Chernobog wrote:Disney Guru wrote:The 1989 edition was pornographic!
People often see what they want to see.
I totally agree. All it takes is one crank to say "I think there are subversive messages about that naughty sex thing in [insert movie here]" and all of a sudden, the movie is unfit for children.
Ok, granted -
The Rescuers genuinely DID have porn in it, and that was the work of a few animators who I consider heroes.
That aside, people are constantly looking for ways to "muddy the clean" as it were. So people ARE going to spot stuff that may or may not be there.
It is only in a puritanical society (such as the one that created these rumours) that people have a problem with sex anyways. I'm not saying that there should be porn in kids movies, but the frenzy that surrounds the merest suggestion of a sex-related reference in a Disney film leads to an environment where there is free reign to alter and edit a film based on the complaints of a single person.
We don't have complete copies of Saludos Amigos or Make Mine Music, nor do we have Song of the South at all on DVD, and I believe it is because of people accusing a priest's knee of being "pornographic" that Disney treads so carefully so as not to offend anytbody. This will just ultimately create a stagnant creative environment where movies that neither offend or please anybody will be made.
Anyways, that's my two cents. I'd get back on topic, but I don't think we will see the Little Mermaid art for another year.
)
)
