Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Paul Dini Talks About The Whole BATMAN BEYOND: RETURN OF THE JOKER fiasco

Implied Violence by Morgus	Oct 11th, 2000 05:11:06 AM
I'm all for Val Lewton-esque-LEOPARD-MAN-blood -under-the-door suggested violence. IF, that is, that's what the makers of said film wanted. However, if the filmmaker intended one thing, and scared execs fearing the wrath of this month's PC Police forced the change onto said filmmaker, well... that's less palatable. Of course, we're not talking about a change in the same league as, say, someone wanting to recut DAWN OF THE DEAD to get a G rating. However, we ARE talking about some pretty annoying, petty, PC tinkering that stinks of Greedo Shoots First. Sigh...
(sigh of relief) by NUXX	Oct 11th, 2000 05:11:08 AM
Well, i hope this is true. I can live with a small moderation, as long as Dini is happy....NUXX OUT...
If Paul Dini likes it.. by Bilan	Oct 11th, 2000 06:07:42 AM
Then it's probably good enough for all of us. Though an uncut version would be wonderful, I suppose if the cuts are minor enough, it's acceptable until WB releases an unedited version or I can find a bootleg VHS, anyway..
This is a rationalization for censorship. by MajorTom	Oct 11th, 2000 07:04:20 AM
I love how they make us feel like the censored version "may even be better" than the original, when it's really just a watered down, lesser version of the original. I've seen the movie, and the scene with the gunshot was the best scene of any Batman movie in many a year, and now it's erased from existence, depriving Bat-fans everywhere of pure Dini/Timm goodness. And the fight scenes were spectacular the way they were. LISTEN UP WARNER BROS, BATMAN FANS WANT THE ORIGINAL VERSION, AND WE HAVE $$$$$$$. I won't support censorship, even if the creators are rationalizing it.
This is not over...... by Praetor	Oct 11th, 2000 07:25:31 AM
Well the worst is now confirmed, and even if it is not disastrous it is still BAD NEWS. Speaking as one who has not yet had the pleasure of this film I could not say which is worse: to have seen this project intact and to know that my fellow Batfans the world over cannot share the full experience, or to have never seen the original and therefore not know what was missed. Harry is on the money though; we must press forwards and ensure that the original cut eventually sees the light of day. I am encouraged that Jean McCurdy seem to have some executive authority in this matter. She has been involved with and supportive of the Batman animated series from the very beginning. One question though? Where is this petition? I am eager to sign and know not where to plonk my name.
Batman Beyond: The Studio Exec Re-Edit. by Regicidal_Maniac	Oct 11th, 2000 07:25:52 AM
Hoo-Boy! Am I ever excited about seeing this film in the way the studio Execs intended me to see it. The fact that it is a studio enforced re-edit is an insult to the esteemed Messers Dini and Timm, the fans who have supported Warner Bros product for years and to anyone who believes they live in a society where they are allowed creative freedom or the freedom of choice. Thanks Warners, thanks Jean MacCurdy. It is however unsuprising. The whole episode is very familiar to anyone who knows that Warner Bros interfered with Ridley Scott's original cut of Blade Runner adding/subtracting and generally being the no-nothing Execs they were cloned to be. With that said, at least the changes made to Blade Runner were made after rather lacklustre test audience screenings and not, as in this case, prior to any public release in an attempt to ward off any undue attention and criticism from the Super Religious Right Wing Politicians/Electorate that America was built upon. After all remember this is the all important Election Year. With that in mind what really steams me about this whole "let's make the Joker more kid friendly" fiasco is that those of us living outside "the good ol' US of A", in my case Australia, may also be stuck with this altered cut (mutilation). The cuts designed to save the general public from impressionable knife-wielding/gun-toting children, are absolutely unnecessary here since we have neither the ridiculously lax gun laws nor blankminded children as in America. The international DVD must contain an unedited version of this film. Surely Warners knows that kids who are influenced by ads for the latest Jelly-Filled Marshmallow-Covered Sugar-Encrusted Choco-Puffs breakfast cereal aren't interested in the features that DVD offers. The technology of DVD (Digital Versatile Disc) allows for features such as Seamless Branching and Parental Locks so that the film can be released with both versions on the one Singled Sided Dual Layer disc. This would mean that those who want to watch the sanitised version can and those that really, really don't can change the settings using the Locks and watch it as it was originally written. Above all I hold a hope Warners has plans to release a "European" Batman Of The Future version of this highly anticipated movie so that it can be fully enjoyed by animation aficionados who live in countries without classes such as 'How To Beat That Manslaughter Rap 101: - I didn't mean it/Diminished responsibility and you' *("but Mom me an' Timmy was just playin' when the gun just went off I wasn't even nowhere near it")* and infomercials such as "The Joys Of Homemade PipeBombs And The Safe Handling Thereof". I honestly don't believe that filmed violence, when shown in context and viewed by an audience within whom murderous tendencies do not already exist, promotes violent behaviour. But then I don't have a BulletMart down the street. Harry Lime Sydney
As long as the leave.... by Jon Zuckerman	Oct 11th, 2000 07:27:52 AM
...the Batman/Joker flashback scene alone, it's fine by me.Actually, the fight scenes aren't violent, they're very well done, I wonder why they're cutting them. I'm trying to remember the gunshot scene in question here, but can't right now.
IT'S STILL WRONG! by Dialtone	Oct 11th, 2000 07:34:14 AM
It doesn't matter whether or not the new "Watered Down So The Suits Don't Get Their Pants In A Wad Version" is "Better". IT'S STILL WRONG! As Majortom said They are just rationalizing censorship. Face it people: Batman IS a dark character and the stories SHOULD deal with dark, VIOLENT subject matter. You wanna know why your Batman Franchise went belly up Warner Bros.? Because you lost all idea of what the Batman Mythos is really about. You want a Batman film? Batman: Mask of the Phantasm is the Definitve Batman film so far. And that was Dark, Brooding, and Yes VIOLENT. Ever since I heard of this new film I was excited. Finally it sounded as if they were really going to get things right. BUT NOW we have these pinko commie touchy feely censors that once again Piss all over things and screw us over. Note to Suits: Read Batman: The Killing Joke. Read Batman: The Long Halloween. Read Batman: Year One. THAT IS WHAT BATMAN IS. I wish I could get my hands on the REAL screenplay of ROTJ because I'm sure it could also be added to the list of REAL Batman stories. DON'T LET WARNER BROS. STEP ALL OVER DINI/TIMM!!! FIGHT THEM!! FIGHT THEM FOR THE FANS! FIGHT THEM FOR YOURSELVES! And most Importantly FIGHT THEM FOR BATMAN!!!
I Just Don't See It by Kem	Oct 11th, 2000 07:48:24 AM
I have seen the movie. I have enjoyed the movie (oh boy DID I EVER!). As a father of a two year old, I just have to say that I don't see what all the fuss is about. Harry is absolutely on the money when he says the film COULD HAVE BEEN rated PG (the case clearly states NOT RATED). The violence level in BBROTJ really does not exceed the normal series by that much. Let me take a different approach. For those of you who have seen the movie, think of the scenes that you might think Warner has a problem with. Now, compare those scenes to the opening of the Batman/Superman/Joker/Lex Luthor movie when the Joker walks into the shop and sprays the owner with the Joker gas. The guy dies. And he dies horribly. SO WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE??? For those of you who haven't seen the movie, just watch the series on TV, and imagine if the fights were longer and had better sound effects. You'll probably come to the same conclusion. Bottom line here is that I think that Warner Brothers has taken an exceptionally great animated movie and, by pandering to inappropriate political pressure, making changes that are "acceptable" to Mr. Dinni, but not what he set out to do. And that is just not right.
protecting our children... by Arioch2112	Oct 11th, 2000 07:54:54 AM
EVERYTHING IS ABOUT PROTECTING THE CHILDREN?!?!?! The past two generations or so of children have been the most protected of our age and what is happening??? The little protected ones are thieving, raping and murdering each other and us well because of all this protecting our kids. Well, maybe they need to have their psyche bumped and bruised from time to time. Something I have noticed, murder and violence is ok if it's biblical. Technically, the Bible should be PG-13 at the least, R at worst. Everything that Joe Lieberman and that bunch want kept off TV before 10pm is in the Bible but you wont hear anything like that...
CENSORSHIP... by BRIT	Oct 11th, 2000 08:00:55 AM
You all seem to rant on about the cutting of this film being censorship, but I must say, my american friends, that's fucking bollocks. It's being edited to suite the childrens market, thats all. Obviously it viewed as being too violent for kids, and therefore they're going to cut it. It's their money on the line (I know that WB already have more money than god), and as we all live in a capitalist society where the dollar rules, those dollars are the issue. It was funny to here one talkbacker refer to WB as 'commie...censors' when in fact they're are western money grabbing capitalist censors. If in fact they were commie censors you would have batman toeing the party line, hailing the joy of brotherhood and econmoic stagnation. I'm rambling now.... anyway we have no 'right' to view this in its original format, but god knows we all want to, and if the polls and petitions work we probably will (when WB see the $$ that could be made) Think about it, if BB:ROTJ was aimed at adults it would be ultraviolent to the extreme, but its not, its for kids. Don't be so naive asto think that this kind of thing shouldn't/doesn't happen.
The shot... by BBarnaud2	Oct 11th, 2000 08:13:59 AM
Having seen the flick, I can guess the cut they are talking about. I thought the shocking part of the shot was the lingering look over the body. In any case the film will remain excellent and make me feel less guilty about small children having nightmares...lol.
Bullshit! What else is he going to say? by inkymae	Oct 11th, 2000 08:23:57 AM
bullshit bullshit bullshit bullshit. I don't believe that Paul dini is content with the cut of the film that they put together. think about it people, the guy still works for Warner Bros and is currently trying to develop his first live action feature for them (The live action Batman Beyond) He wants a future a Warner Bros. (and I don't blame him one bit) Paul Dini knows he is not in a position to complain about the studio cutting up his work. He doesn't want to be labeled as a troublemaker and get the boot on BB feature. WB and Paul both know that a negative comment about the new cut from Paul would create a huge uproar among diehard fans. So he has waltzed out with a nice appeasing statement saying he is satisified with the cut. and "it hasn't changed the tone at all" and "I wish I had done those cuts in the beginning anyway". BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT. That is what you call propaganda crap. Paul, I don't blame you one bit. I would have done the same thing. Harry, shame on you for believing it so blatantly. And Warner Bros. (sigh) are you ever going to get a clue? DON'T BELIEVE THESE COMMENTS FOR A SECOND. PAUL IS DOING DAMAGE CONTROL FOR WARNER BROS. FIGHT FOR THE ORIGINAL CUT!!!!!!!!!!!!
As always, the Onion has a relevant take on this. by LSHB	Oct 11th, 2000 08:31:28 AM
namely that they'll de-fang the Batman film and then act all amazed when it bombs on the purchase market. The analogy I mention is from the latest online Onion: Network Executive Cancels Show After Ruining It In Development LOS ANGELES-- Fox vice-president of programming Jonathan Sohn pulled the plug Tuesday on the new sitcom Table For Twelve after rendering the show unwatchable with his persistent meddling during the development phase. "I was really sorry to have to cancel Table--I went to the wall for that show," Sohn said. "I heavily reworked the pilot, de-emphasizing the father's relationship with his sons and adding a talking dog. I hired away two writers from Just Shoot Me, which consistently leads its slot. I even personally came up with the show's catchphrase, 'Well, it ain't no Christmas ham, Pepe!' In the end, though, it wasn't enough, and I had no choice but to shitcan the thing." Sohn said he will now focus his energies on "fine-tuning" King Of The Hill.
I'm probably gonna' get blasted for this... by largent	Oct 11th, 2000 08:31:42 AM
Yes, I wish they weren't messing with this movie, but... my complaint was just that they would edit it, knowing now that Timm is reworking the questionable stuff puts me entirely at ease. The strict rules Batman: The Animated Series was under at Fox made for some of the most amazing visual "ideas" that have ever been seen. Example: They couldn't show the murder of Bruce's parents. The nightmarish sequence they were forced to come up with to get around that (Bruce imploring his parents not to enter a dark tunnel, which rips up from the ground to be revealed as the barrel of a pistol which starts to rotate and we see it cock and get ready to fire when Bruce bolts awake) had much more emotional impact than a few shots of a thug firing a gun. I think Bruce Timm doesn't get near enough of the credit for what he has done visually with the animated Batmans. And I think when they are pushed liked this, they do some of their most original stuff. Bottom line is that in America, comics and cartoons are geared for kids. Is this regretable? Yes. But you know what... If you were eight years old and were told you couldn't watch this movie at all, would you be so high-handed about censorship then? Make the film so the future-geeks can enjoy it along side us old folk. Let's just hope they get it all done and on the shelves in December, because I don't know how much longer I can wait...
I STILL REFUSE TO BUY IT! CENSORSHIP SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY by TheExtra	Oct 11th, 2000 08:33:34 AM
Until there is an uncut & unedited DVD of this item I am still not going to spend one thin dime on any Warner Brother Product. Censorship is censorship. It's like saying we're only going to take away part of your rights, tone then down a little. Bullshit. WB is wrong.
BRIT is right ... by cuznjean	Oct 11th, 2000 09:09:07 AM
Technically, this whole thing isn't really censorship, at least not as it pertains to the First Ammendment. If the government were forbidding the film to be released, sold, or screened, that would be censorship. But this film is a property, and the company that owns this property has every right to tinker with it and make changes and cut scenes until they're satisfied that it's a marketable product--no matter how irritating it is to those of us outside of the market they're trying to target. That said, they should realize that young children are not their target audience, that this series has a huge adult following who doesn't want to see a watered down version of this film. If they release an uncensored version, I'll buy both versions. If not, however, I won't buy the kiddie version by itself.
But what I also want to know is ... by cuznjean	Oct 11th, 2000 09:13:13 AM
What are they going to do with the comic adaptation of the movie? I already ordered it from my comic retailer, last time I looked it was still slated to come out this month. Is it also going to be delayed to prevent spoiling the movie? And is it also going to be redone to remove the violent scenes, or will it be a faithful adaptation of the original cut? Also, I can't believe I spelled amendment like that up there ...
To Praetor, re: petition by cuznjean	Oct 11th, 2000 09:15:13 AM
One of the petitions is at savethejoker.org (if that doesn't work try http://randomthought.addr.com/ rtj.html). There are two other petitions which I've linked to from there.
Thank you Cunzjean by Praetor	Oct 11th, 2000 09:20:44 AM
By the way Cerberus the cuts are almost certainly from the flashback sequence. Bearing in mind who gets shot I mean. I am surprised however that other trims have been made. Are the action scenes SO intense?
Censorship? by AlmostHuman	Oct 11th, 2000 09:52:42 AM
I'm not so certain that what is being done to this film can truly be considered censorship. I'm sure that both Dini and Timm can probably attest to many instances during the production of the long run of Batman animated episodes and films when a scene here or there needed to be re-edited to tone down violence or what-not. The difference here is that some of us got a chance to see the project before it's final release. There have probably been so many edits over the years that our reaction to this is probably somewhat laughable to WB. They're probably thinking, "If they only knew how many times edits have taken place in the past without their knowledge." If it's the original production company of any given product that solely makes the decision to change it's product, I don't view it as cesorship. It is too bad, however, that this is being done to the film. I, for one, feel a pit in my stomach over knowing that I may not ever see the fantastic version that everyone is talking about. I am very much relieved, somewhat, to know that Bruce Timm is handling the edits. Warner Brothers, please release an unedited version in some fashion. Please. I have so many friends who were SO EXCITED about the release of this film and now, in light of the changes, seem reluctant to even check it out. From all accounts, this film could have been the very thing that was needed to help bring all of the diehard Batman fans into the Batman Beyond fold that have been resisting the new Batman concept. I have had trouble accepting Terry as Batman and have been very excited to hear statements like, "as far as I'm concerned, Terry IS Batman. He's earned it in ROTJ!" Please give us the chance to see this is it's original version. Don't even give bootleggers a reason to produce a single copy of the uncut film. All of those dollars that people will spend on bootlegs should be yours, WB. All you have to do is make the right decision.
I will buy both versions... by AlmostHuman	Oct 11th, 2000 10:04:15 AM
if they are both released. My kids are also looking forward to this. If an uncut version is only available on DVD, this will be the first DVD to be released that will make me finally buy a DVD player.
First! by Squashua	Oct 11th, 2000 10:21:09 AM
Me me me me me me! I would only buy the Special Edition version. I don't see why they can't just make ONE VERSION and include the cut material as a "deleted scene" extra or include the cut material in a separate path of feed like Terminator 2 and Abyss did.
'BRIT' is NOT right, dammit by cuchulainn	Oct 11th, 2000 10:35:12 AM
Perhaps life in a nation where government-sanctioned censorship is accepted as common practice has diluted his views on this issue. To whom this film is marketed is subjective and irrelevant -- you don't see any 8 year olds writing letters to WB -- nor does anyone have the 'right' to see this film in any version. However, in the United States we enjoy the privelege of seeing, reading, hearing, and saying a great many things of which our global neighbors are deprived. While the First Amendment protects us against any attempts by the government to abuse this privelege, it has always been assumed that such an understanding extends beyond 'official' policy -- to the entertainment industry, for example. It's fairly obvious that the WB has been COERCED, rather than forced, into this course of action by the political machinery of this country, and while it may not be a violation of our Constitutional rights, it's still censorship, and it's still fucked up. Just because it's not illegal doesn't mean it's not WRONG, and while you and your countrymen may be accustomed to this type of nonsense, I am fucking well not.
Incredibly I have the answer (really) by gigolo aunt	Oct 11th, 2000 10:44:37 AM
It seems to me that the real problem here is the timing.WB was all set to release this movie until Washington took aim at them hoping to garner votes.They should just push back the release date until after the elections and no one give a shit anymore.I know I'd be willing to wait.
To gigolo aunt by cuchulainn	Oct 11th, 2000 10:55:38 AM
Hear, hear! You've hit the nail right on the head. Although I would rather see the election delayed until after the release of the movie...
Just hit them where it hurts.... by icedragon	Oct 11th, 2000 11:30:29 AM
There is only 1 way that a big company will listen to it's little customers...hit them in the wallet. I've already killed my preorder on the dvd, yes I'm eating a 3$ deposit but sometimes you have to make a point. I will rent it once it hits my local Hollywood because that way WB will not see a cent of my money and the store will be buying a copy anyway. If this DVD flopps then the people at the top of the project have to answer to somone, and there is enough proof that the customers are not getting what they want on this item. I'll save my $20 and buy something else that's not WB. Here's to the big exec's oo\|o.
say this agin, why not do it on one dvd and use parental control by sonatinas	Oct 11th, 2000 11:37:31 AM
adfasf
Censorship? Well, in a way. by All Thumbs	Oct 11th, 2000 12:02:16 PM
Yes, BRIT and others are right: this movie is the property of the WB and they have every right to edit the movie for their intended target audience. It IS censorship because they are censoring certain parts of the movie so that children can watch it, but it is not censorship in the way that it affects our First Amendment rights. That said, I do think that there are harmful implications that go along with the choice to censor this movie because I honestly believe it would not have been censored if it hadn't been for the recent pressure put on the studios and the rest of the industry. All those people telling me not to freak out about this subject: this is EXACTLY what I was talking about. Gore and Lieberman, or Bush and Chaney even, don't have to make laws to censor the industry, they know if they push hard enough the industry will start regulating itself like crazy. Unfortunately, while the heat is on the studios tend to go overboard and then special interest groups pick up where the politicians left off and we have to deal with it for a longer period of time than the election. Yes, we're going to be hearing more of this as the year goes on and maybe longer.
It's just a shame... by superhero	Oct 11th, 2000 12:03:00 PM
Yes, I've seen it and it was truly an Amazing piece of animation. It's funny because the whole reason I NEVER liked Batman Beyond is because it never had any "bite". It lacked the guts that both versions of the original Batman series had. Now that they give the Beyond stuff some balls they just chop them off again. Man, it's a sad, sad day and I truly have lost the little bit of respect I may have had for Warner Brothers. Timm and Dini can't really be blamed because they don't own Batman and are pumping out a product for their bosses (the REAL scum in my opinion). But it still makes me quite sad that they didn't have the courage to say NO. Of course I don't know the real story behind it so I should just shut up. But lemme tell ya you guys are gonna be missing out. Just realease TWO versions fer chrissakes!!!!!!
I WANT ORIGINAL AND EXTRA CRISPY and some more REAL news by StoneHelper	Oct 11th, 2000 12:16:51 PM
I want the original version. If the new one is better, than I want that one, too. BUT FIRST I WANT THE ORIGINAL. Then I'll look at the other one. Ya know, I noticed that Amazon says the disc will have "Deleted Scenes"...it's been this way since the announcement...interesting.
What you might want to read into it... by Daredevil	Oct 11th, 2000 12:31:25 PM
"It was funny to here one talkbacker refer to WB as 'commie...censors' when in fact they're are western money grabbing capitalist censors"....What the guy probably means by calling them commie censors is that most of the pressure for censorship in the U.S. comes from liberal politicians. Politicians who are constantly pushing for more government control of our lives, whether it is content of movies, taxes, or guns. That's where the "commie" comment comes in: excessive goverment control. Not that it matters to you, being from Britain, but that's probably the biggest underlying issue in the Republican/Democrat race this year. The Democrats are wanting more government control, while the Republicans want to let the people have more control over things like where their taxes go and how their social security is invested. And that includes allowing parents the right to decide what their children watch rather than having the government censor them. That's why I laughed when I heard the Australian man (I believe his name was "Harry from Sydney") mention that it was the "Super religious right wingers" that were up over censorship. Sure, some are. But the vast majority comes from liberals who don't trust the public enough to raise their own children. And I laughed even harder when he tried to blame any of it on our "ridiculously lax gun laws". Considering that we have at least 200% stricter gun laws now than we did 20 or 30 years ago, but we also have at least 200% more gun crime now. If that doesn't tell you it has nothing to do with the availability of guns and the strictness of the laws.... Blaming guns is just as stupid as blaming violent movies. Just to let you know, I saw movies much more violent than Batman cartoons when I was a kid and there was a loaded gun in my parents bedroom my entire life, but I never once even THOUGHT of touching it without permission, let alone using it in a way I saw on a movie. It just depends on how you're raised................. As for The Return of the Joker, If given the choice, I'll buy the uncut version. But WB will most likely put out both versions. Because they know if they only put out one version, they're going to be alienating a lot of people on either end of the spectrum who WILL NOT buy the other version. The die hards on this side who absolutely won't buy the watered down G rated version and the overly protective parents who won't buy a movie for their kids if it's NOT G rated.
To Maddmaxxking......... by Praetor	Oct 11th, 2000 12:42:31 PM
Can't really list a SPOILER account for you here, would be unfair to others. However the scene in question relates to a crucial flashback sequence in the film. Follow this link- http://www.toonzone.net/cgi-bi n/wf/wwwthread.cgi?action=list &board=wfbb.archive15&bnum=15& from=index&bg=wfbb, to the 'World's Finest' message board and go down the archive page to a section marked 'Flashback Spoiler' written by NightWing 38116. This gives a blow by blow account of the whole flashback, and will give you an idea of what all this fuss is about. Enjoy!
A sugar-coated way to conceal the BLOODY censorship of BB:ROTJ!! by candyman_boo	Oct 11th, 2000 12:44:57 PM
Paul Dini is a great guy. Has had my respect, will always. But I am NOT pleased to see him pleased at the re-cuts. How can the originals be surpassed by some shitty re-camps and re-takes ordered by money-hungry suits who want to 'widen' the scope of the films viewing? This is a clear INSULT to all BB fans and movie lovers in general. I highly suggest we take que from Harry and carry on with the protests. Warner Bros. must be screwed at all costs. If we don't make a STAND now then, film-makers like Dini will never attempt another BB:ROTJ again. To all the suits, go fucking make a Sesame Street Movie!!!!!!!
Playing grownup by soylentphil	Oct 11th, 2000 01:24:45 PM
Gang! Like it or not, Dini, Timm, etc. are all involved in a BUSINESS. This was a BUSINESS DECISION. Have any of you read "Batman: Animated"? The studio sent the crew back to the drawing board LOTS of times, because they routinely pushed to see what would get through. That's why the show is as edgy as it is/was - they kept pushing. Occasionally, the execs push back. There's a whole page of "funny" lines from Standards & Practices in the book. Standard MO for as long as Dini, Timm and Co. have been making toons for WB. Really nothing new about it.
The flashback by Chris_Fougere	Oct 11th, 2000 02:11:27 PM
Since I'm the type that like spoilers I went and read the synopsis (the address is in one of the messages above) and am baffled that the scene may be cut for violence and not intensity. Unedited or not I will definately watch it before popping it in and putting the kids in front of it.
Well... by Lev_Harris	Oct 11th, 2000 02:42:50 PM
My kids would most definitely watch the uncensored version. I wouldn't want to rob them of the finer things in life. Oh, and we need a candidate who wants more sex on television. This Hollywood shit is absurd.
What exactly is Dini supposed to say, Harry? by superninja	Oct 11th, 2000 02:52:10 PM
And why did it take you this long to get an answer out of him if he's not just an acquaintence? Or were you sitting on it again? I guess if you were to protect your friendship with Dini, that's fine but that's not much of a favor to the fans of this website who you knew were going into convulsions over the fact that this film was being edited. WB gives Dini his paycheck -- who knows what they're holding over his head?...Maybe oh, say, a live-action Batman Beyond feature film script? Writers get no respect from studios and Mr. Dini's only feature credit is Double Dragon. Just something to think about.
Off on a tangent by TallScott	Oct 11th, 2000 02:52:20 PM
Hey remeber when Bambi's mon got shot..or the heartbreaking scene where dumbo visits his imprisoned mom..or the bare boobies in fantasia..Or the COUNTLESS violent acts in a warner brothers cartoon..Or when the kid had to shoot old yeller..I and countless others watched those scenes when we were children and I think its kinda an insult to the intelect of children that people think its best that we try to keep such things from kids thinking they cannot handle it..I am still not in favor of the cuts to batman beyond but I will settle for a second uncut disk...Oh yeah i still get teary when he has to shoot his best pal Old Yeller
Deac Speaks... Warner Brothers You Just Don't Get It... Do Ya??? by Deacon	Oct 11th, 2000 04:01:47 PM
Warner Brothers i know you can read thgis you ass licking gutless politician's dick sucking whores.... and i just wanna tell you what a mistake you are going to make you WHORES! if you think an average 10 year old watches Batman Beyond and understands whats going on? you are a stupid fucking idiot who came up with the idea for pikachu the movie! now Paul Dini kicks ass ok? he is the ONLY person who has Kept your sorry ass Cartoon station alive!(yeah a bunch of mongaloid retarded short bus riding TIMMAY! yelling kids watch pokemon but they will all die from eating glue eventually... give it another 6 months) Show Paul Dini some fucking respect WB you dick sucking WHORES!!! i have no problem with you WHORES releaseing a siftened up bastardized mongaloid version of Batman Beyond Return Of The Joker... but if you have an ounce of actual un roted brain in your dick sucking head you WILL release a Special Edition/Director's Cut(with a Paul Dini Commantary? i hope so!)of BB:ROTF no more then amonth after the initial bastardized version's release.. on DVD only cause most children don't Buy DVD's and most parents don't buy DVD's for their kids.. like a retarded 9 year old is gonna know the difference in audio and picture quality... he just knows "ooo pretty colors boom it blow up TIMMAY!" so look at the AICN poll.. more then 5000 of us want the real Un-Edited version.. and we're all old enough to vote on that poll(once again i mention the average bastard 9 year old ain';t gonna do nothing but try and eat the keyboard and/or mouse then scream TIMMAY!) so give us what we want... release the director's cut/special edition DVD for whatever price you want... prolly 25 bucks... whats 25 times 5000 WB? get a calculator or better yet call Paul Dini and ask him cause he's the only one of you incredible wonderfucks who has a brain.. and what a brain it is mr. paul dini sir... Paul why don't you just go dowen to WB headquarters with a couple of hookers and get WB tosigna contract mid orgasm? they would give you there souls mid orgasm! i'm a sicky aren't i? Censorship is COMMUNISM! LAND OF THE FREE IS A JOKE THE UNITED STATES RUIN EVERYTHING THEY ARE COMMUNISTS! first the USA media ruins Korn now this..... i'mlucky i live in Canada eh?
What about the Superman EP where the guy gets the electric chair by superninja	Oct 11th, 2000 04:08:57 PM
just as he figures out Superman's secret identity? Doesn't show him getting gassed, but he's strapped in the chair and you hear the sound of the gas being released into the chamber. That aired on Fox Kids. What about the "dream" EP of Batman where Batgirl gets killed? All this was fine six months ago. WB are pandering idiots.
Deac Speaks.. anyone gotta bootleg? i got cash? by Deacon	Oct 11th, 2000 04:15:50 PM
it has become quite obvious that Warner brothers will not release a Special Edition DVD for Batman Beyond Retunr Of The Joker and frankly being the anal retentive person i am i want to see what warner brothers deemed important enough to cut therefore ruining the movie and W@arner's image for many many BatFans for years to come.. so if anyone has a bootleg copy of Batman Beyond Return Of The Joker Promotional Copy UNEDITED please contact me at deaconfrost99@yahoo.com or saiyanvegeta0@yahoo.com i gvot cash!!! see warner brothers? if i am willing to spend my money on a crappy version of the uncut film instead of a visual feast for the eyes version of the Edited film.. how many others will? Warner Brothers has the guts and intelligence of a One Legged Chinese African-American Midget named Winston... no thats cruel.. Winston is much smarter then Warbner Brothers Execs
Wow, Deacon.... take some Ritalin, will ya? by Bregalad_	Oct 11th, 2000 04:29:42 PM
I suggest a double-sized dose.
Why is this not a Feature Story right up front, Harry? by StoneHelper	Oct 11th, 2000 05:17:35 PM
Seems funny that the story appeared twice last week (under different headings, or updated), and yet this story -- the answer we've all been waiting for is pushed to side? Interesting, Fatman, very interesting. And I am very proud of you that you finally made a friend. That's nice that he's not just an acquaintance. Aww, look at the fatman and the Batman boy "breaking bread." Did you leave any for Paul?
Paul's Pentameter... by StoneHelper	Oct 11th, 2000 05:23:36 PM
Harry -- you actually know people who speak in pentameter? Do you know what this means? For all of you wondering where this is coming from...above Harry tells us that Dini had no "hesitancy in his pentameter as he spoke." Jesus Christ... Pentameter... (phone rings) Harry: "Hello, Paul? How is the new Batman Beyond cut coming?" Paul Dini: "I have of late but wherefore I know not lost all my mirth..."
An edit is not censorship (but its not that cool either) by Tall_Boy	Oct 11th, 2000 05:25:59 PM
Just a technicality there. Anyway, when I heard that there were objections to the violence in BB:ROTJ, I had a feeling it would relate to the "flashback" sequence that everyone was talking about, and this sounds like one of the most critical moment in the film itself. Now, the impact of the scene can still remain the same with editing tricks (they got to be pros with that on TAS.) Harry did have a point, some of the best sequences in TAS were structured around these rules. However, on principle, its kinda sucky that they had play around with it anyway. Also, I don't own a DVD player, so that means I wouldn't get to see the unedited sequence too, so that's a kick in the sack. BUT, as someone stated before, as much as we would like it, this is a WB product targeted to a specific audience. In the end, that audience would win out because they are the overwhelming majority compared to fans like us (which is few in comparison). Also, if parents bought this for thier kids unkowning of any sort of more violent content then they thought they were getting into they would be understandably pissed off. Now, I DO think a double release would be the way, to go, and I am still pumped to see the flick regardless of any edit or not. But in the end, we are not the target demographic for this product, so its up to people to make that decision.
Oh, and PS- election year politics suck ass by Tall_Boy	Oct 11th, 2000 05:29:18 PM
'nuff said
by AlmostHuman	Oct 11th, 2000 06:09:52 PM
After reading Deacon's post, I can begin to understand why a company like Warner Brothers would have cause to not care one way or another whether they appease the type of fans on this site or not. If I were an exec at WB and read Deacon's last couple of posts, I would be more prone to say "screw 'em" and not even consider releasing an unedited version. Deacon, you are giving all of us a bad name and lessening our position regarding our objections to ROTJ being edited. Can you convey your feelings without embarassing yourself, pissing off Warner Bros., and alienating everyone else on this board? Give it a try. StoneHelper, the comments you make are nothing but hateful. I object to your harsh words regarding Harry. I don't know Harry personally, but everyone is entitled to a bit of respect. If you can't post without demeaning others, you have no business here.
Lied to again by trainD	Oct 11th, 2000 08:24:28 PM
well at least we still have the japanese
That still bites... by X-Girls	Oct 11th, 2000 08:27:02 PM
that it had to be censored, instead of letting artists do their thing and treating Batman as not-nessarily-kiddie-cartoon-c rud.
I'm actually kinda curious... by JimJim Binks	Oct 11th, 2000 08:42:24 PM
I've seen the movie a few times now. I love it. Its my favorite Batman movie so far. I am curious as to how its going to look when edited though. Chances are I'll watch the edited one if my brother buys it for his kid and I'll buy the uncut one for myself on DVD. I can't wait to hear the commentary on this movie.
Willing to buy screener/bootleg by Regicidal_Maniac	Oct 11th, 2000 08:56:50 PM
Censorship, for whatever reason, whether to protect public or private interests is always wrong and has no place in the creative process. SCREENER WANTED. WILL PAY TOP DOLLAR. Anyone in Sydney (or elsewhere) have an original uncut ROTJ Screener to sell at any price? For that matter, anyone have a good quality bootleg copy to sell at going rate? Email orsonwlles@hotmail.com
in the belfry by jbreen	Oct 11th, 2000 08:58:02 PM
Curious argument this, in some ways. Like many posters here, I tuned into the morning toons at a young age - well, around 7 or so plus - and was rivetted by the whole shebang. These days my nephews - also in the 7 to 9 bracket - are doing the same. They love Batman, and my older nephew was thrilled by 'Mask of the Phantasm' when he watched the copy I bought him. In some ways, then I understand and would appreciate two versions of this film to be released. It is kinda pissweak geek-saddoe behaviour to be all precious about how Batman is 'adult'. That kind of exclusivity just flies in the face of this character's media history. He has been many things. Kids are fans who may not pick up on all the subtexts that we 'sophisticated' adults may enjoy about the Dark Knight, but I can't see why there shouldn't be a watered down version for them to enjoy and thrill and chill over. As long as there is the full on version remains intact and watchable alongside of it. I do have one or two problems with this scenario, nonetheless. It would be nice if Dini and Timm were actively involved with overseeing the business of this softening of their creation (which they don't appear to be). And, if Dini is playing his cards close to his chest on this in order to protect the future franchise and live action film, I can't help but wonder whether this will set a precedent for all of these to be made palatable for kids of all sizes. It would be a weird world to see two of everything released, and I can only imagine the costs of such a venture. If it turns out to be prohibitive, it may be that we only ever see studio exec approved child safe cuts of cartoon character films. Sad thing then, if that's the case.
damn... that should be by Regicidal_Maniac	Oct 11th, 2000 08:59:39 PM
ORSONWELLES@HOTMAIL.COM Stupid Keyboards.
Paul was silenced, but the uncut bootleg is going forward my fri by TheEvilHarvyDent	Oct 11th, 2000 09:04:22 PM
What BS, Paul was forced to say that response people.. he is an artist, does any artist like his work changed?!? Bull shit. As we speak, a RTOJ "underground" group is trying to devise a way to enhance a screener of RTOJ in reproduction. Price? Around 30 bucks, if you are planning to pay more, dont. this one will be the best, wait until you get word from us. You'll here from us within a month.. somewhere.. over the..
Unclfka obviously missed the screening with Paul at comic con, a by TheEvilHarvyDent	Oct 11th, 2000 09:24:50 PM
Unclfka, Paul was very pleased with RTOJ before the hoopla. So, why the change? Hmm... Besides, your argument for "final" cut does not hold, if you had ever saw the screener, the movie was perfect in story and time. This was a fine version of comic to screen, not American Beauty dumb ass. Oh, excuse me. Somebody cut that last line for Unclfka for its not my right nor anyone others to critized american ignorance... "Unclfka". lol.
Deac Speaks... well i do get a little excited... i apologise, yo by Deacon	Oct 11th, 2000 10:35:57 PM
if anyone looked at my past posts i am very calm and oriented but i just LOVE batman beyond and Hate the fact it's getting cancelled but this Movie kinda gave me some helpful calm.. Batman Beyond's Legecy(i don';t think the live action movie will be any good cause i mean duh.. Warner brothers.. wild wild west? batman forever and batman & robin) i just really hate it when Paul Dini gets his best work edited for children by Warner brothers.. if anyone important is reading this(and don't get me wrong you my fellow BatBrothers and Sisters are important to me it's only all of us that can force Warner to realise it's mistake... there is power in masses) anyway if anyone of importance is reading this.. i just want to say that Batman has and always will be the Dark Knight.. he's not like spiderman or superman, he doesn't fight for truth justice and the american way and he doesn't make clever one liner quips and witty puns ... he IS Violent, he is not a child's hero... and the only reason he has become this is because of the 60's adam west Batman show and the old 70's superfriends cartoon... if you read the comics you will find the batman all of his fanslove.. the Dark, gruesome, no fear Batman.. the Batman who strikes Fear into his enemies... the batman who punishes evil the hard way... because in a way he Is Evil... and to edit Batman movies to protect children that don't even realize who the real batman is ...well...is a crime in itself.. although it is business, i must tell you that it is simple business sense to release a Special Edition/Director's Cut of Batman Beyond Return Of The Joker, UNEDITED on Dvd... Why DVD? because 70% of parents who buy movies for their children do not buy them DVD's... mainly because the child has no clue what dolby digital 5.1 or an anamorphic transfer means... plus a kid doesn't know how to operate a DVD... with a vhs tape he puts it in presses play and BOOM it's watchable! so simply release the edited DVD/VHS on december 12th like you intend for the children and adveratise the hell out of it on KidsWB and then release a DVD only Director's Cut/Special Edition with the Edited Footage and make the case a kinda non-child oriented case and have a warning right on the front so no parent would accidentally buy it instead of the edited child one... and there you go! i know i would be willing to wait another month for the UnEdited version instead of never getting it! Warner Brothers it's simple good business sense! if you do what my theory suggests you will be catering to all Batman fans.. those who want the unedited and those who want to protect their children! more money! you saw the AICN polls.. 5000 times 20 equals alot of money! so in retrospect.. i'm sorry for flipping out and everything but come on... you gota admit.. my post was kinda funny.......... TIMMAY
Deac Speaks... commentary anyone? by Deacon	Oct 11th, 2000 10:48:52 PM
how much would it rule if Paul Dini did a commentary? or maybe Timm? Harry i gotta ask you a personal Question... i assume paul Dini is a friend of yourstruthfully right? well i need to know these two things... did he sound depressed or at all strange when saying that the cuts would be good for the film or that he likedthe cuts? cause i think Warner brothers payed him off! i mean as cool as paul Dini is he as well as every human being on this earth has a price.. i don't care who you are or where you are, you got a price... warner probaboly offered him some cash to silence the outcry from the public about this BB:ROTJ issue... i mean idon't want to believe it but it makes perfect sense.. who else would we, the BB fans listen to besides Paul Dini?
Lighten Up People by The Other	Oct 11th, 2000 11:15:42 PM
First off I'd like to say I totally understand why Warner feels the need to do this. What I don't understand is why everyone is accusing the politicians for it. I mean, yes the studios are under closer scrutiny but they know they can't really be forced into anything, and unlike television people actually have to go out and plunk down money for the movie. What I do see is that some Kids WB exec saw the final cut and freaked because there's no way they could ever run that cut on Saturday morning. Why they couldn't release the original cut on video and then edit it for television (like what was done for Transformers: The Movie) is beyond me but it probably makes business sense to them. Most likely this kind of stuff has gone on behind the scenes on the series all the time and we've never heard about it. The only reason we've heard anything about it now is that the re-edit was left so late they had to delay the release. Second, why the f*ck do you people constantly attack Harry? I've sat here and read talkbacks for years and I really don't get it. Just because suddenly he's a big name you start calling him a sell out. Usually I agree with Harry's reviews and his scoops usually come out true. Just because you don't like what he has to say doesn't mean you shoot the messenger. The same with Dini. You people were praising him as a god when you found out he was doing the live-action film. Now he does what the studio wants but keeps control over it and you hate him for doing it. Dini finds the new version acceptable. He says possibly better and I'll take that with a grain of salt. I went and read the Flashback Spoiler and quite frankly I don't know if cutting it will change the movie or not. Even if the gunshot is cut completely and only mentioned, I think the shock value would be just as intense. I sat staring blank at the screen for at least 5 minutes when I read about it. Don't get me wrong, I still want to see the uncut version with that scene intact (God do I ever. Gives me chills thinking about it.) but as long as the event still happens even if it isn't seen I think the substance of the movie will still be there. On a side comment to Brit, I think the others may be right about your point of view. I mean even the 1996 Doctor Who TV movie got censored in ways I really don't understand and which must have made it very confusing for viewers. Batman Beyond isn't for little kids. If you really watch it the writing puts it on a young teen level at best. I think the WB has finally realized that and moved it into a later time slot where older kids are most likely to watch it. Now Warner is considering releasing an uncut version as well as the new version. Instead of bashing them for this why don't you all lighten up and support them. Threatening not to buy the movie at all isn't the way to do this. The best way is to show them they will make money off of a duel release. Whether you like it or not the edited version is coming. That is a fact. If you want the uncut version then just accept that and let Warner know you want both. If you haven't voted in Harry's poll then go do it. Warner doesn't care about your opinion of their movies but they do care about $$$$$$. Let them know its profitable and just maybe they'll do it.
WB's deeds by Pseudonym	Oct 12th, 2000 01:22:07 AM
Now I'm just a casual Batman Beyond fan. I never really dug Terry as Batman, never really dug the flying, never really dug the high-tech batsuit. But when I saw the trailer for Return of the Joker, I got friggin' chills up my spine from that maniacal Mark Hamill laugh. I was jonesin' to see this thing. So, yes, I am pretty ticked off that WB decided to change it. But this is standard movie industry practice. Nearly every movie out there has had scenes cut and/or reshot because the suits didn't approve. Censorship? No. They aren't suppressing free speech. They aren't changing text that speaks out against the government. They aren't changing the movie to pro-USA propaganda. It's a reshoot of stuff they didn't like. We don't like it, but it's not a human rights violation. And as for the "public outcry" about the changed scenes, I hate to break it to some of you, but mucho millions of Americans don't know about it and wouldn't care if they did know. The way things are now, they'd probably agree with toning down the violence. So try not to get so pissed. It's the same exec BS we've all seen perpetrated for years; it's nothing different just because now it's Batman under the editing knife. And cut Dini a little slack. I have faith he'll try to make it up to older fans with the Batman Beyond live action movie he's trying to get done. Bearing this in mind, though, don't stop signing those petitions, just control those acidic tempers from flaring up and pissing off the people that may actually listen to what we have to say. As for me, I don't really plan on seeing it unless they release the original cut.
Oh, Paul Dini's a HACK, now? by Andy Travis	Oct 12th, 2000 03:46:42 AM
That makes sense, from an irrational, type-before-you-think point of view. Before you guys "lose respect" for the guy, just think: if it weren't for him and Timm and ALL THE REST, you wouldn't even have a Batman cartoon at all, not to mention THREE cartoon series. Calm rational opinions, OBSENITY-FREE, earns attention...who knows, you may change a few minds that way...
Hate to Stoke the fires but...... by TallScott	Oct 12th, 2000 04:00:04 AM
I was thinking..Ok WB puts out a couple of the most audiance insulting films called Batman and Robin and Wild Wild West..AND they cant get a new superman movie up and running...AND they droped the ball on getting behind the classic film IRON GIANT.( Remember when it was on HBO..If you blinked you might have missed it)..AND they have the sheer audacity to tamper with Kubrik's Eyes wide Shut..( Think of the movie what you will ...but Kubrick was one of the Kings and they had no right doing that)Now this...This is the last straw for me..I will look at anything with a WB logo on it with distrust from now on...I wish they would quit listening to focus groups,demigraphics and all of that other corprate BS and just put out what we want..Not what they think we want...I think a person(s) there at the house that Jack built needs to find another mode of employment..Oh and if they do put out the unedited version I plead with you talkbackers BUY it dont rent it we need to show them that they need to listen to us
NO!!! IT'S STILL WRONG!!! by Brinn71	Oct 12th, 2000 04:02:01 AM
I want to see it UNCUT!!!! I want the option of what I see!!! I don't want anyne telling me what version I must have. I am paying for it, it should be my decision!!! NOW HEAR THIS!! I WON'T BUY A CUT VERSION!!! YOU WON'T GET MY MONEY!!! I WANT UN-CUT!! TO HELL WITH CENSORSHIP!! Vote for un-cut now!!! On a side note, HBO'S "SPAWN" came out in both edited and non-edited versions....
Paul Dini and bruce Timm are some of the best hollywood has tho by TallScott	Oct 12th, 2000 04:07:56 AM

Buy nothing! just give up on this fanboy crap by sinople	Oct 12th, 2000 08:37:06 AM
Frankly, I'm soooo sick of this crap. I am not a rich fanboy who can buy every version that keeps getting re-released. I jumped on DVD to buy definitive versions and that's it. I refused to buy the barebones editions of Nightmare Before Christmas or Rushmore or the US version of Eyes Wide Shut. Frankly, I'll do the same here.
I'd be intrested in seeing that screener posted to a newsgroup.. by mrobertson	Oct 12th, 2000 09:02:25 AM
Heck I'd even encode it for posting if I had a friend that had a copy!
My view, for what it's worth... by JackBurton	Oct 12th, 2000 09:51:43 AM
Any way you cut it this is a censoring of the original artistic vision by the "suits" upstairs, and as such shouldn't just be allowed to go by without an uproar by the fans who want to see what the artists originally intended to show us. I mean if this is allowed to go unanswered for then what will be next? Artists rights is what it's all about, and I for one want to see the whole uncensored story that Dini and co set out to show us, and until that is possible I won't be seeing any of it. Warner's can keep their watered down pc friendly censored Batman, and further more if they want to email me I'll tell them just where they can shove it.
better story by Scavok	Oct 12th, 2000 09:58:15 AM
I don't mind violence in film as long as in is important to the story. Some times excessive violence will diminish the final product (check out ROBOCOP 2). As a writer with produced work I have learned to let go of certain aspects for a cleaner, more effective storyline. The journey from idea to product has more turns than any viewer knows. I imagine this is a bigger factor than any censorship issue involving the BATMAN BEYOND video. I love all the Batman stuff, but am getting weary myself of some over-extended battles that border on frenetic. The story is more important than any action. It sounds like a good decision was made. I look forward to seeing it.
Spoilers and clips... by Aunty-WB	Oct 12th, 2000 12:14:35 PM
...I've got 'em both! Having seen the original screener, I can honestly say that I don't know how they are going to make the proposed cuts work. (Spoiler to follow) Who shoots and kills Joker? None other than little Robin himself, Tim Drake. How is it done? Very graphically and blatanly with Joker's "bang/flag" gun. How will it be edited to suit the existing storyline? I can't see how; Tim's murder of the Joker is essential to the rest of the plot. If it's changed so that he's no longer the shooter, the rest of the plot will have to be changed, as well. Is this censorship? Of course. Do I agree with it? From an adult POV, I love the story. However, since BB is primarily marketed to kids 6-12yo, (and I've seen the official WB studies that promote this fact)I agree that it should be changed to reflect that. Should the unedited version be released? ABSOLUTELY! In fact, to those who are interested, I will send you a free, QT clip of the controversial scene. I will be doing this in about a week, or so. For those who are interested in getting the clip, email me and I'll send it to you. I should be mailing the clips in about a week or so. Censorship is wrong, but so is marketing violence to children. I applaud WB for recognizing BB'S primary audience is children and shaping the film's content to reflect that. However, the unedited version is a fantastic achievement and an artistic and creative milestone in the Batman legacy. It deserves to be seen! Hopefully they will be making two versions: one for the majority audience of kids and one for the minority audience of us geeks. In the meantime, I'll be sending the uncensored clip to all who respond. FIGHT CENSORSHIP!
Depends on what they edit by Jobriga3	Oct 12th, 2000 01:05:11 PM
I doubt that anyone has problems with the Joker being shot (offscreen, of course) but I could see where they'd have a problem with the scene. *SPOILERAMA TO FOLLOW, STOP READING NOW IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW* After all, the scene involves a child being tortured, brainwashed, and ultimately using a gun on an adult - hardly the type of stuff you want to sell to the same kids who watch Batman: Beyond every Saturday morning. This isn't an adult theme like a death in the family (a la Bambi or Lion King) or a pivotal point in a child's life (a la Old Yeller). This involves a psychopath who kidnaps and tortures a child, and I can see how WB would be nervous about releasing it. I'll wait until I see the final cut before setting any sort of judgment on the editing. *END SPOILER*
cuchulainn...is wrong dammit by Kal	Oct 12th, 2000 02:18:39 PM
Cuch, how can you criticise the UK when US television is so heavily censored it's becoming a sad joke, you can't swear, fuck, take a piss, shit, crack jokes about anything unless it's so watered down even five year olds find it boring. Try watching Uk tv where you'll find totally uncensored nudity, language indeed, real human beings doing real things without a moral message being shoved down your throat every two seconds. There is no originality, nothing. I would think twice before you start spouting your propaganda, it's simple not true and research your facts first.
Deac Speaks... Canadian Television NOT CENSORED... by Deacon	Oct 12th, 2000 05:34:02 PM
yeah.. you know that HBO show The Sopranos? well it's been aired, UN-EDITED in canada.. since we don't get HBO in the great white north it was aired on CTV(canadian television) and this isn';t a cable channel... CTV is THE canadian channel i mean it's normal a normal channel you can get out in the woods with rabbit ears man! and it was aired unedited! i mean nudity every swear word imaginable and violence up the ying yang.. and it wasn't aired at midnight or anything... 7:00pm weeknights! can you believe that? and thats not all! another canuck channel called ShowCase has various softcore porno movies on at 9:00pm weekends! and i'm not talking playboy channel stuff i'm talkin really really nasty "just a wink away from XXX" porno here from europe! all subtitled but thats not what people watch em for! and all the programming on Showcase is un-edited.. the slogan for Showcase is "Television Without Borders" oh and you know how American Psycho was edited for it's american release? it wasn't edited for it's canadian release... in fact theres one scene in the canadian release that wasn't edited(a bit more gruesome then the USA version) so yeah... Canada rocks
Bush Voters by The Other	Oct 12th, 2000 09:45:38 PM
I would just like to say for the record that George W. Bush scares the living shit out of me. You're willing to vote for this man just because he's not talking about "making Hollywood safer for our kids" or whatever the new BS slogan is? Did any of you watch his acceptance speech? It gave everyone I know the same impression... this man should not be in the White House. It caused one woman I know to call the Democratic Party office and ask what she could do to help the Gore campaign. We all know this whole safe Hollywood thing will go away in a couple months just like the ID checking frenzy at movie theaters did this year. Don't throw away 4 years of good leadership because you're pissed off on one issue. It isn't the whole world.
Re: DarkVictory7 by gigolo aunt	Oct 13th, 2000 08:22:38 AM
You will feel bad about the things you say about gay people when you finally come out of the closet.And also,just having an opinion about which pokemon characters are good or not-well thats just pathetic.
sigh by Stark	Oct 13th, 2000 08:42:59 AM
I know it's been said before, but I'll toss it in again if only to help drown out the screaming of those people who think that just because they don't get what they want it must somehow be due to something illegal or immoral or oppressive. Censorship is bad. Evil, even. Fight it where it exists. But script approval is NOT censorship, it is the right of the producing studio and it is a stipulated clause in the legally-binding contracts that all parties agree to at the outset (and no, you the consumer are not considered a party in these matters, regardless of the size of your ego). Furthermore, to start shouting this down as censorship is an act that is itself offensive when viewed in light of the true censorship that does exist in the world. Go do a bit of research and find out about the authors around the world who are not only banned, but actually imprisoned or hiding in fear for their lives because of their writings. And for Christ's sake, grow the hell up. I want to see the un-cut version too, but let's try to keep some perspective here.
The whole series on dvd! by five	Oct 13th, 2000 01:15:55 PM
As long as we have Warner Brothers' attention, how about a request for all of the series episodes on dvd as well?
Episodes on dvd by AlmostHuman	Oct 13th, 2000 02:51:07 PM
I would love to see all of the episodes on dvd also. I was just telling my wife last night how cool it would be if Warner Bros. would do this. They could release them season by season in segments or something similar. I wouldn't even care if they were somewhat expensive, I'd still snap them up. It's pretty clear that the interest in the series exists just from all of the responses in the talkbalks for BBROTJ topics. I would think that WB would sell of ton of these if they would do it. I wouldn't even think that there would be licensing issues either with cartoon network and what-not. Quite a few of the episodes are already available in small collections on vhs, collecting them all on dvd is not much of a stretch. If anyone is reading that works at an appropriate WB dept., this could be a good one to suggest and see if something starts rolling. It's almost a given that the sales would be there for this.
More on dvd episodes by AlmostHuman	Oct 13th, 2000 03:03:11 PM
Sorry to go all "fanboy" on this but just the mere idea of it gets me excited. Just think, the dvds could include sketches and animatics. Creators like Bruce Timm and Paul Dini could record comment tracks on several, key episodes. I would think that a "behind the scenes" documentary based on the Batman:Animated book would also be in order and be a HUGE selling point for the series. Who wouldn't want to see footage of Kevin Conroy or Mark Hamill preparing for and recording dialogue for the show. I already miss the series on WB and am really holding out hope that WB will someday (hopefully sooner than later) release all of the episodes on dvd sets. Gives me chills...in a manly, level headed, non-geeky kind of way. Ahem.
Warner Bros. Execs are Idiots by MockTheKing	Oct 13th, 2000 04:56:19 PM
Don't they realize that they will make a much bigger profit if they release two versions the un cut and edited version. First of all the kids will be able to see the cut version which will make the censors happy and the more mature viewers can see the un cut version. Movies and cartoons don't make kids kill people kids who kill people are jsut plain fucked up period and no censorship is going to change that. People will always hurt other people it's human nature. Granted i'm only 16 but i know what i'm talking about. I'm smarter than the robots they have working as executives over at Warner Bros.
It's just a freakin' Batman cartoon. Seriusly. by bltpdx	Oct 13th, 2000 05:31:06 PM
I never, ever, ever thought I'd say this but lay off of Warner Brothers just a little. (That still sounds weird). First of all, it's not censorship. No amount of complaining can make it censorship. Censorship is when someone makes it illegal to say or write or show something. It's not illegal, because if Dini hadn't signed a contract with WB, he could just go out and distribute it himself-if he had the money. Oh wait, he doesn't have the money? Ok, better find someone willing to give him money. If they put conditions on giving him the money, that's their right. Now, as to whether WB is being stupid: They thought their audience would be kids. No offense, but so would have I. Apparently, they are willing to learn from their mistakes-reference their attention to Harry's poll. When it turns out the audience is actually 35-year-old fanboys, I'm betting they'll make a smart decision and re-release. But it's not stupid to try to get the best return for your money, and assuming Batman cartoons are for kids is not exactly the stupidest thing a corporation has ever done. Brandon 98% ellipsis-free since 1998
Seriously. I meant seriously. by bltpdx	Oct 13th, 2000 05:32:42 PM
And where the hell did my formatting go?
P G ? All this fuss over Pee F'n Gee ????? by RobinP	Oct 14th, 2000 11:25:07 AM
The video releases of Batman Beyond tv episoded in the U.K. are routinrly rated either PG or 12. Stop dorking around and give us the original for cryin' out loud. We're big boys....we can take it !
Censorship? UK? by ricisme	Oct 14th, 2000 12:14:04 PM
More cencorship in UK? Ho ho fucking ho! (For a start - you won't hear that word on CBS, NBC etc!) Get real Cuchulainn! And is there any other country in the world (Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq... perhaps) that doesn't allow topless bathing on it's beaches??? And would any politician DARE to be an atheist (there is no god!). And all this raving about a slight cut in a CARTOON!!! Cencorship my arse! (thats ARSE, rhymes with Farce). Get real boys and... well I guess it is just boys!
Batman Beyond Fiasco by Mi10950655	Oct 14th, 2000 03:42:22 PM
I'm sorry but there is no excuse for this type of decision. There are so many ways to correct this problem that it boggles the mind. I often times wander how people like this get into a position of power and decision-making. I sincerely doubt it is because they actually merit it! For years Hollywood and specifically Warner Bros and Marvel have had the opportunity to rake in millions of dollars by simply utilizing characters which have been around for approximately 60 years. These are characters of myth and popular culture, recognized the world over. A guy named George Lucas recognized the value of characters of myth and legend and went about bringing his vision to the screen. He didn't insult his audience and he recognized that people over the age of 11 years were fans of this genre. (I understand he made a few coins for his efforts.) To the Executives of Warner Brothers, there several thousands of people standing at your gates with hard currency, greenbacks, coin, dough, drachmas, who are willing to fill your coffers for a version of a movie already made! Provide it to them by allowing them to purchase it on-line!! They could go to specific sites and purchase your product. In addition these sites could be used to purchase future products of this type. Some of them would be willing to pay possibly even more money for movies of even superior crafting!!! (i.e. story telling, animation etc.) I offer this information freely. I am a 45 year old physician who just happens to enjoy everything from Assimov to Deny O'Neil to Roddenberry (I believe the latter individual was involved in some such science fiction that made Paramount a few bucks over the past 25 years). This ain't brain surgery!! Take a chance, make a reputation for yourself, be forever known as marketing wizard. Listen to the people who are dying to give you their money! For crying out loud!!
Batman Beyond by Mi10950655	Oct 14th, 2000 03:50:17 PM
By the way where can one go to sign the poll(s). Secondly anyone with information on how to purchase a copy of the original, please e-mail me. That is before it is the hottest selling tape at comic book conventions around the planet! Thanks
Dini's not a d@mn sellout by Kurgen	Oct 14th, 2000 04:45:36 PM
Give Dini a break, I 'm sure he doesn't enjoy being recut, but he's making the best out of a bad situation. I don't know what he wants to do after this, and he may consider leaving WB after this, but he's gotta hang in there and get what he can out of the suits. Quit calling him a sellout, dorks.
Warners and censorship by Afro_Dogwhelk	Oct 14th, 2000 08:57:49 PM
Some commented about how films are cut everyday because they are too long etc. Fair enough, but the studio eventually gets to a final cut. The public are then allowed to see it. It's when they cut it after this that it becomes fucked up - knowing that their is a longer, original version out there. For example, I live in Britain, and here the censors said that The Matrix could be passed uncut if it was given an 18 certificate. Nope, Warners didn't want that, so it was passed as 15 with all the headbutts removed. (hence, why we buy imported R1 DVDs). Come on, can a 15 year old not see a headbutt in a film without walking out of the theater and 'nutting the first person he sees?? Even Mulan was cut in this country because of a headbutt! We can't even see a fucking Disney film without it being cut! So fuck Warners and fuck the BBFC.
Batman is an American Folk Hero by DaveGoliath	Oct 14th, 2000 09:03:40 PM
If there was an original director's cut in addition to the kids version, I would buy it too. The soft version for kids is a good idea, tho, but the Joker needs some darkness. Phantasm was great!! I'm a true fan - see my batvan at secondcomm.com/batwebsite/batv an.htm and it will give me credibility! or prove I'm crazy!!
interested in finding out more about the unedited bootlegs? by returnofthejoker	Oct 14th, 2000 10:50:00 PM
If you do not work with or for the MPAA, a law firm, or any division of the government or Warner Brothers, email returnofthejoker@hotmail.com
To returnofthejoker by Sim_Ronin	Oct 15th, 2000 10:32:06 PM
Your homail address doesn't work.
Another attempt to have somebody do the thinking for YOU.... by Octagon Fess	Oct 15th, 2000 11:04:35 PM
What this all comes down to is the fact that someone down the line at Warner Bros. saw the final cut of Batman Beyond "Return of the Joker" and something in it bothered them personally. So much so that they thought that people, consumers, who pay good money to see great entertainment would naturally feel the same way as them. Well I have news for you Warner Bros. WE DON'T. I'm so tired of hearing too violent, disturbing, not for children...well you MUST have read the script before you greenlighted this project?? What the hell were you expecting then?? I for one can decide for myself what I find too violent or disturbing. If your THAT worried that some little kid who's not smart enough (through inept parenting) to know that you can't dress up as a Bat and start punching people in the head then put a PARENTAL LOCK on the DVD, and let people who truly appeciate what Bruce Timm and Paul Dini have created to enjoy it in it's entirety. I have enjoyed the programs your network has aired over the years, Those primarily bieng Batman and Superman as well as Batman Beyond, And have enjoyed how pure the translation is from the source material it's been adapted from. But please...don't start thinking for your consumers..it makes for very bad business as I'm sure you can all see from Harrys site. My advice is to take whoever has been complaining about excessive violence and transfer them over to a much safer network where they can feel nice and safe and warm and have somebody do all the thinking for thier simply minds. Here's hoping that we'll see the version that the Creators intented, my fingers are crossed.
Screeners recalled by norrinradd76	Oct 16th, 2000 12:24:12 AM
I was going to get a look at a screener copy this weekend, but unfortunately my contact informed me that the screener he had access to had been recalled by Warner Bros. Makes you wonder if they have been reading all the talkback requesting copies of the screeners. HMMMM
batman beyond by HomegaMan	Oct 16th, 2000 06:48:13 AM
If you live in New York you can get a bootleg copy of the film from the street vendors on 34th street. Not only was my copy decent but it was the directors cut. Look for them before they're gone
bootleg batman beyond by Scavok	Oct 16th, 2000 10:13:21 AM
Homegaman in the above message suggested buying a bootleg copy of the Batman Beyond video... Need I even say - NEVER NEVER NEVER buy a bootleg copy of ANYTHING - in buying bootleg copies you are insulting the people who do the work, the writers, the creators - you are biting the hand that feeds you. That goes for ANY movie, CD... who do you think gets the money? Certainly not the artists - and they don't get paid enough as it is. Never do it. VERY UNCOOL.
BB:ROTJ info!! by The Man with the	Oct 16th, 2000 09:26:33 PM
Stick it the WB where it hurts 'em the most... Wanna know how? Email me at sliderboy@hotmail.com for info...
bootlegs and why the studio are stoopid by darke	Oct 17th, 2000 05:10:48 AM
simple fact, already there are booitlegs of the original screener of the film, not complete and not as the studio ever wanted the fucking thing seen. And people are paying big money for them... can't the studio see what they are doing, by changing the film, or at least not making multiple versions available they are losing money. shit that was pretty obvious from the start, but now that the bootlegs are happening its even worse. there's just a thought for you.... darkeness is calling you.
I have what you want! by The Man with the	Oct 17th, 2000 03:52:50 PM
Email for info BBReturnoftheguy@hotmail.com
Not going bother by DMS01	Oct 17th, 2000 07:23:29 PM
Paul is trying to get his creation off, it will look bad for him if he put down WB for censoring his film. Likely ness of seeing a special edition of the film. WB and other American film companies seem to be slaves to the polically correct and special intrests groups. I'll stick to anime for my cartoon action. Least they're not bound by idots who are worried about the numbers. I'm not going watch anything thats been butcherd due to stupidy. If they're going to release a uncensored one, i'd get it. Nothing else.
Art Institute of Seattle Student speaks up... by Brave77Heart	Oct 18th, 2000 12:33:46 PM
There's a couple of thing that the WB has to realize that just as Harry has pointed out they would GAIN more money if they made TWO versions just due to the amount of people that want the original and then the people who would want to see both. Like me. Take for instance Dragon Ball Z. They got smart and started making both verions due to the amount of people who wanted to see the episodes as they truly were. OR the ever popular cartoon Spawn series that is shown on HBO. They made TWO verions so that kids could see it. IT can go both ways. It's simple dollar signs. Another thing is, let us parents/gardians do OUR job. It's not YOUR right to tone it down. I'll watch it when my son goes to bed and then make a decision if I should let him watch it or not. (That's one thing that is ticking me off about Bush's views on the whole "keeping hollywood safe" crud. It's up to us as parents to teach our kids what's right and what's wrong. Don't go blaiming Hollywood. The parent is with there child from the day there born...A hollywood director is not. So keep it seperate and let us adults make the decisions for our loved ones. As for the other stuff. Let's put it this way. In the last two years I have spent a little over $3,000 dollars on Dragon Ball Z (cut and uncut versions.) WB can either get a piece of that money from parents like me who will pay for both verions (for me and my son) and they will get money from other adults and kids due to having both verions. IF it comes down to a dollar sign this seems to be the most resonable. Please don't cheat us. My son and I have both been looking forward to seeing this. And I know when he is old enough (if it's really as bad as you say) he will appriciate being able to see the uncut verions also. Thank you for your time. IF you have any further questions or answer to my inquires please write me at RnLnWr@aol.com Thanx
a sad day for us all by motool	Oct 26th, 2000 05:37:51 PM
Like most Batman fans I am truly saddened by the WB's decision to re-edit "Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker." I have enjoyed Paul Dini's vision of the Dark Knight because of the quality of the stories, the maturity of the issues addressed, the excitement of the battles, and especially for the pathos, tragedy, and integrity that he has emphasized in Bruce Wayne/Batman's character. This series has been so successful because the stories work on so many levels that can engage both adults and children. I have tremendous faith in the quality of the story-telling and an artistry of Dini and the entire creative team. I have also thoroughly enjoyed Batman Beyond and have had several conversations with fellow fans trying to guess what happened to other characters from the Batman universe, such as the new Robin and Nightwing, and to Bruce Wayne in the interim. My love for the series and interest in the characters only makes the WB's decision more upsetting. While certain scenes may be rather violent, I agree with so many other fans that these scenes should remain in the film. These scenes are purposeful. There are no throw-away scenes in the television episodes or in the earlier animated features. Based on this record I do not believe that the writers and animators would have included meaningless, gratuitous violence. I presume that they have included the scenes in order to address the effects that violence can have on the characters in the film and their society, as they have so brilliantly addressed before. Cutting scenes and changing angles can only lessen the affects that the creators had originally hoped to achieve. I would therefore like to add myself to the growing number of people willing to buy both versions of Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker. While I would prefer to see only the original version, I do want to see the movie as originally envisioned and thus would be willing to spend the extra money should the original cut be separately released.
What is WB thinking? by bluedevilnight	Oct 29th, 2000 07:19:32 PM
I sincerely hope that WB comes to their senses and releases Batman Beyond:ROTJ in an unedited form. Not only will they be alienating the fans of the show but they will be depriving themselves from profits. I can't possibly see how backlash from violent content in ROTJ would be that incredible as to offset the upshots. WB, do the right thing and release two versions. I put up a webpage that has links and info regarding the status of Batman Beyond: ROTJ. Let's get everyone to e-mail and write in and sign those petitions!!! http://www.geocities.com/clare nce_e_lai/batman_beyond/batman _beyond.html
Batman Beyond screenplay question (SPOILER) by zyuray	Oct 31st, 2000 10:58:30 AM
I got my hands on the screenplay for ROTJ. I'm trying to figure out whether this is for the original version or if it is the rewrite. In all the spoilers I have read, none have mentioned this particular plot point - while in Joker's captivity, Tim has a chip implanted into his head with Joker's consciousness. This chip transforms him, physically and mentally, into the new Joker. Now what I want to know is, was this the plot of the original version, or did Tim become the new Joker on his own demented accord? This chip thing seems really cheesy, so I am thinking that maybe this is from the cleaned up version, so as to not portray Tim as a twisted psycho who betrays his former mentor. So for anyone who has seen the original, is this what happens?
An injustice greater than Gotham ever faced by GreenDog	Dec 13th, 2000 01:08:12 AM
When I first heard about the release of Return of the Joker, I couldn't have been more excited. I own all the previously released animated Batman movies, and I was looking forward to what could have been the crown jewel of the animated fils. After watching it tonight, I was very disappointed. Not with the story, which was great, but the edits ( which I have compared from IGN.com ) have all but removed the drama from this movie. The mood of the film stays sedated, missing something to make it fully click. The scenes ( far more than just a gunshot ) and dialogue that have been cut are, in my opinion, EXACTLY what is needed to make this movie the creative vision it was meant to be. I implore the people in charge of a DVD release to release the unedited version. I am sure I am not alone when I say I will glady buy the unedited DVD the moment I see it, even though I already own the edited VHS. The polls speak for themselves, and an edited DVD release could never hope to garner the amount of profit an uncut version would because this is what we want, the innumerable Batman fans who support the franchise. PLEASE RELEASE THE UNCUT DVD!
Batman: Beyond Special Edition by Atom175	Dec 19th, 2000 12:31:29 PM
Alrighty, so BB:ROTJ has been edited. I don't mind, I bought the film anyway, but after seeing it and checking out what was deleted, I am very interested in an uncut version. Harry, since you said that the WB will listen to our tiny voices, I want to add my 2-cents worth. Makin a film is about two things, entertainment and money, and lots of it too. The WB, knowing that Batman Beyond's target audience is children (It's on KIDS WB for crying out loud!!), and I believe they made the correct move in editing the film. I don't want my little brother whatching the Joker torture Robin. Thats nightmare material for kids folks and bad biz for the WB. However, since Batman is a multigenerational icon, appealing to all ages, I do believe that it would be in the WB's best interest to release an uncut version for the older fans. I mean, come on, over 5,000 people wanting an uncut version and 3,000 people wanting both versions? I did the math for ya'll. 5,000 people wanting an uncut $25 movie/DVD =$125,000 for WB. 3,000 people wanting both versions ($50 for both)= $150,000. Thats a combined total of $275,000, over a quarter million!!! Not to mention others who will hear about it through word of mouth and advertising. This is a gooooooood profit for something that they could whip up within a week and package it for under $10. WB, if you here this, if you want to make an additional half-million, why don't you go ahead and put out an uncut version with a MPAA rating on it so that parents can decern which version is best for their kids, and silence all of those outraged fans. Thanks for listening. Atom

Talkbacks

Paul Dini Talks About The Whole BATMAN BEYOND: RETURN OF THE JOKER fiasco

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks