Toy Story 2 has been edited for political correctness. Disney is now censoring history.

  • 60 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for ezekiel43
#1 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1800 posts) -

Sets a bad precedent. This scene is not on the new UHD and BD releases.

I don't understand their logic. Seinfeld has an episode where George and Jerry check out a 15 year old's cleavage and then try to justify it to Elaine. Would that fly on a TV show made now? Hell no. Are people bothered that it's on the DVD? No. Nobody cares. Nobody would have cared about this Toy Story scene. All they did by taking it out is upset some fans.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#2 Edited by uninspiredcup (35084 posts) -

To be fair, that was some Harvey Weinstein level stuff.

He's basically saying he'll help them because he wants to bang them. Him, an old ass toy, them, young dolls.

Isn't really a good example for kids who are still developing. We are talking very young kids as well, girls as well as boys.

I mean I grew up watching stuff like Robocop, but the violence had a positive message, Jesus wins.

This is saying "woman are stupid bimbos, exploit them for sexual gratification".

Avatar image for phbz
#3 Posted by phbz (4681 posts) -

Comparing a kid's movie from Disney with Seinfeld... Makes perfect sense. Plus you should check It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia if you think nothing will be as politically incorrect as Seinfeld.

Avatar image for davillain-
#4 Posted by DaVillain- (38153 posts) -

The fact Toy Story 2 was release in 1999 at the turn of the century, I'm more amazed this hidden easter egg has been removed all of a sudden because it's a Harvey Weinstein thing. But to be honest, I'm surprised it took 2 decades to crash down on him but at that time, social media wasn't a thing or hardly existed so that too is why it took Harvey this long to bring him down. Toy Story 2 wasn't the only one making casting couch and sexual harassment jokes. Scream 3 had the running gag of each actress at one point having sex with a producer and a director for the parts they wanted.

Avatar image for heirren
#5 Posted by Heirren (2324 posts) -

Blame the social media darlings, theyre the ones who cant deal with these sorts of things.

Avatar image for jaydan
#6 Edited by jaydan (2492 posts) -

Sooo the part that got edited was a portion of the blooper reel in the post-credit scenes; in other words, the segment that got edited is not a part of the main movie but a little piece found in the credits. I can't really be mad here. Pixar is no stranger to plugging in some of the adult humor, but this is one that did not age well and the world does not have a positive view on "couch casting" even if it's just as a joke. Not much of a loss here.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#7 Posted by foxhound_fox (98044 posts) -

Seems appropriate for a G-rated children's movie. *rolls eyes*

This sounds like outrage for outrage's sake on your part. Disney fired James Gunn for inappropriate comments he made years and years ago, without giving him time to really explain. They have a massive reputation to maintain, especially in today's age of the internet spreading things virally. If they re-released the movie with this in it, it would effect their revenue from it's sales.

They aren't "changing history", it's their intellectual property to do with what they please. Just like you are free to be outraged along with me over how Lucas perverted the original Star Wars "Special Edition" trilogy for the re-release in 1997, it was his intellectual property to do with what he pleased.

Avatar image for heathen75
#8 Posted by HEATHEN75 (819 posts) -

Censoring a children's movie is not censoring history. Disney owns the movie and can do as they please with it. I won't be ;losing any sleep over it.

Avatar image for dariency
#9 Posted by Dariency (9416 posts) -

I didn't think anything of this scene when I saw it as a kid. I don't think any little kid would, because they don't get it. Only adults do.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#10 Edited by mrbojangles25 (44414 posts) -

Swapping guns for walkie talkies due to over-sensitivity? Bad

Getting rid of some creepy casting-couch type shit because it instills poor values in kids and is socially relevant? Good.

It's not "editing history" btw, what is historical about Toy Story outside of it existing in the past?

@uninspiredcup said:

To be fair, that was some Harvey Weinstein level stuff.

He's basically saying he'll help them because he wants to bang them. Him, an old ass toy, them, young dolls.

Isn't really a good example for kids who are still developing. We are talking very young kids as well, girls as well as boys.

I mean I grew up watching stuff like Robocop, but the violence had a positive message, Jesus wins.

This is saying "woman are stupid bimbos, exploit them for sexual gratification".

Kind of agree with this. If I saw that today I would be creeped the hell out. I was creeped out.

@ezekiel43: I don't think it's being edited for political correctness, btw, I think it's being edited for good taste. I mean really I like when animated movies sneak some jokes in for the adults but that wasn't funny when the movie came out and it's not funny now.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
#11 Posted by mrbojangles25 (44414 posts) -

@dariency said:

I didn't think anything of this scene when I saw it as a kid. I don't think any little kid would, because they don't get it. Only adults do.

I don't know how old you are, but when I was a kid (I'm 35) I wouldn't have understood it either.

But I tell you what, kids are a lot smarter than they were 25 years ago, a lot more aware of things. I think a lot of them would understand this.

Furthermore, while Toy Story might be good for all ages, a whole spectrum of kids see this stuff so some 14 year old pubescent kid could see this and then try it some twins in his class.

At the end of the day, I don't think we really gain anything by its inclusion, but we do gain something by omitting it.

Avatar image for dariency
#12 Posted by Dariency (9416 posts) -

@mrbojangles25:

@mrbojangles25 said:
@dariency said:

I didn't think anything of this scene when I saw it as a kid. I don't think any little kid would, because they don't get it. Only adults do.

I don't know how old you are, but when I was a kid (I'm 35) I wouldn't have understood it either.

But I tell you what, kids are a lot smarter than they were 25 years ago, a lot more aware of things. I think a lot of them would understand this.

Furthermore, while Toy Story might be good for all ages, a whole spectrum of kids see this stuff so some 14 year old pubescent kid could see this and then try it some twins in his class.

At the end of the day, I don't think we really gain anything by its inclusion, but we do gain something by omitting it.

I'm 30 now, so I was 10 when the movie came out. I was a sheltered child, so even when watching the movie again when I was a bit older I didn't notice anything inappropriate it. They are just toys after all. But I can definitely see now, in todays society, how this scene could be censored out.

It's true that kids today are more in-the-know, thanks mostly to social media and them being on their phones all day. They also have parents that are more in-the-know, also thanks to social media and them being on their phones all day. Still though, I don't think any child under 10 would be able to make the connection.

I agree we don't gain anything by its inclusion. I never found the scene to be funny in any way, so having it omitted is nothing lost.

Avatar image for hallenbeck77
#13 Posted by Hallenbeck77 (15800 posts) -

How does a gag like that wind up in a G-rated movie, anyway?

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#14 Posted by LJS9502_basic (167154 posts) -

Didn't belong there in the first place.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#15 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1800 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

This sounds like outrage for outrage's sake on your part.

Hardly. I wasn't even going to get this. Not a big fan of CG animation in general. But it's only a matter of time before these big studios start censoring movies I like.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#16 Edited by uninspiredcup (35084 posts) -

@hallenbeck77 said:

How does a gag like that wind up in a G-rated movie, anyway?

Was always surprised they got away with this. Can only imagine the nightmare fuel it created.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#17 Posted by foxhound_fox (98044 posts) -

@ezekiel43 said:

Hardly. I wasn't even going to get this. Not a big fan of CG animation in general. But it's only a matter of time before these big studios start censoring movies I like.

"Censoring" what exactly? It was a blooper reel.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#18 Posted by Ezekiel43 (1800 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:
@ezekiel43 said:

Hardly. I wasn't even going to get this. Not a big fan of CG animation in general. But it's only a matter of time before these big studios start censoring movies I like.

"Censoring" what exactly? It was a blooper reel.

That was part of the credits, which is part of the movie.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#19 Posted by foxhound_fox (98044 posts) -

@ezekiel43 said:

That was part of the credits, which is part of the movie.

Still a blooper reel. And my original point still stands, it's Disney's property, they can do whatever they want with it. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

Avatar image for phbz
#20 Posted by phbz (4681 posts) -

That's how Hitler started!

Avatar image for davillain-
#21 Posted by DaVillain- (38153 posts) -

@hallenbeck77 said:

How does a gag like that wind up in a G-rated movie, anyway?

Toy Story 2 was release in 1999, different era and this type of blooper wasn't a big deal anyways. To the kids back then, we all laugh at Pete for going lala with the Barbie dolls just for fun, nothing too serious. Looking at this again, this was clearly foreshadowing the rise & fall of Harvey Weinstein.

Fun fact: Did you know in the movie "The Rescuers" there's a hidden scene were a woman is naked in the window but it's very brief and no one never notice it until someone report it many years ago.

Avatar image for hallenbeck77
#22 Posted by Hallenbeck77 (15800 posts) -
@davillain- said:

Toy Story 2 was release in 1999, different era and this type of blooper wasn't a big deal anyways. To the kids back then, we all laugh at Pete for going lala with the Barbie dolls just for fun, nothing too serious. Looking at this again, this was clearly foreshadowing the rise & fall of Harvey Weinstein.

Fun fact: Did you know in the movie "The Rescuers" there's a hidden scene were a woman is naked in the window but it's very brief and no one never notice it until someone report it many years ago.

The joke isn't the worst thing out there--just really out of place in a film like this. I'm scratching my head about it more than anything else.

I remember hearing about The Rescuers thing. It was supposed to be in a frame or two in the film, but probably has been since removed, I imagine.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#23 Posted by Serraph105 (34057 posts) -

This isn't even "in" the movie. It's part of a series of fake outtakes that appears at the end of the film during the credits. It's something where nothing is lost from the film if people don't see it.

Avatar image for minishcapper
#24 Posted by minishcapper (37 posts) -

Old men ogling young women is bad. but adding homosexual overtones in characters, like in the live action Beauty and the Beast is fine. This is Disney now.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#25 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10958 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

Old men ogling young women is bad. but adding homosexual overtones in characters, like in the live action Beauty and the Beast is fine. This is Disney now.

What exactly are 'homosexual overtones'? Are you comparing the harassment of women to consenting adults of the same sex?

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#26 Posted by uninspiredcup (35084 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

Old men ogling young women is bad. but adding homosexual overtones in characters, like in the live action Beauty and the Beast is fine. This is Disney now.

No longer homophobic, because it isn't the 1940's anymore?

Avatar image for nintendoboy16
#27 Posted by nintendoboy16 (36593 posts) -

This is an outtake anyway. And honestly, if it was something like Deadpool, then I would get you. But it isn't so...

Avatar image for minishcapper
#28 Edited by minishcapper (37 posts) -

@uninspiredcup: do the dolls look like they feel they are being harassed? Why are you infantilizing women?

@HoolaHoopMan: it's not a matter of homophobia. The character in Beauty and the Beast was not originally written as homosexual, which believe me was not an unknown phenomenon in France at the time the book was authored. So here we have an example of Disney inserting homosexuality into a character while removing heterosexuality of another character in a harmless joke. I'm not making a value judgment, just an observation.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
#29 Edited by uninspiredcup (35084 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

@uninspiredcup: do the dolls look like they feel they are being harassed? Why are you infantilizing women?

By this logic, someone sexually abused who has no concept of it, normalizing it through repetition (which does happen), isn't sexually abused.

Anyone watching that with a brain cell can clearly see it's blatant a dirty old man sketch in a thing aimed at little boys and girls.

It will exist in it's original sales copy and archived as a historical curio just like (for the example) the Superman propaganda cartoons which features buck-teethed asain stereotypes. It doesn't mean DC continues to do that shit, or is proud of it.

There's a difference between progressive wack-jobs screaming about anything and everything and basic common sense.

Avatar image for SolidSnake35
#30 Posted by SolidSnake35 (58923 posts) -

Good. It's high time leftist companies stopped this dirty old man stereotype. Shame on Disney for taking so long. I just hope we can start a dialogue about reparations for old white men that have been affected financially by this.

Avatar image for vfighter
#31 Posted by VFighter (5242 posts) -

I'm really surprised so many are in favor of censoring this? Sad as this is the slow death of comedy.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#32 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10958 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

@HoolaHoopMan: it's not a matter of homophobia. The character in Beauty and the Beast was not originally written as homosexual, which believe me was not an unknown phenomenon in France at the time the book was authored. So here we have an example of Disney inserting homosexuality into a character while removing heterosexuality of another character in a harmless joke. I'm not making a value judgment, just an observation.

OK, so you've made an observation. Why does it matter? Especially when you've contextualized it with a scene which has overtones of 'bad' behavior. You've drawn a parallel between acceptable behavior (homosexuality) and unacceptable behavior (sexual harassment).

You say you're not making a value of judgement but inserting it into the context of the thread makes it pretty obvious that you are.

Avatar image for SoNin360
#33 Posted by SoNin360 (7104 posts) -

This gag went way over my head when I was a kid... don't really see the big deal. Takes a bit of reading between the lines to see it as offensive. But it's hardly a significant part of the movie, so I couldn't care much less that it's being censored. It's just kinda funny that something from a G rated movie was considered "too much" and had to be removed.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#34 Posted by Serraph105 (34057 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

Old men ogling young women is bad. but adding homosexual overtones in characters, like in the live action Beauty and the Beast is fine. This is Disney now.

Thats......I mean, yeah? One is regarding consent and the other is joking about harassment. This is clearly a step in the right direction.

Avatar image for minishcapper
#35 Edited by minishcapper (37 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan: I would say Disney is the one making a value judgment, but hey, whatever floats your boat. By the way, don't ever watch anime or you'll be constantly triggered. Are you going to demand that Rumiko Takahashi censor Ranma 1/2 because it has an old man who likes to steal panties and ogles young women? Takahashi is a woman, by the way.

Avatar image for PSP107
#36 Posted by PSP107 (17527 posts) -

@ezekiel43:

What's the problem?

Edit: Just watched the 25 sec clip.

So what's the problem?

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#37 Edited by MirkoS77 (14471 posts) -

On principle, I don’t agree with altering creative works after their release. Times change, they’re always changing, and it’s a bad precedent to set. Sure this is small, sure it’s “in the credits”, but that misses the point.

Avatar image for vfighter
#38 Posted by VFighter (5242 posts) -

@Serraph105: Step in the right direction? Ummm...yeah I don't think so.

Avatar image for Ganados0
#39 Posted by Ganados0 (1074 posts) -

They probably figured out this movies original audience will return to it as adults and kick up a stink about this scene and removed it so not to hurt their sensibilities.

Avatar image for saltslasher
#40 Posted by SaltSlasher (1318 posts) -

It was pretty flirty, but yeah it isn't as innocent as I thought it was gonna be, cause it clearly was aware of the culture.

Avatar image for JustPlainLucas
#41 Edited by JustPlainLucas (79395 posts) -

I lived through the George Lucas edits. I think I can deal with this.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#42 Posted by MirkoS77 (14471 posts) -

@JustPlainLucas said:

I lived through the George Lucas edits. I think I can deal with this.

Yea, the edits he had no right to make.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#43 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10958 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

@HoolaHoopMan: I would say Disney is the one making a value judgment, but hey, whatever floats your boat. By the way, don't ever watch anime or you'll be constantly triggered. Are you going to demand that Rumiko Takahashi censor Ranma 1/2 because it has an old man who likes to steal panties and ogles young women? Takahashi is a woman, by the way.

I don't watch anime, so good luck changing the subject on everyone who challenges your diversions.

Avatar image for minishcapper
#44 Edited by minishcapper (37 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan: Ok, well Disney is the international distributor of Studio Ghibli's films. Do you think they should edit out the scene in Castle in the Sky where the adult male pirates all have a crush on Sheeta aboard the pirate plane?

The joke is that despite being gruff pirates they end up doing all the work for her because they're so lonely and never get to be around women because of their station in life. But I suppose you would think that is toxic and that one of the greatest animators of all time should be forced to change his art because of your opinions.

Avatar image for Litchie
#45 Posted by Litchie (24346 posts) -
@JustPlainLucas said:

I lived through the George Lucas edits. I think I can deal with this.

LOL

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#46 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10958 posts) -

@minishcapper said:

@HoolaHoopMan: Ok, well Disney is the international distributor of Studio Ghibli's films. Do you think they should edit out the scene in Castle in the Sky where the adult male pirates all have a crush on Sheeta aboard the pirate plane?

The joke is that despite being gruff pirates they end up doing all the work for her because they're so lonely and never get to be around women because of their station in life. But I suppose you would think that is toxic and that one of the greatest animators of all time should be forced to change his art because of your opinions.

No idea, never seen it. This just seems like a huge distraction you're creating.

Avatar image for ezekiel43
#47 Edited by Ezekiel43 (1800 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan said:
@minishcapper said:

@HoolaHoopMan: Ok, well Disney is the international distributor of Studio Ghibli's films. Do you think they should edit out the scene in Castle in the Sky where the adult male pirates all have a crush on Sheeta aboard the pirate plane?

The joke is that despite being gruff pirates they end up doing all the work for her because they're so lonely and never get to be around women because of their station in life. But I suppose you would think that is toxic and that one of the greatest animators of all time should be forced to change his art because of your opinions.

No idea, never seen it. This just seems like a huge distraction you're creating.

it's not. It could happen. Would be pretty insulting, considering how many man-hours Miyazaki's 2D animation takes.

Avatar image for taylor12702003
#48 Posted by taylor12702003 (253 posts) -

Pc garbage is getting old.

Avatar image for Willy105
#49 Posted by Willy105 (24873 posts) -

1. Pixar took out one of their own jokes because it wasn't funny any more, especially after who John Lasseter was discovered to be.

2. To movie end credit gags is improved by doing this, since it no longer has that one awkward joke with all the rest.

3. Posting this thread with that thread title only gives reason for people with a persecution complex to be triggered cause "they are being censored now!".

Avatar image for minishcapper
#50 Edited by minishcapper (37 posts) -

@Willy105: John Lasseter was accused of giving unwanted hugs. He was not a sexual predator. Describing him as "considering who he turned out to be" as if he's Kevin Spacey or Harvey Weinstein is a massive judgment on your part, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

@HoolaHoopMan: Ok, well if we go back to my original comparison, how is any different to show an old man with creepy unwanted sexual attraction to young women than it is to show a gay man (LeFou) with creepy unwanted sexual attraction to a straight man (Gaston)?