Changing the guns in ET

[thedamndest]

For the 20th anniversary DVD version of E.T., Spielberg digitally changed the federal agents' shotguns into walkie-talkies (old news). Do you agree with this change? Director's cuts are occasionally released of films, but they usually have more to do with the director's vision not meshing with the changes the studio asked (forced) him to make in order to release the film. In this instance, the gun to talkie is more indicative of a changing political climate as guns were blamed for every problem America ever had (not to mention to release a family friendly DVD). It seems like a subtle change, but why would the federal agents be running up to this alien they are hunting with walkies? By keeping it guns you keep in the context of man's (institutionalized especially, not so much the family unit) threat to this harmless creature. Off the top of my head I am thinking of the scene where they seal up Elliot's house and the hospital scene.

What do you think? Harmless change? Should he have left it as it was?

[Jeritron]

I don't mind it since he realizes it's a kid movie and he has some beliefs regarding the subject. If it personally bothered him as a father and what not, to have guns in a movie he knows is watched by kids forever, then I'm more than fine with the change. It's not major.

I do however prefer the normal cut of the movie. I'm glad that it's included in all its glory on the dvd I have, which is how it should be. So that's fine.
Since both versions are presented, and the change is rooted in something that bothers him on a moral level rather than a creative one, it's no problem whatsoever.
It's a few of the other shots added or changed in the director's cut that piss me off.

[thedamndest]

That is pretty much the reconciliation I have arrived at, that from a critical point of view I prefer the original cut, but I can tolerate this for the purposes of the changing needs of the younger audience. What else is changed in the cut you have?

[Savio]

guns = always better

[Savio]

oh and pics?

[Jeritron]

That is pretty much the reconciliation I have arrived at, that from a critical point of view I prefer the original cut, but I can tolerate this for the purposes of the changing needs of the younger audience. What else is changed in the cut you have?

Theres just a few shots of a CG E.T added. Pretty much pointless and stupid.

I only use the disc with the theatrical cut on it.

[thedamndest]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/ET1982.jpg

If that ever fails to load, it's on wikipedia.

[Fox]

it's not like they're pointing the guns at the kids. I think its just another example of Spielberg losing his balls. i mean, he raped Indy, guys.

[Destor]

I think both versions should have been released so the parents could decide for their own children.

[Lock Jaw]

Yup.

E.T.: Guns Edition

E.T.: Soccer Mom Edition

[Jeritron]

I think both versions should have been released so the parents could decide for their own children.


They were. They're both in the same set as well. Theres the special edition and theatrical on the dvd.

[thedamndest]

I just watched the Harrison Ford ending of ET. So glad that isn't the ending.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs8PxiYT8Z0
Wasn't embeddable.

[Destor]

They were. They're both in the same set as well. Theres the special edition and theatrical on the dvd.
Then I have no gripe with this.

[Jeritron]

Thats my stance as well.

I also don't even know if I, or most people, would have even fuckin noticed that if it weren't for fanboys who claim to hate Spielberg and Lucas (despite the amount of entertainment we've gotten from them) discussing it to death. It became pretty blown out of proportion along with some other things.
If anything, I'm more against the addition of lame CG shots, and thats why I watch the theatrical instead.

[Destor]

Star Wars the Special Edition is better than the theatrical release.

[Jeritron]

Some of those effects shot are seriously helpful. I judge each change for what it is. Very few, if any of them effect the story or film itself. They only enhance it visually, and that's what the films are meant to do, immerse you visually in the universe.

I think changing Boba Fett's voice, or changing the Jabba's palace musical are awful. Along with a few other things.

But, I think the added effects shots to the end space battle, changing the Emperor's hologram to the correct actor, and showing other planets celbrating with a heavier score at the end of Jedi are all vast improvements.
Cleaning up the boxes around ships, or making the lightsabers brighter and less shaky is excellent as well.

I'm not for change as a whole, or against change as a whole. I judge them case to case. Normally, I'd prefer them to be minimal.

[thedamndest]

It's an interesting change. Twenty years isn't that much, especially if you consider how long guns have been around. In 1982 guns were all over Saturday morning cartoons. Now you get Pokemon, Rugrats, Doug, etc. No guns. Which is probably good for kids, and it probably better for the sake of watching a family friendly DVD that the guns are removed (not that it's a HUGE deal because they aren't necessarily pointed at Elliot and they aren't even fired). It's just an interesting change to make in terms of what a difference twenty years can make.

Also, I watched the Harrison Ford thing again and I'm pretty sure it was two scenes meshed together. Makes more sense now.

[Fox]

I watched the Special Edition of A New Hope the other day. Obi-Wan's lightsaber still looks like a plastic light bulb. I really don't see how they missed it.

[Savio]

It's an interesting change. Twenty years isn't that much, especially if you consider how long guns have been around. In 1982 guns were all over Saturday morning cartoons. Now you get Pokemon, Rugrats, Doug, etc. No guns. I doubt Doug would have the balls to hold a gun. As for Rugrats, maybe Phil but definetly not lil