DVDizzy Forum

Oh and one more thing...the cover says special edition, shouldn't it say diamond edition? Hmmm

Lorddh wrote:Oh and one more thing...the cover says special edition, shouldn't it say diamond edition? Hmmm

It shouldn't say Diamond because it's not a diamond edition. They changed it.

Luke wrote:

Mr. Yagoobian wrote:The cut scenes' audio was unsalvageable; they had no choice but to re-dub his dialogue...other than having two voices coming out of his mouth for the duration of the film, which would be tremendously annoying.

I don't know that I buy that it would be annoying to have different voices. I mean wouldn't it be better to have some of his track retained than none of it? Of course the whole unsalvageable audio line strikes me as strange. This is Disney, who saves transcripts of meaningless story meetings for 70 years. But the primary dialogue for their most ambitious film to date just becomes irreparable? I'd like us to get a fuller story on that sometime. But we won't unless they are one day able to restore it.

<I>De gustibus non est disputandum.</I> Personally I'd find it annoying to have any on-camera presence repeatedly speaking in two different voices, particularly someone whose vocal qualities are distinct---imagine a Jimmy Stewart or Schwarzenegger film with substantial portions of dialogue re-dubbed.

Transcripts, by several orders of magnitude, are less volatile than film or audiotape, especially anything nitrate-based.

Lorddh wrote:Oh and one more thing...the cover says special edition, shouldn't it say diamond edition? Hmmm

Really??? Then which movie is taking its place? Sorry I was t informed, haha.

Lorddh wrote:

Lorddh wrote:Oh and one more thing...the cover says special edition, shouldn't it say diamond edition? Hmmm

Really??? Then which movie is taking its place? Sorry I was t informed, haha.

I'd assume that Aladdin would be added back into the line-up. Who really knows anymore at this point. I'm getting so tired of the inconsistency of these releases that I don't care what they're called, as long as we get them. I'm still really bitter that all of us in the US haven't seen the Dumbo SE yet.

I don't understand why they don't unzoom the censored scenes and just erase the "offensive" pony and get one of their good animators to just animate a new cupid in its place so we don't have the horrible pan & zoom where the film grain grows to boulder sizes...

ianwahlers wrote:I don't understand why they don't unzoom the censored scenes and just erase the "offensive" pony and get one of their good animators to just animate a new cupid in its place so we don't have the horrible pan & zoom where the film grain grows to boulder sizes...

Because that would be destroying the artistry of the film. The censorship you're talking about is exactly the same thing seen in Farenheit 451. It's not moral, ethical or just plain fair. No one can completely erase or rewrite history. There will always be tidbits of what happened. I think Disney should just grow up and show us Sunflower (restoring the missing audio, as well). It's definitely not fair to the fans of the film. Plus, this isn't a mainstream film. In actuality, the film is more regarded to the collector's and buffs of the film. Though I am superbly mad that (as far as we know, which we really don't. There isn't anything saying that we won't get the fully restored film; then again, there isn't anything saying that we will) this won't include Sunflower (which is rightfully should), I will still most likely buy it because I'm dying to see the picture quality.

TheSequelOfDisney wrote: Because that would be destroying the artistry of the film. The censorship you're talking about is exactly the same thing seen in Farenheit 451. It's not moral, ethical or just plain fair. No one can completely erase or rewrite history. There will always be tidbits of what happened. I think Disney should just grow up and show us Sunflower (restoring the missing audio, as well). It's definitely not fair to the fans of the film. Plus, this isn't a mainstream film. In actuality, the film is more regarded to the collector's and buffs of the film. Though I am superbly mad that (as far as we know, which we really don't. There isn't anything saying that we won't get the fully restored film; then again, there isn't anything saying that we will) this won't include Sunflower (which is rightfully should), I will still most likely buy it because I'm dying to see the picture quality.

Censorship is censorship, regardless of how it's done. And according to the people who have seen the digital restoration in theaters, it's still censored, so we won't get it on Blu-ray.

That still doesn't mean that censorship is a good thing. I just want to see the whole film and I feel that Disney is missing a grand opportunity to show how far it has come since 1940. Embracing the past, not neglecting it.

Keep in mind that this is not a case of modernists censoring a movie. Walt Disney himself had the scene censored within his lifetime, so Sunflower is going to remain censored.

Honestly I just don't feel that Sunflower has any place in the movie. It was a poor attempt at humor that is very out-of-place in a classical out-of-time setting.

As for my suggestion, I'm not saying that censorship is good, just that since they will probably never release it uncensored within the film itself, why not find a better way of presenting the scene without destroying the quality of the image.

Maybe they could reach a compromise someday by censoring it better and then presenting the scene in its original form as an extra with an attached Leonard Maltin intro.

But, if you are hoping for a completely uncensored movie, you're expecting too much from the same studio that continues to refuse to release Song of the South on DVD, when it is not racist at all!

ianwahlers wrote:Maybe they could reach a compromise someday by censoring it better and then presenting the scene in its original form as an extra with an attached Leonard Maltin intro.

This is what they should've done for this release. It's been 70 years! I mean, I understand that some people never change, but a lot of people have. Studies show that each generation has been increasingly more acceptable of others. And, I understand the suggestions that you proposed, but I, personally, don't want the past to be completely removed from society. There are plenty of films that show racial elements, and they have been released, uncensored (mind you). I just think it's unfair.

ianwahlers wrote:Keep in mind that this is not a case of modernists censoring a movie. Walt Disney himself had the scene censored within his lifetime, so Sunflower is going to remain censored.

jpanimation wrote:According to wikipedia (among other sources), it was the 1969 Fantasia re-release that had Sunflower removed. Seeing how Walt was dead and buried, I doubt he made the cut. I will venture to guess that the Walt Disney Company thought it would be unwise to re-release the movie with the racial stereotype intact after the African-American Civil Rights Movement just ended.

Looks purely to a be political decision made by the company, not a personal decision made by Walt.

If Walt had censored the movie himself, I bet he would've had the scene re-animated with cherubs replacing Sunflower, since they serve the same purpose in this segment. The scenes before and after Sunflower have cherubs serving the centaurettes with big stupid grins on their faces, not to mention they're both comic relief characters, so it only seems natural to replace her with a cherub.

I think Sunflower needs to be replaced with Oprah!

Sunflower aside (since she was edited out 40 years ago), the three avoidable strikes for this release are:

1) Walt Disney's Original "Fantasia" is not available by itself in North America - - you have to buy into the sequel bundle.

2) The discs used up by the sequel seem to have replaced even the most standard supplementary features for Walt's original film like "Claire DeLune", "Baby Ballet", "Peter and the Wolf", etc.

3) The voice of original host Deems Taylor has been replaced by a modern recording (no offense to Corey Burton who is a great talent).

I agree with you Luke on all that.

What would be weird about different segments of the film having different voices? There can be two narrators!

O, why don't they keep Deems Taylor's old original narration...and have someone who can sound like him record and replace the lost dialogue?

They had a Walt Disney voice impersonator! Yes, some people won't think he sounds good enough because some people are that critical, but it's better than nothing!

As for Sunflower, I am in total agreement with ianwahlers and jpanimation. Just edit out SunFlower with a digital removal of her. And why not throw in a cherub? They don't have to say it's the original theatrical version. They can give us the original theatrical version via seamless branching to the original scene and an introduction talking about Sunflower and what's up with her.

Unless of course we consider Walt's original edits how it should be because he edited himself. Did he make the crappy quality zooms?

I agree with you also merlinjones.

Just in case anyone misses it, Disney has issued a press release for this release, which DVDizzy has on the main page: http://www.dvdizzy.com/fantasia-fantasi ... -1130.html

Again, I hope the UK "Fantasia" only set is open region.

ajmrowland wrote:

DisneyJedi wrote: Because...

Some people who want to watch movies on the go can't afford portable Blu-ray players yet. So if they want to watch a movie on the go, they can get both a Blu-ray and DVD copy of the movie. That way, they can watch the Blu-ray in their living rooms on their HDTVs or computers if they have Blu-ray drives, and the DVD on a standard TV, computer with DVD drive or portable DVD player. They don't call them combo packs for nothing.

There aren't any portable blu-ray players, but if there were, most people wouldnt afford them.

Actually there are portable blu-ray players.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... eimprovemz

I like how after years and years of stalling, they've deemed Destino too long (at 7 whole minutes) to include on the standard DVD.

I bet they still have plans for a collection (maybe a 2nd Treasures Rarities set) to include it but will not say anything about it until their Blu-Ray sales are high enough.

They just released a Press Release for The Blu-Ray/DVD today! Please read it while you have the chance.