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

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.

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".

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

@mrbojangles25:

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.

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

Didn't belong there in the first place.

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.

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

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

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.

That's how Hitler started!

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.

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.

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?

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

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

@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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

@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.

@ezekiel43:

What's the problem?

Edit: Just watched the 25 sec clip.

So what's the problem?

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.

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

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.

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.

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

Yea, the edits he had no right to make.

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

@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.

LOL

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.

Pc garbage is getting old.

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!".

@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)?