Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

The Jackalope · Mar 28, 2002, 02:12 AM

juanvaldes · Mar 28, 2002, 05:40 AM

it's ****ed ****ed ****ed.

That is all I have to say about that....

Cipher13 · Mar 28, 2002, 07:08 AM

They're removing the guns from ET?

AHAHAHAH.

Goddamn, we be one screwed up species.

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: Cipher13 ]

ringo · Mar 28, 2002, 10:06 AM

History shouldn't be revised for correctness later. The guns were a reflection of the time when the movie was made, Stupid to airbrush them out later.
Self-censorship is still censorship.

The Dude · Mar 28, 2002, 10:09 AM

And Spielberg is still Spielberg. A rich white conformist ***** .

C33 · Mar 28, 2002, 10:15 AM

i hear they've been working on re-releasinig Rambo too. it's taken a few years but they believe they'll have all the guns, bombs, blood and explosions digitally removed by 2004.

[ 03-28-2002: Message edited by: C33 ]

Millennium · Mar 28, 2002, 10:47 AM

I will never forgive Spielberg for this.

I had respect for him as an artist. But now we see the truth: he's just a whore to political correctness.

Yoda's Erotic Piggyback · Mar 28, 2002, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by Cipher13:
They're removing the guns from ET?

They replaced the shotguns with Walkie Talkie's. Looks real but the idea is still silly.

CaseCom · Mar 28, 2002, 12:40 PM

Oh, get down off your high horses. Spielberg says that now that he's a father himself he thinks it's too scary to have agents chasing kids with guns drawn. Hardly a "political" statement. Personally, I have no problem with it either way.

The anniversary DVD will have the original version included. So much for "censorship."

I think the bigger travesty was those cheesy celebration scenes Lucas inserted near the end of the "Star Wars" special edition.

ringo · Mar 28, 2002, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by CaseCom:
Oh, get down off your high horses. Spielberg says that now that he's a father himself he thinks it's too scary to have agents chasing kids with guns drawn. Hardly a "political" statement. Personally, I have no problem with it either way.

Scary fantasies prepare us for scary realities.

typoon · Mar 28, 2002, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by The Dude:
And Spielberg is still Spielberg. A rich white conformist ***** .

I don't think it was All Spielberg's Idea since Drew Barrymore is his god Daughter and is Anti-gun. from what I hear she was the one who wanted the guns removed so he did.

Arty50 · Mar 28, 2002, 03:02 PM

If you were harboring ET in your house, would you expect the Feds to show up unarmed? Yeah, sure. And pigs fly, and....

denim · Mar 28, 2002, 03:10 PM

ET sucked when they released it the first time, so I don't expect this mutilation of a silly movie will make much of a difference.

jholmes · Mar 28, 2002, 05:33 PM

" All right men - we have an alien invader who has kidnapped a young boy - Johnson, Simpkins - grab your walkie-talkies and come with me!!"

For his next move, Spielberg will go back and add a plot into "1941"

Lerkfish · Mar 28, 2002, 05:45 PM

Originally posted by jholmes:
For his next move, Spielberg will go back and add a plot into "1941"

ROTFLMAO! god, someone needs to transplant a plot into that movie.

Lerkfish · Mar 28, 2002, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by ringo:

Scary fantasies prepare us for scary realities.

The things that have always bothered me about this picture...

1. the safety was on.
2. The man holding elian wasn't even a family member...he was that wacked out sailor who "rescued" him and then insinuated himself into the family in a very weird, stalking and disturbing way. He quits his job to hang around the kid 24/7 and appoints himself family spokesman for some odd reason. He is even interviewed at one point expressing his rage at the father for not speaking to him (meaning speaking to the fisherman)...that's some very creepy stuff there. And THAT is who is holding the kid in a closet.
3. The family had been given literally hours to hand the kid over and refused, threatening to keep him no matter what, even if they have to die doing it (think about this in other context...that's essentially a dangerous hostage situation)
4. The house was surrounded by agitated expatriated Cubans threatening violence if the boy was removed.

all things considered, I'd be more upset if they didn't have weapons.

XPBlows · Mar 28, 2002, 05:56 PM

wow.... history re-written again..... Rambo 20th edition - too true.....hahahahaha..... rated "G" for all audiences.....

driven · Mar 28, 2002, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by Lerkfish:


all things considered, I'd be more upset if they didn't have weapons.

I'm glad I wasn't there and didn't have to make those decisions that day.

That said: What you are looking at is a factor in why Gore lost the election.
(Although in my mind the biggest factor was that his home state went against him.)

ringo · Mar 28, 2002, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by Lerkfish:


The things that have always bothered me about this picture...

1. the safety was on.
2. The man holding elian wasn't even a family member...he was that wacked out sailor who "rescued" him and then insinuated himself into the family in a very weird, stalking and disturbing way. He quits his job to hang around the kid 24/7 and appoints himself family spokesman for some odd reason. He is even interviewed at one point expressing his rage at the father for not speaking to him (meaning speaking to the fisherman)...that's some very creepy stuff there. And THAT is who is holding the kid in a closet.
3. The family had been given literally hours to hand the kid over and refused, threatening to keep him no matter what, even if they have to die doing it (think about this in other context...that's essentially a dangerous hostage situation)
4. The house was surrounded by agitated expatriated Cubans threatening violence if the boy was removed.

all things considered, I'd be more upset if they didn't have weapons.

Say what you want, I still see someone pointing a gun at a kid.

1. A cop doesn't care if the safety is on when you point a gun at him. I imagine you wouldn't either.

2. Whoever was holding him, he's still in the family's house. If the family didn't care, why should you?

3. Hostage sitution? Only because the US said so. The only one threatening violence inside the house is the dude with the gun.

4. Violent Cubans are allowed to protest. Besides, they're not inside, where the Nice Man is pointing a gun.

daimoni · 07:09 PM

.

shanraghan · Mar 29, 2002, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by CaseCom:
Oh, get down off your high horses. Spielberg says that now that he's a father himself he thinks it's too scary to have agents chasing kids with guns drawn.

Children may seem delicate, but they're not as fragile as we make them out to be. I highly doubt that kids being chased by armed men in a movie would scare them too much, and thee's no harm to adding a little tension to the movie. It's been a very long time since I've seen this movie, but I don't recall them ever firing any guns. Perhaps once, but my memory is vague.

If they really are removing the guns from ET then they should remove the scenes where ET's heart glows through his chest as well. If you ask me, that'd be far more disturbing.

Leia Shoots Like a Girl · Mar 29, 2002, 12:47 AM

This is what everyone is in a huff over. I think that if whoever didn't point it out, then nobody would have even noticed.

Note the Walkie Talkies in the guys hands on either side.

BRussell · Mar 29, 2002, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by ringo:
Scary fantasies prepare us for scary realities.

Exactly! We need to show more violence to kids so they're prepared when the jack-booted thugs really come for 'em!

shanraghan · Mar 29, 2002, 12:53 AM

They must be windbags to use those things as weapons.

The Jackalope · Mar 29, 2002, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by CaseCom:
Oh, get down off your high horses. Spielberg says that now that he's a father himself he thinks it's too scary to have agents chasing kids with guns drawn. Hardly a "political" statement. Personally, I have no problem with it either way.

By the way, Speilberg is known as a massive hypocrite in gunny circles by having pretty much the largest personal collection of NFA34 firearms (machine guns, etc) in Hollywood while railing against firearms with large amounts of $$ going toward vicitm disarmament groups such as HCI.

I just put the cartoon up as a joke. It's a funny one if you ask me. Heh.[/LIST]
[ 03-29-2002: Message edited by: The Jackalope ]

TheJoshu · Mar 29, 2002, 01:32 PM

How about them bringing back the mother to re-record the line "you're not going as a terrorist" to "you're not going as a hippie"?

jcadam · Mar 29, 2002, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by Lerkfish:


The things that have always bothered me about this picture...

1. the safety was on.
2. The man holding elian wasn't even a family member...he was that wacked out sailor who "rescued" him and then insinuated himself into the family in a very weird, stalking and disturbing way. He quits his job to hang around the kid 24/7 and appoints himself family spokesman for some odd reason. He is even interviewed at one point expressing his rage at the father for not speaking to him (meaning speaking to the fisherman)...that's some very creepy stuff there. And THAT is who is holding the kid in a closet.
3. The family had been given literally hours to hand the kid over and refused, threatening to keep him no matter what, even if they have to die doing it (think about this in other context...that's essentially a dangerous hostage situation)
4. The house was surrounded by agitated expatriated Cubans threatening violence if the boy was removed.

all things considered, I'd be more upset if they didn't have weapons.

What disturbs me about this picture:

I don't care if the safety is on. You don't point a weapon at anything you're not willing to kill. I think that agent either 1) has no concept of gun safety or more likely 2) was willing to kill Elian and the man holding him.

Safeties can fail, I've seen it happen.

Orange Luna · Mar 29, 2002, 06:35 PM

Remember Lucas did something similar in the Star Wars remake. When Han Solo was threatened by Gredo in the Mos Eisley Cantina Lucas added digital effects that had Gredo firing first- not Solo.

Korv · Mar 29, 2002, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by TheJoshu:
How about them bringing back the mother to re-record the line "you're not going as a terrorist" to "you're not going as a hippie"?

Sign of the times. I suppose "terrorists" are to scary to mention. So what's an adequate replacement? "Hippies" of course. Our new enemies in this time of war. The thing you don't want your kids ever becoming. Hippies.

This sickens me.

starman · Mar 29, 2002, 08:55 PM

Sign of the times.

No, that line was removed from the very first video release. I still have a bootleg VHS of it just for proof that the line existed.

Mike

shanraghan · Mar 30, 2002, 04:53 AM

Originally posted by Korv:


Sign of the times. I suppose "terrorists" are to scary to mention. So what's an adequate replacement? "Hippies" of course. Our new enemies in this time of war. The thing you don't want your kids ever becoming. Hippies.

This sickens me.

Indeed. I'd say that this is the change I have the most problems with. Even if it was taken out earlier, the fact post-sept 11th political correctness and blindness supports it turly stokes my ire. It's a bad sign if people don't even have the balls to mention terrorists in a negative context... but I'm ranting.

Cipher13 · Mar 30, 2002, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by CaseCom:
Oh, get down off your high horses. Spielberg says that now that he's a father himself he thinks it's too scary to have agents chasing kids with guns drawn. Hardly a "political" statement. Personally, I have no problem with it either way.

The anniversary DVD will have the original version included. So much for "censorship."

I think the bigger travesty was those cheesy celebration scenes Lucas inserted near the end of the "Star Wars" special edition.

"Mummy! That man has a gun!" *cries*

Can you really see ANY child being scared by that?

Hah!

Lemme tell you, this generation of children is far less naieve than any previous to it.

This entire situation is ridiculous. You don't CHANGE movies to suit the times dammit!

It isn't right.

Who wants to go rewrite The Illiad to remove the violence from it??

fobside · Mar 30, 2002, 05:31 AM

Originally posted by Cipher13:


"Mummy! That man has a gun!" *cries*

Can you really see ANY child being scared by that?

Hah!

Lemme tell you, this generation of children is far less naieve than any previous to it.

This entire situation is ridiculous. You don't CHANGE movies to suit the times dammit!

It isn't right.

Who wants to go rewrite The Illiad to remove the violence from it??

seriously. kids these days are probably so used to violence and guns that theyre not phased by any of it. if they saw someone with a gun, theyd just pull their own.