up and makes them watch Cinderella II non-stop until they literally can't take anymore. Soon, the blubbering shell of the man you are now will be thanking Disney for their edits (If only they would censor all of Cinderella II).

Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
- Prince Phillip
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 11:48 am
- Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Bad Taste in Disney movies
2099net wrote:Yes Herman. How dare you think for yourself? Who do you think you are? How are you going to survive in the 21st Century with an attitude like that? Luckly we know what to do with troublemakers around here...herman_the_german wrote:Which is precisely the reason why somebody with a balanced and reasonable attitude (such as mine) needs to be just as vocal as those loudmouths. Which is why I am stating these opinions, and take any opportunity to do so (though sometimes it doesn't make me too popular).
We ties them up and makes them watch Cinderella II non-stop until they literally can't take anymore. Soon, the blubbering shell of the man you are now will be thanking Disney for their edits (If only they would censor all of Cinderella II).
















































