eyes wide shut censored in USA

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by xah@xahlee.org, Jan 23, 2006.

  1. Guest

    , Jan 23, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Yes, the American DVD is censored (Warner has a policy against releasing
    DVDs that are Unrated or NC17)

    The specific nature of the censorship is interesting... during the orgy
    scene, CGI characters were added to the scene, obscuring certain sex-acts.
    The uncensored scene was not particularly shocking, but it conflicted with
    some of the MPAA's very specific rules about what can and can't be shown in
    an 'R' rated movie (example, more than two 'thrusting' motions in a sex-act,
    and the film gets an automatic NC17)
    This is probably one of the most famous pieces of censorship in the history
    of cinema so it shouldn't be too hard for you to find much more information
    about it on the web.

    While we're on the subject of Warner's Kubrick DVDs, I think I'll mention
    there rather shoddy business practice of a few years ago (which they should
    not be allowed to live down,) the DVDs were originally released with
    mediocre transfers which displeased fans (Warner reportedly rushed the DVD
    mastering process, to capitalise on the publicity from Kubrick's death.) So,
    a year later, when everyone had already bought the shoddy-transfer
    pressings, Warner transfered them properly to DVD and rereleased them. So
    far, fine, except that Warner chose not to issue replacements to those who
    had bought the earlier, flawed pressings.
    This isn't terribly relevant to Eyes Wide Shut, but it seems worth dragging
    up every now and then for the newcomers to DVD.
    The Man With No Name, Jan 23, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. <> wrote:

    > is there clips of the censored parts somewhere on the web?


    Not that I would know. But I live in Europe and I have a copy of the
    uncensored DVD. If you put a couple of screenshots of the censored parts
    up (in the long sequence where TC walks around the orgy), I will be glad
    to put up the uncensored ones for a direct comparison.

    > PS i have some screenshots here:
    > http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/skina/skina2.html


    None of these seem to be different from the European version. Do go and
    check the scene taking place between 1h 16' and 1h 18' 40''.

    (OK, forget my proposal and just go check this link)

    http://www.archiviokubrick.it/english/movies/ews/index.html?main=making
    --
    UFV:Che fai, rubi?(DVD)/Simpathy for Mr. Vengeance.avi
    Ricomincio da capo(DVD)/Il laureato(DVD)/Una botta di
    vita(VHS) - http://www.albertofarina.tk
    un fake di Alberto, Jan 23, 2006
    #3
  4. un fake di Alberto wrote:
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > > is there clips of the censored parts somewhere on the web?

    >
    > Not that I would know. But I live in Europe and I have a copy of the
    > uncensored DVD. If you put a couple of screenshots of the censored parts
    > up (in the long sequence where TC walks around the orgy), I will be glad
    > to put up the uncensored ones for a direct comparison.
    >
    > > PS i have some screenshots here:
    > > http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/skina/skina2.html

    >
    > None of these seem to be different from the European version. Do go and
    > check the scene taking place between 1h 16' and 1h 18' 40''.
    >
    > (OK, forget my proposal and just go check this link)
    >
    > http://www.archiviokubrick.it/english/movies/ews/index.html?main=making
    > --
    > UFV:Che fai, rubi?(DVD)/Simpathy for Mr. Vengeance.avi
    > Ricomincio da capo(DVD)/Il laureato(DVD)/Una botta di
    > vita(VHS) - http://www.albertofarina.tk


    It seems like Kubrick shot those scenes knowing they might need
    altering. Without the masked figures there's a lot of vacant space, yet
    with them them they look just as well composed, maybe better. And the
    figures are real people. A camera was walked past them in about the
    same movement as seen in the film, it angles a bit, so they aren't
    static photos. Maybe Kubrick shot the masked figures himself, with his
    own cameras, against bluescreen?

    Anyway, it fits so perfectly with the theme of the movie -- masks, and
    occultism, and things shut from view, that I'm glad to have the
    censored version. :)
    Matthew Dickinson, Jan 23, 2006
    #4
  5. Mat Hunt Guest

    It's unlikely that SK "shot those scenes knowing they might need
    altering" or that he "shot the masked figures himself". They were
    simply a way for Warners to placate the MPAA while technically
    reassuring everyone else that the film wasn't actually cut.
    Mat Hunt, Jan 23, 2006
    #5
  6. Marley Muffley, Jan 24, 2006
    #6
  7. Mat Hunt wrote:
    > It's unlikely that SK "shot those scenes knowing they might need
    > altering" or that he "shot the masked figures himself". They were
    > simply a way for Warners to placate the MPAA while technically
    > reassuring everyone else that the film wasn't actually cut.


    Well, somebody had to get out a camera and some very similar-looking
    robed and unclothed figures and film them, walking a camera past them,
    in about the same motion as was done in the "uncensored" version.
    Normally it's not easy to superimpose people onto the middle of the
    screen without making it look out of place and in the uncensored
    version there are gaps where the people conveniently fit.

    Not that this is important, or anything.
    Matthew Dickinson, Jan 24, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest Guest

    I thought I had read somewhere when EWS first came out that the masked
    figures were digitally put in. Anyone else remeber that or am I just crazy?

    Matt Myrick


    "Matthew Dickinson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Mat Hunt wrote:
    >> It's unlikely that SK "shot those scenes knowing they might need
    >> altering" or that he "shot the masked figures himself". They were
    >> simply a way for Warners to placate the MPAA while technically
    >> reassuring everyone else that the film wasn't actually cut.

    >
    > Well, somebody had to get out a camera and some very similar-looking
    > robed and unclothed figures and film them, walking a camera past them,
    > in about the same motion as was done in the "uncensored" version.
    > Normally it's not easy to superimpose people onto the middle of the
    > screen without making it look out of place and in the uncensored
    > version there are gaps where the people conveniently fit.
    >
    > Not that this is important, or anything.
    >
    Guest, Jan 24, 2006
    #8
  9. Yelps Guest

    Link to the excerpt......uncensored. Windows Media Video file:
    http://www.yelpsastound.com/images/ews.wmv








    <> wrote in message
    news:MsgBf.13963$...
    >I thought I had read somewhere when EWS first came out that the masked
    >figures were digitally put in. Anyone else remeber that or am I just
    >crazy?
    >
    > Matt Myrick
    >
    >
    > "Matthew Dickinson" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> Mat Hunt wrote:
    >>> It's unlikely that SK "shot those scenes knowing they might need
    >>> altering" or that he "shot the masked figures himself". They were
    >>> simply a way for Warners to placate the MPAA while technically
    >>> reassuring everyone else that the film wasn't actually cut.

    >>
    >> Well, somebody had to get out a camera and some very similar-looking
    >> robed and unclothed figures and film them, walking a camera past them,
    >> in about the same motion as was done in the "uncensored" version.
    >> Normally it's not easy to superimpose people onto the middle of the
    >> screen without making it look out of place and in the uncensored
    >> version there are gaps where the people conveniently fit.
    >>
    >> Not that this is important, or anything.
    >>

    >
    >
    Yelps, Jan 24, 2006
    #9
  10. Guest

    Xah Lee wrote:
    is there clips of the censored parts somewhere on the web?

    un fake di Alberto wrote:
    http://www.archiviokubrick.it/english/movies/ews/index.html?main=making

    Yelps wrote:
    Link to the excerpt......uncensored. Windows Media Video file:
    http://www.yelpsastound.com/images/ews.wmv

    Marley Muffley wrote:
    Side by side video comparisons.
    http://www.angelfire.com/film/kubrick4/

    Thanks a lot!

    after watching these, i feel cheated. My view of Eyes Wide Shut
    certainly are different because of the censorship. **** WASP.

    Xah

    ∑ http://xahlee.org/
    , Jan 24, 2006
    #10
  11. Joshua Zyber Guest

    "Matthew Dickinson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, somebody had to get out a camera and some very similar-looking
    > robed and unclothed figures and film them, walking a camera past them,
    > in about the same motion as was done in the "uncensored" version.
    > Normally it's not easy to superimpose people onto the middle of the
    > screen without making it look out of place and in the uncensored
    > version there are gaps where the people conveniently fit.


    The robed figures were digitally animated in. They are CGI, not real
    actors. If you crank up your brightness the effect stands out pretty
    clearly (obviously, you're not meant to do that for normal viewing).

    The figures were added by Warner Bros. after Kubrick's death because the
    MPAA rated the movie NC-17 in its original form, and adding those
    figures to block out the nudity was the least obtrusive method of
    self-censorship that the studio could impose without cutting any
    footage.

    Prior to his death, Kubrick was well aware that he was obligated to
    deliver an R-rated movie, and would have altered the scene in some way
    himself had he not died. He was notorious for tinkering with and
    fine-tuning his movies right up to the last minute, sometimes demanding
    prints be retracted after the movie had already premiered so that he
    could cut footage (e.g. 2001, The Shining).
    Joshua Zyber, Jan 24, 2006
    #11
  12. Joshua Zyber wrote:
    > "Matthew Dickinson" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Well, somebody had to get out a camera and some very similar-looking
    > > robed and unclothed figures and film them, walking a camera past them,
    > > in about the same motion as was done in the "uncensored" version.
    > > Normally it's not easy to superimpose people onto the middle of the
    > > screen without making it look out of place and in the uncensored
    > > version there are gaps where the people conveniently fit.

    >
    > The robed figures were digitally animated in. They are CGI, not real
    > actors. If you crank up your brightness the effect stands out pretty
    > clearly (obviously, you're not meant to do that for normal viewing).
    >
    > The figures were added by Warner Bros. after Kubrick's death because the
    > MPAA rated the movie NC-17 in its original form, and adding those
    > figures to block out the nudity was the least obtrusive method of
    > self-censorship that the studio could impose without cutting any
    > footage.
    >
    > Prior to his death, Kubrick was well aware that he was obligated to
    > deliver an R-rated movie, and would have altered the scene in some way
    > himself had he not died. He was notorious for tinkering with and
    > fine-tuning his movies right up to the last minute, sometimes demanding
    > prints be retracted after the movie had already premiered so that he
    > could cut footage (e.g. 2001, The Shining).


    They don't look computer generated to me.
    Matthew Dickinson, Jan 24, 2006
    #12
  13. On 23 Jan 2006 22:55:26 -0800, "Matthew Dickinson"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >>
    >> Prior to his death, Kubrick was well aware that he was obligated to
    >> deliver an R-rated movie, and would have altered the scene in some way
    >> himself had he not died. He was notorious for tinkering with and
    >> fine-tuning his movies right up to the last minute, sometimes demanding
    >> prints be retracted after the movie had already premiered so that he
    >> could cut footage (e.g. 2001, The Shining).

    >
    >They don't look computer generated to me.



    Maybe not the hooded figures, but they are dark. But the nudes look
    like CGI barbie-dolls. Did you see the still shots of the nudes from
    behind? Of course on rolling film, it's not as apparent.
    Winston Castro, Jan 24, 2006
    #13
  14. Mat Hunt Guest

    But they are. The backgrounds and nude models were filmed by SK and
    appear in all versions of the film, though the black figures with their
    backs to the camera are super-imposed CGI.
    Mat Hunt, Jan 24, 2006
    #14
  15. Mat Hunt wrote:
    > But they are. The backgrounds and nude models were filmed by SK and
    > appear in all versions of the film, though the black figures with their
    > backs to the camera are super-imposed CGI.


    How do you know?

    The real girls look like barbie dolls, too.
    Matthew Dickinson, Jan 24, 2006
    #15
  16. Wordsmith Guest

    That was the idea. That was precisely the idea.


    W ; )
    Wordsmith, Jan 24, 2006
    #16
  17. Wordsmith wrote:
    > That was the idea. That was precisely the idea.
    >
    >
    > W ; )


    I know :)
    Matthew Dickinson, Jan 24, 2006
    #17
  18. sanpablo Guest

    On 22 Jan 2006 19:25:54 -0800, wrote:

    >recently i learned that Eyes Wide Shut in US theatrical release has
    >been censored.
    >I have seen the DVD for North America region bought in US.
    >Is this DVD version censored too?
    >
    >is there clips of the censored parts somewhere on the web?
    >
    >Thanks.
    >
    > Xah
    >
    > ∑ http://xahlee.org/
    >
    >PS i have some screenshots here:
    >http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/skina/skina2.html



    I have the Hong Kong uncensored version if you need a copy.
    e-mail me at rchapman at mail dot com
    sanpablo, Jan 25, 2006
    #18
  19. Richard C. Guest

    X-No-archive: yes

    "The Man With No Name" <> wrote in message
    news:43d460c8$0$15124$...
    > Yes, the American DVD is censored (Warner has a policy against releasing
    > DVDs that are Unrated or NC17)
    >

    ===========================
    It had nothing to do with the DVD.
    Americans were "protected" by the censoring in the Theatrical version too.
    Richard C., Jan 26, 2006
    #19
  20. Jordan Guest

    I seem to remember there was a WS/FS controversy as well. The original
    pressings were released as FS due to Kubrick's reported preference for
    the format, which ended up not flying with a lot of fans. Was the
    re-release WS?

    - Jordan
    Jordan, Jan 28, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Curtin/Dobbs

    CHEAPER BY DOZEN:"censored" commentary?

    Curtin/Dobbs, Apr 7, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    410
    Mark Steese
    Apr 8, 2004
  2. ddmcd
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    774
    Jon Purkey
    Dec 1, 2004
  3. Elliot Mantle

    Eyes Wide Shut Uncut

    Elliot Mantle, Jan 16, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,920
    Joshua Zyber
    Jan 17, 2005
  4. Wild Coyote
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    340
    MassiveProng
    Mar 12, 2007
  5. IRO

    The censored TV ad

    IRO, Feb 2, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    407
Loading...

Share This Page