PETITION FOR UNCUT UNCENSORED FANTASIA BLU RAY

[Elladorine]

Rudy Matt: Had you read my post without a chip on your shoulder and paid more attention to who said what, maybe you wouldn't have misquoted me (the first quote of your post that you attributed to me was actually typed out by ajmrowland), and perhaps you would have realized I did not expect nor even ask for a "mass-market" release of the unedited version as you so accuse; I was attempting to suggest an alternate, Treasures-type release in addition to a mainstream one. Nor did I ever claim that Walt would not have edited it at some point; in fact I acknowledged that he had already altered some of his own material. I'm only suggesting that it's possible he could have seen such material in this light had he still been alive today, similar to the sentiments expressed by Leonard Maltin and Whoopi Goldberg in several DVD intros. And while The Three Little Pigs was indeed released as the edited version on the Treasures disc, the Jewish peddler scene is still viewable on the very same set. I only ask that such material not be erased from history; "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it." How do the racial sterotypes of a 70-year-old film hurt the people of today when put into the proper historical context? Are you implying anyone who watches these scenes are just too ignorant to realize that yes, this was once the norm, but times have changed and we now know better?

I am interested in animation from many standpoints, including the impact of mature themes and controversial material on our history and culture. It's part of the reason I love watching. And if I enjoy watching, why shouldn't I enjoy collecting any available material so I can watch it at any time I choose? It's not for the sake of being any type of fan-bot completist as I don't plan on picking up every scrap of material Disney has ever made. And even if I did, I don't understand how that or anything I've written in this thread could justify your accusations that I'm selfish, hypocritical, greedy, or lustful when I've only made wishes or suggestions, not demands; I also haven't made any personal attacks about the content of your character and it's very poor on your part to do so to mine. Don't claim I do not care about Walt's image, the company, or the millions of people a small release of this material would supposedly hurt. Knowledge is power, and this type of material can definitely be learned from if it's not buried. Once again, "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."

Anyway, I'm done replying to you in this thread, it's a waste of my time and energy and I should probably walk out before you sling further accusations in my direction. It's obvious we'll never come to an agreement on this subject, and quite frankly, I'm rather sick of being told how selfish I supposedly am from discussing my opinions over a few seconds of film produced in a very different era.

By the way, I don't particularly mind being called "goofball," but I do prefer "fangirl" over "fanboy."

Peace out, and happy posting.

[Heil Donald Duck]

Give me a break. Learn what? Racial and ethnic stereotypes exist in films? All one needs to do is turn on their TV and they'll see hundereds of racial stereotypes each and every day. This is such a BS argument. No one needs to see the Sunflower Centaur to learn that racial stereotypes exist in films. What is more compelling is the argument that such hurtful images DO NOT NEED TO BE PERPETUATED WHEN THEY CAN BE CORECTED.

Give me a brake, the Sunflower Centaur were originally in the film so it is more harmful to cut the creature out and say it newer existed and no that is not correcton to film that is censorship. People like you dont understand how important it is to see the film the way they were shown in theaters in the past.

Walt Disney received complaints from the Jewish community that his film The Three Little Pigs contained a hurtful Jewish ethnic stereotype. Walt corrected the scene and reanimated it. Was this act some terrible slight against film history? No - Walt did not want his films to HURT people, he wanted to appeal to the largest possible audience. It was his film, he took out what should never have been put in.

Lot of Jewish worked for Walt, and some of them worked actually on the Jewish sequence in Three Little Pigs, the change only came when the short was-released to theaters in 1936, and Walt was not that happy to make those changes, and all of the Jewish animator refused that he hated them. Four year before Fantasia. Also the Jewish animators didn't want to take that out. So seeing other version of three Little Pigs is unrespectful to those Jewish artists.

The fact that even the squeaky-clean Disney studio fell under creating such stereotypes, just as the rest of the US studios did, is a reflection of our culture at the time.

Disney should be no expectation when it come to republish those material they way they originally were.

You say this as if this was the only example of racial stereotypes in animation or even Disney animation. These examples are legion. They aren't restricted to the 30's and 40's, these stereotypes exist today. What is so damned important about seeing the Sunflower Centaur? Answer - there isn't anything important about it, it has been missing for 40 years,

Then explain to me why in the hell that cut of the sunflower happened not until 2000. All other home videos had that sequence.

if you want to see it, go watch it on YouTube...why do you want millions of modern people to be hurt and offended by Fantasia, when the creators of that movie would never want their film to hurt or offend anyone? Why do you want African-American children to be hurt and offended by this movie, when it was never created to hurt or offend anyone. Yes - the original version is a reflection of the culttre at that time, those images are no longer a reflection of our culture today. This is why you people reveal yourselves to be selfish fanbots who only want "complete" collections - you don't care about the larger implications. You only care about the gleaming hole in your video shelf.

If you do care so much about Walt Disney you should nt be telling pepole to watch this on youtube as those showings there to my best knowledge are without Walt Disneys Company approval (i.e illigal). And If you have job there which I highly doubt then you are doing more harm to to your employees than good.

Anyone who cares about such things can see those exaples in numerous other shorts and from numerous other films from other studios. This is how I know you are spouting crap - because this has nothing to do with "history" or "learning" about American culture. You people want a time machine via home video and you want to own every scrap of film ever produced by Walt Disney. Education? History? What lies! This has nothing to do with either, you just can't escape your blind lust and greed to own a version with uncut footage. History my eye!

This has everything to to with learning and nothing with greed, pepole what to see this in same manner as move goers did back in the day when those material were originally released. The Disney Studio shouldn't be no expectation when its comes to discuss the making of those shorts, the way they were made.

The MODERN company has a RESPONSIBILITY to not TARNISH the REPUTATION of the studio by REPEATING steroetyoes that NEVER SHOULD HAVE APPEARED IN THE FIRST PLACE, hurtful images that WALT DISNEY HIMSELF WOULD HAVE REMOVED 30 YEARS AGO, JUST AS THE STUDIO DID THAT BEARS HIS NAME.

NO, they are not responsible to those images they clam that them selfs in the intros of so many DVDs they are responsible to freedom of the speech and exclude those images (that you want them to do so much) are actually more harmful than good. This is what is called corporate Censorship.

Goofball, everyone expects American wartime propaganda cartoons from the 40's to bash the Germans and Japanese, that's why no one cared when Disney released them (in limited quantities). Fantasia is one of the highest selling home video titles of all time. It is a mass market title. The modern company does not want to hurt or offend or perpetuate negative racial stereotypes. Maybe you do, for your own selfish reasons, so you can own the unaltered film. But by doing so, you only reveal your own selfish motives. You don't care about the feelings of others, you don't care about the damage done to the company or the reputation of the movie, or the feelings of others, you only care about owning every frame of footage produced by Walt Disney.

Those shorts were not limited runed in theaters, they were regularly runed in front of features. The morden companys are only fright of monster that they are creating them self by deny that those footage exist in first place, those images and stop calling people selfish for wanting those images they see straight through those urban legends and what them to bite the dust,, so the film should be unaltered on the home market. And no this hasn't anything to do with selfish reason to want those image as they are past of Animated history and the film history and the American culture, have you herd how Soviets alter history by removing footage. So this is about preservation of the past.

American-Africans see more bad things in those ganster move and than in Song of the South or Fantasia.

Yeah, based on the fact that Walt was a modernist and continualy updated his work and was known to correct ethnic stereotypes in his films. You are wrong and wildly incorrect in assuming Walt WOULDN'T remove or re-animate the footage.

You, simple cant assume anything what Walt would do, no one has right to do so, he has been dead for over 40 years . You have your own strange personal agenda that are doing more harm than good to the film of Walt Disney and his Jewish animator.

Walt always wanted the largest possible audience for his compay -- he would throw you 150,000 fanboy collecters under the bus if the alternative meant hurting millions of Americans. Get over yourself - Walt was not a patron for elitists and specialists. He wanted to please everyone. There is no way Walt Disney would release Fantasia unabriged today. No way. Shoot, the fim was never intended to be re-released in the same version anyway, it was always intended to change release-to-release.

Then explain why the re-release thing never worked out? Because it is more costly than kept in its original form.

Then tell me why are out of print sets of WTD sold on Amazon marketplace and on Ebay for 80 $ or more, I can tell you way because the material on there is uncensored and many people missed out because of the limited run so seller can charge way to much money for stuff that shouldn't have limited runed in first place.

He was not making films to please narrow minded people like you ether.

A-HA! I knew it - you don't want it for history, you are a collector. That's the only reason any of you want it, you just want to fill and complete your collections. Maybe you should switch to collecting butterflies, at least your collection won't offend people with racial stereotypes from the 30's and 40's.

What have you against collectors (they are more loyal buyers than casual soccer mommies or dads (whom you are), They what to spend there money on first rate uncensored material not second rate material that fits your soccer mom is view. I do admit that collector collects for all shorts of reason and I collect for historical purpose (Im not requlia type of collector) as I have great interest in Walt is animated past so seeing this films altered are ignorant and disrespectful to the past.

BS. Based on what a man did over the course of his life, it is entirely possible to make assumptions on what he would do. It is more possible than not that Walt Disney would not murder someone. How do I know? Because he never committed an act of violence towards anyone.

Again what don't you understand of the sentence "You cant assume anything what Walt would do." So don't try to take someone else's creation and turn it into something else you'd rather see as you in your own greed wants to see it i.e censored Fantasia.

It is more probable than not that Walt would continue to alter his films to remove hurtful stereotypes because of his growth as a producer and the changes in American society.

Then explain to me way do all those images that you wants removed still exist in the Disney is Vault. Because it is about preservation and best preservation of those is to release those films unaltered on DVD or Blu-ray, the way Walt wanted them to be shown originally, there only clueless pricks thats heads the studio that are creating the problem and Animation historian Jerry Beck have singled them out for doing so as I posted relier. The ignorant people at the helm give into people like you causing all the trouble.

No one is qualified to make those assumptions? No, we make those assumptions every day, but you fanboys and fanboys only care about your collections, not Walt the man, not the company, not the people who would be hurt by returning images rightly cut 40 years ago. Selfish, greedy, lusting fanbots.

It's the truth. If you want to see it, you can see it on YouTube. But that's not good enough for you, you want it re-incorporated into the film and mass-marketed onto DVD and Blu-Ray, regardless of the damage that would do. Seeing as how your stated reason (history) is bollocks, that leaves one only answer -- you are a fanboy collecter and you want something that you think is missing from your collection. I have every right to make that accusation, because it's the truth.

If you care so much about Walt and the company then why do you keep rambling about Youtube (it is illegal to watch those films there and damage the income of the studio). It preserve Walt is legacy best by presentation those the way he originally showed them in theaters on DVD and Blu-ray. It is shameful that studio give into people like you it does more harm than good.

Not the sake of "political correctness" -- the sake of hurting people with racial stereotypes, something you don't care about.

You basically explained what political correctness but Im fright to tell you two things that political correctness is used as justification to be unrespectful to Walt and or the past (if you take another studio) and your tactics are more hurtful than those images that you want removed form the film.

History should be respected it is only why to understand the present day as and you have shown that you can not apprentice the past, and what to preserve the ubran legend that were created by the todays corporate is own greed, that can be easy removed by putting the film uncensored on DVD and Blu-ray.

BTW, did you ask Roy yourself exactly why they were cut?

Yes, actually. I didn't use those words, but in my correspondence with him, I thanked him for bringing the 1940 cut to DVD. He stated he thought Walt would have been aggressive with home video and he thought Walt would be pleased with their 2000 version.

The film was originally released in 1940 so he probably thought (If you ever spoke to him which I doubt (sorry) ) you were referring to unaltered verison (that you hate so much and want to deny other to see). So you have shown lack of knowledge about the film and you don't even known when the film was originally released, and he probably were unaware of what the restoration department were doing when he reply to you (If you ever spoke to him which I doubt (sorry) ) i.e damaged the film by remove sunflower from it.

Did he specifically say it's what his uncle would have wanted or are you making yet another assumption?

You're the one making assumptions to justify your own greed.

No Rudy Matt you are the only on that is making assumptions for your own strange agenda.

We're talking about the exact same person who made the Treasures releases possible, which included many cartoons containing racial stereotypes.

And the Three Little Pigs is shown on Roy's Disney Treasure set the way Walt altered it, not the way it was originally shown. And if it's so damned important to see racial stereotypes in Disney animation, they can watch the many examples in the Treasure sets, as you just pointed out, so why in the Hell is it so important to see these in Fantasia? Hypocrite much?

The alternate Three Little Pigs is there by mistake, mistake that was corrected on UK verison. Since it is in Leo is intro show the sequence on the USA set. So that shouldn't be used as excuse to show butchering Fantasia (i.e remove Sunflower)

Fantasia is a mass-market title for all the world, it isn't an obscure wartime cartoon or a black and white short from the early 30's. You want to see that footage, go on YouTube, leave the rest of the world and African-American families alone.

Fantasia never was for kids in first place or narrow minded people like you.

If you have hard time to approach the original Fantasia (which you clearly do)
Then don't watch it. It's as simple as that, and allow others that like to see it the way it was originally made.

Don't try to take someone else's creation and turn it into something else you'd rather see as I said erlier.

Fantasia as rest of Walt is library should be seen uncut as Walt originally presentation in theaters on hometheater format (DVD, or Blu-ray). So I support op in what he did.

BTW;
Then way have unaltered Melody Time, unaltered Three Little Pigs, shown up out side USA on official Disney DVDs. USA people should see those films unaltered as well and that include Fantasia and Song of the South to name few examples. And final time why do you keep rampling about youtube which is illegal and cost the company more money than unaltered verison of the film.

African-Americans have seem films that are lot of worse than Fantasia. Should I as white be offended that Warner Bros is Elmer Fudd is clumsy half wit, no. Should African American be offended over black creatures in Fantasia no. Should natives Americans be offended over Peter Pan no.

Ruddy Matt two questions to you.
How old are you?
Are you black?

But I say the same as enigmawing I through with wasting my time on you and your aggressive hurtful tactics.

[jpanimation]

Racial and ethnic stereotypes exist in films? All one needs to do is turn on their TV and they'll see hundereds of racial stereotypes each and every day. This is such a BS argument. No one needs to see the Sunflower Centaur to learn that racial stereotypes exist in films. What is more compelling is the argument that such hurtful images DO NOT

You just belittled the Sunflower racial stereotype by comparing to the hundreds of modern stereotypes on TV everyday. If thats how you truly feel, and its just one of HUNDREDS seen everyday, then what makes this one so special? What will make this one stand out from the hundreds that we are exposed to every day that garners so much of your attention? I just think you've invented this double standard in your mind that tells you that all stereotypes are perfectly fine unless its Disney because you, more then anyone, can't deal with the fact that his company participated in the widely adopted racial stereotypes of the time.

You want to see that footage, go on YouTube, leave the rest of the world and African-American families alone.

First of all, YouTube is more "mass-market" then physical media could ever be. There are more people watching YouTube videos on a daily basis then DVD/Blu-rays, so I'm not sure how having it on YouTube is going to save people from being offended when the potential exists for even more people to see it. As mentioned before, watching copyrighted material is illegal and damaging to the Walt Disney company.

Secondly, the "rest of the world" couldn't give a shit about our racial stereotypes (as far as African Americans go). They've had no problem releasing Song of the South and it's only in the US where all the self-censoring is happening. White guilt only exists in the US, so don't expect other countries to suddenly feel bad about these stereotypes (this is the only country where people are offended by them). I'm also wondering how you can assume that ALL African-American families feel the same way as you do.

[merlinjones]

Fact is, Walt Disney had the Pastoral Symphony cut for US theatrical reissue of Fantasia in the early 1960s. Sunflower has been out (at least domestically) ever since -- though different attempts to improve on the cut have been attempted several times over the years, most notably for the 50th anniversary reissue (also for the "Irwin Kostal" version).

So Walt himself made the call to alter this film going forward.

Footnote: The complete footage was accidentally shown on the Disney Channel in the mid 1980s as it was part of the original cut of the "Magic and Music" TV hour, which was then also altered for rebroadcast.

[jpanimation]

According to wikipedia, 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.

Couldn't believe I found fanart on the web:

[ajmrowland]

I think what Rudy Matt's not getting is that Sunflower is a similar situation to SotS: too many people are needlessly offended by her. I say needlessly, because the studio's trying to hide all it's own flaws under the rug by it's own eat-off-the-floor reputation that it created, and that people who are offended need to see these films uncut and they need to remember that such stereotypes were the norm back then, and move on. We claim to be over racism, but I'll believe that when people stop saying "that's so gay" or when Time Warner stops segregating black movies with BHM. The issue of racism is bad now, because it seems that only WHITE people are offended by racism these days, when we other things to worry about.

In other words, these people need to see these movies for what they really are, and move on with their lives.

[Margos]

I actually rather like that fan-art! (Although I don't believe Sunflower really had much in the chest department... Wasn't she supposed to be a very young Centaurette? She looked like a small child compared to the others....)

[Rudy Matt]

I think what Rudy Matt's not getting is that Sunflower is a similar situation to SotS.

No, no, no. I absolutely "get" that reactionary poopholes will freak out about racial stereotypes in Song of the South and Fantasia. The reason they'll do so is because Disney - as a company - is so enormous and so amazing, they have become a giant target and will be used by these poopholes to advahnce their agendas. If the exact same movies were released by some tiny distributor, no one would give a damn. But the occasion of these classics give these opportunists reason to raise holy hell and paste the Disney compay all over the news.

Thing is, the Sunflower Centaur would have been removed by Walt himself, the only people who want it restored to DVD or Blu-Ray are selfish collection-oritented fanbots. It's the truth. Swallow it, you know it's true.

[Heil Donald Duck]

I think what Rudy Matt's not getting is that Sunflower is a similar situation to SotS.

No, no, no. I absolutely "get" that reactionary poopholes will freak out about racial stereotypes in Song of the South and Fantasia. The reason they'll do so is because Disney - as a company - is so enormous and so amazing, they have become a giant target and will be used by these poopholes to advahnce their agendas. If the exact same movies were released by some tiny distributor, no one would give a damn. But the occasion of these classics give these opportunists reason to raise holy hell and paste the Disney compay all over the news.

Thing is, the Sunflower Centaur would have been removed by Walt himself, the only people who want it restored to DVD or Blu-Ray are selfish collection-oritented fanbots. It's the truth. Swallow it, you know it's true.

No, that is not the truth, ajmrowland wrote the truth about this matters. You and your narrow minded brain do not get and it is interesting that you didn't quote what he wrote after the sentence you quoted him on. It expose that you are not geting it so what did he wrote:

too many people are needlessly offended by her. I say needlessly,
because the studio's trying to hide all it's own flaws under the rug by it's own eat-off-the-floor reputation that it created

In addition Rudy Matt no one can assume what other feel about those matters (Black or white) and no one can assume what Walt would do today. This is not about fanboysim as you continuously argue it is about getting rid of censorship and it's suppression of free speech. It could cause major harm if corporate heads are allowed to decide what is said/published and what isn't, so allowing corporates to get way with releasing those films can sett dangerous example if they decide to get involved with
politics. Specially big corporation like Disney and Warner Bros as they own bigs media outlets.

[Rudy Matt]

No, no, no. I absolutely "get" that reactionary poopholes will freak out about racial stereotypes in Song of the South and Fantasia. The reason they'll do so is because Disney - as a company - is so enormous and so amazing, they have become a giant target and will be used by these poopholes to advahnce their agendas. If the exact same movies were released by some tiny distributor, no one would give a damn. But the occasion of these classics give these opportunists reason to raise holy hell and paste the Disney compay all over the news.

Thing is, the Sunflower Centaur would have been removed by Walt himself, the only people who want it restored to DVD or Blu-Ray are selfish collection-oritented fanbots. It's the truth. Swallow it, you know it's true.

No, that is not the truth, ajmrowland wrote the truth about this matters. You and your narrow minded brain do not get and it is interesting that you didn't quote what he wrote after the sentence you quoted him on. It expose that you are not geting it so what did he wrote:

too many people are needlessly offended by her. I say needlessly,
because the studio's trying to hide all it's own flaws under the rug by it's own eat-off-the-floor reputation that it created

In addition Rudy Matt no one can assume what other feel about those matters (Black or white) and no one can assume what Walt would do today. This is not about fanboysim as you continuously argue it is about getting rid of censorship and it's suppression of free speech. It could cause major harm if corporate heads are allowed to decide what is said/published and what isn't, so allowing corporates to get way with releasing those films can sett dangerous example if they decide to get involved with
politics. Specially big corporation like Disney and Warner Bros as they own bigs media outlets.

This IS about fanbot greed, if you cared about "getting rid of censorship", you'd find thousands of other targets more worthy of your passion other than a "black" stereotype in a 70 year old film. Don't you realize how nonsensical you guys sound when PRETENDING your passion is about high-falooting concepts like history, free-speech, etc when the TRUTH is that you want to OWN Fantasia in the form that it premiered in 1940? You guys are so transparent, you don't care about history or censorship - you guys are fanbot collectors who greed and lust over every scrap of footage you can get. I'd respect you guys more if you would just admit it -- "Yes, Rudy, I want to see and own Fantasia as it premiered in 1940." That I would respect because it's honest. But this excuse regarding history and study of racial stereotypes in the 40's? That's why you want a racial stereotype re-inserted into Fantasia? What lies! Give me a break!

[BK]

What is this all about?

The reason why they should uncensor Fantasia is because there is no reason to censor it in the first place.

Racism or whatever the controversy is, is unfounded. You can find the same amount and even worse amount in any film these days. You might as well censor comedians seeing how many of them rely on stereotypical jokes based on race.

What I find funny is that Fantasia sold less than a million copies on DVD, hell, less than 500k and the population of America is what 340m? The % of people buying Fantasia of all movies would be highly skewed towards collectors so that means what 10,000 people or so were offended? Who cares about them?

Vocal minorities, that's it. Same with all these reports of brainless soccer mums who can't take care of their kids.

The company should just give these retards the middle finger and move on. I mean, come on, they screw over the collectors (vocal minorities too) so often, why don't they do the same for people who AREN'T willing to pay for the product they put out?

And, in a blatant attempt to be controversial, I'll end this post by saying a virus of some sort should wipe out all these brainless, sensitive fools. I don't know how it would find it's target (maybe lack of common sense) but if it happened, I can't say I wouldn't be happy.


edit: It seems less than 250k were sold since it's first week only had 15,000 sold. So that means, hundreds of people or maybe dozens were offended. This deserves a

[Heil Donald Duck]

No, that is not the truth, ajmrowland wrote the truth about this matters. You and your narrow minded brain do not get and it is interesting that you didn't quote what he wrote after the sentence you quoted him on. It expose that you are not geting it so what did he wrote: In addition Rudy Matt no one can assume what other feel about those matters (Black or white) and no one can assume what Walt would do today. This is not about fanboysim as you continuously argue it is about getting rid of censorship and it's suppression of free speech. It could cause major harm if corporate heads are allowed to decide what is said/published and what isn't, so allowing corporates to get way with releasing those films can sett dangerous example if they decide to get involved with
politics. Specially big corporation like Disney and Warner Bros as they own bigs media outlets.

This IS about fanbot greed, if you cared about "getting rid of censorship", you'd find thousands of other targets more worthy of your passion other than a "black" stereotype in a 70 year old film. Don't you realize how nonsensical you guys sound when PRETENDING your passion is about high-falooting concepts like history, free-speech, etc when the TRUTH is that you want to OWN Fantasia in the form that it premiered in 1940? You guys are so transparent, you don't care about history or censorship - you guys are fanbot collectors who greed and lust over every scrap of footage you can get. I'd respect you guys more if you would just admit it -- "Yes, Rudy, I want to see and own Fantasia as it premiered in 1940." That I would respect because it's honest. But this excuse regarding history and study of racial stereotypes in the 40's? That's why you want a racial stereotype re-inserted into Fantasia? What lies! Give me a break!

No, your the only person that don't know history or censorship as you don't know how dangerous it can be to allow companies to get a way with such acts.

edit: I have come to conclusion you sir is a ether Troll or WUM, im through with you, and your wonderland.

[singerguy04]

If so few were sold then why was it pushed to be a part of the Diamond Editions? I'm not asking to contradict BK, I'm asking because I don't know why Disney is going to release them under the Diamond Banner. They might as well just release them as Special Editions really, and leave Aladdin in the collection. Maybe this is why we've been hearing the rumors of Fantasia's release in Nov/Dec this year despite BatB's DE?

As for Sunflower, I just watched the uncut pastoral symphony on youtube and I really just stand in the middle. I honestly don't see why many of us are hung up on this censorship. She doesn't do anything too important in the story of the segment that her omission is missed. In fact IMO, her "cartoony" nature takes away from the beauty of the centaur part of this segment. On the other hand, I understand the fact that Disney shouldn't have to edit a piece of art for fear it will cause an uproar. Fantasia simply doesn't have enough of a fan-base that will care if she were in the film and she's such a minor part above that. The segment also contradict itself by having the beautiful black/zebra centaurs later. When I was younger they were my favorite ones! IMO it's as if the segment kinda recovers itself, except for the fact they are still playing a servant roll.

To conclude, whatever Disney choses to do with the editing I will still be happy with the film. It is one of my favorites regardless of this small edit. I would only hope that if Sunflower is edited out of the film they include a bonus feature about her and the reasons she was cut. It seems to be a very interesting topic of discussion and would also be a very neat feature to have on the new edition.

[ajmrowland]

Okay, here's a revelation that I did NOT just pull out of my ass: It's about BOTH fanboy greed and getting rid of censorship. We all just prefer one excuse over the other.

[ajmrowland]

If so few were sold then why was it pushed to be a part of the Diamond Editions? I'm not asking to contradict BK, I'm asking because I don't know why Disney is going to release them under the Diamond Banner. They might as well just release them as Special Editions really, and leave Aladdin in the collection. Maybe this is why we've been hearing the rumors of Fantasia's release in Nov/Dec this year despite BatB's DE?

As for Sunflower, I just watched the uncut pastoral symphony on youtube and I really just stand in the middle. I honestly don't see why many of us are hung up on this censorship. She doesn't do anything too important in the story of the segment that her omission is missed. In fact IMO, her "cartoony" nature takes away from the beauty of the centaur part of this segment. On the other hand, I understand the fact that Disney shouldn't have to edit a piece of art for fear it will cause an uproar. Fantasia simply doesn't have enough of a fan-base that will care if she were in the film and she's such a minor part above that. The segment also contradict itself by having the beautiful black/zebra centaurs later. When I was younger they were my favorite ones! IMO it's as if the segment kinda recovers itself, except for the fact they are still playing a servant roll.

To conclude, whatever Disney choses to do with the editing I will still be happy with the film. It is one of my favorites regardless of this small edit. I would only hope that if Sunflower is edited out of the film they include a bonus feature about her and the reasons she was cut. It seems to be a very interesting topic of discussion and would also be a very neat feature to have on the new edition.

The Diamond Editions are being pushed to be what the Platinums once were many several years ago: a prestigious outlet for some of the studios most famous works to be made available. While it's true that many mainstream titles are there as well, Fantasia is very famous still, and You know that the Studio puts a lot of effort into them acknowledging that not everyone will explore all corners of the disc set.

[BK]

If so few were sold then why was it pushed to be a part of the Diamond Editions? I'm not asking to contradict BK, I'm asking because I don't know why Disney is going to release them under the Diamond Banner. They might as well just release them as Special Editions really, and leave Aladdin in the collection. Maybe this is why we've been hearing the rumors of Fantasia's release in Nov/Dec this year despite BatB's DE?

I think ajmrowland said it already but basically isn't Walt most proud of Fantasia? I read it on Wikipedia about all the excesses of the showings but it wasn't liked by audiences and he had to apologize for it or some BS like that.

Fantasia 2000 is it's indirect sequel and is Roy's pet project so naturally both would be tied together and being the two basically iconic films from the studio's founder and family would make them want to try and advertise it more, give it more prestige.

Since they basically alienated the average Joes into thinking Platinum and now Diamond are 'superior' they might as well toss Fantasia in there to boost any chance of sales.

Sure, maybe it was wishful thinking to ever have Fantasia/2000 as a spring release but that doesn't make any sense on Disney's part to have NO spring release to compensate. I guess they didn't want to have it overshadowed by Dumbo and they didn't want Dumbo to overshadow Princess. However December with Beauty and the Beast not to mention ALL the other blockbusters of the year does not make much sense either. I think Disney know that it's always going to be a niche product and as a Christmas kind of release it will work better for it overall.

That said, if they do acknowledge the sales of Fantasia will be less than any other movie, the editions should be comprehensive, not drop any features and should not have any dumb games or music videos and other stupid features. They should also release the full set on DVD without any exclusive features except for maybe PiP tracks or the like, which might not even be there considering Roy passed last year. It's already such a small niche product, they shouldn't alienate some of those avid DVD collectors for this release.

Anyway that's my 2 cents.

[singerguy04]

The Diamond Editions are being pushed to be what the Platinums once were many several years ago: a prestigious outlet for some of the studios most famous works to be made available. While it's true that many mainstream titles are there as well, Fantasia is very famous still, and You know that the Studio puts a lot of effort into them acknowledging that not everyone will explore all corners of the disc set.

not to nit pick or pick on anyone, but the prestigiousness of the PEs and DEs is way way way over glorified. The films that were chosen to be a part of the PE's were only picked because of their sales. Eisner even announced that during the press conference for the Platinums. The studio should be and i'm sure is proud of every film they have made. These releases are just the ones who made the most money. I'm not complaining that the Fantasia's are included. I'm rather happy they are, but lets not over-glorify the intentions of marketing .

I just think it's interesting that the company chose to release the films as Diamond Editions, when there are films that did make more and will most likely be excluded. Perhaps the thought is that they will sell more with the banner than without.

I think I'm getting to the point that I'd rather have these films released without a banner at all. In ways the banner is misleading and pointless since even the films with a "superior" banner get second rate releases (Peter Pan's PE for example).

[ajmrowland]

yeah, I saw that one coming. I think they are still trying to get some level of collectors' status, even with main-stream DEs. That's what I'm saying; it's that the line is meant for both mainstream and collectors' crowds. I dont think they really thought so much about it when they made the first Platinums.

[singerguy04]

I'll completely agree with that, but in accepting that truth about the DE line then we can't really complain about the games or silly music videos. Those aren't the features meant for us. (I'm not trying to defend Disney with those since they are crap that I'm not even sure kids enjoy all that much. I know my nephew doesn't care about bonus features at all.) I can also see why we'll more than likely receive the edit. Whether we like it or not, this is being released as a Diamond Edition and that equals people with families buying them.

[marlan]

I'd sign it, but to be frank, petition don't matter to Hollywood. At least the Hollywood of today. They will do what they will do and the rest of us either buy their crap and skip it.

I'd love to see an uncut version and feel they need to release it, but I don't think that will happen.

In my opinion internet petitions do not matter much and they are not taken seriously. It is so easy to classify them as spam and get rid of them.

Instead, if you really think that this matter is important and want to make a difference, you should do (and be willing to do) something concrete instead: write a letter to the The Walt Disney Company, make a phone call or something like that.

So, nunval, who started this thread, why don't you write a letter to the WDC, and encourage others to write as well? I'm sure a polite and properly argumented letter will be taken into account. When enough people act and share their concern with Disney, that may very well lead to positive results.

Another issue not mentioned in this thread is the framing of Fantasia on video. When I saw Fantasia on DVD, it felt all the time to be framed a bit too tightly. There is a standard for the Academy aspect ratio (as I wrote in the Dumbo thread) and it dictates how much of the film frame shall be cropped off in projection. In Fantasia and Dumbo video releases I suppose too much was cropped off and the standard was not observed; one should compare the DVD/Blu-ray releases and 35 mm theatrical film prints at a film archive to verify or refute this hypothesis. The framing of Academy ratio movies need not and must not be altered at will.

When Fantasia and Dumbo will be released on Blu-ray in the U.S., also the framing should correspond to that of a theatrical screening. The European release of Dumbo seems a bit unprofessional to me, but it could still be corrected for the forthcoming U.S. release if people care to react.