OT(sort of).... TCM hypocrisy continues....

I just remembered that in the late '80's airlines were provided edited films. I don't know if by the studio or the airline. My boss had seen a film in the theater, then on a plane with his son the film was shown edited. My boss commented it was just as good with the profanity dubbed out with darns and such. All the same, there are organizations doing preservation and films re-released as director's cut and modified films seems contrary to preservations. Remember the uproar when Ted okayed colorizing films?

In the case of THE FRENCH CONNECTION, editing out that sequence eliminates a positive point-it could have been anybody. I thought cable stations weren't subject to the codes of the networks.

TCM can't edit a film since that would be illegal.   Thus, TCM leased a film that was edited by those with the legal rights to do so.

Bing has a sound understanding of what is going on, which is:

Should TCM lease a film that has been edited (assuming the leaseholder doesn't have an unedited version to lease), OR should TCM just not show the film unless it is the original version? 

This is obviously a complex topic. (Sorry I may be repeating points that have already been made.)

1. Do the business owners of a work of art have the right to modify that work?

The recent debate about the modifications made to the Roald Dahl books brought this to the fore.

In the Roald Dahl case they have decided to publish 2 versions of the books, with and without the changes.

For The French Connection, the original version still exists on DVD and Blu-Ray, but Fox (Disney) seems to only be providing the edited version for broadcast.

A more silly example, but George Lucas has tinkered with the original set of Star Wars films when they were re-released for theaters and for sale in different forms. Did Han Solo shoot first?  Is an authorized director change different from a studio change?  (Thanks James for the Mata Hari example.)
3. Are there other films that TCM has shown where the word is used?

For more recent films (made after the use of the production code changed in the 60’s), the most likely cases would be for Spike Lee films and Tarantino films.

TCM has shown Do the Right Thing. The owners of the rights to this film have not changed it.


4. Should TCM keep track of changes that the rights owners have made to the films? Is it censorship if the rights holders make the changes?
A grey-area case I can cite is the movie Marty. There is an ‘extra scene’ where Clara returns home after her first date with Marty and talks to her parents about what happened and we learn of her hopes for the future. There are versions of this film with and without this scene. For many years TCM showed the version with the extra scene. Then it went away for awhile. In the most recent showing the scene was included again.

This is not TCM’s decision as to what is included. They are merely going along with whatever version is being provided to them as part of the leasing process.

In general there would be cases of “Is this restoration, or is this editing?”

So far TCM has chosen in general not to give any information about film edits or other content prior to showing a film, unless the hosts happen to mention something.  But you can imagine how much work this would be for the channel to specifically track, at a time where they are most interested in cutting costs and not adding to them.  From a simplicity and cost perspective, it is in their interest to not go down that slope.