Couldn't the original creators have prevented it from being published in this way? A German children's book author originally refused US publication of her "find-things-in-this-book's-images" book when she was supposed to edit two things in this scene:
(one is more easily visible, but bonus points if you spot the second)
and apparently also cigarettes or tobacco pipes in others. Eventually there was a publisher who was willing to publish it as-was.
(And yes, I'm aware that this isn't the same as erasing the existence of gay people, particularly in a movie that is about a group of gay people, and I don't mean to equate the two. Just wondering how no one noticed this or if someone with authority over it could have prevented it.)
Not really. Creators are never-to-rarely sole owners of film rights. Distribution rights are an entirely separate entity and theatrical and home viewing rights aren't always the same contract. It's not like every cover of the DVD or poster gets the personal look over and go-ahead from the director. Not unless they're self-distributing.
The director actually said he was okay with it, because he wants the story to be seen by everyone. I think he's overestimating how long bigots will leave the DVD running once they realize what it's about.
(one is more easily visible, but bonus points if you spot the second)
and apparently also cigarettes or tobacco pipes in others. Eventually there was a publisher who was willing to publish it as-was.
(And yes, I'm aware that this isn't the same as erasing the existence of gay people, particularly in a movie that is about a group of gay people, and I don't mean to equate the two. Just wondering how no one noticed this or if someone with authority over it could have prevented it.)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment