Suppose you could buy a filter attachment for your DVD player that would edit out any movie reference to Latinos? Say your family watches only blue-eyed blond characters.
It would be immoral. But would it be illegal?
Digital technology makes the what-if possible.
An evenhanded documentary from AMC and ABC News lets filmmakers and film sanitizers have their say. “Bleep: Censoring Hollywood?’ premieres Tuesday at 8 p.m. on AMC. It’s less titillating than the title.
The overview begins with a Colorado Springs company, CleanFlicks, that fills orders from around the country, sanitizing major motion pictures to suit its customers. The company markets its services as a “family-friendly’ way to purge Hollywood movies of sex, violence and profanity.
In 2002 CleanFlicks filed suit in Denver against 16 Hollywood directors. The Directors Guild of America countersued Clean Flicks and 10 other companies for violating copyright law. Now Congress has joined the fray with the proposed Family Movie Act.
Both sides have compelling arguments.
In an interview, Clean Flicks owner Ray Lines says his business was born when several friends asked him to edit Kate Winslet’s nude scene out of their DVD copies of “Titanic.’ Suddenly, he found himself in the movie business.
Filmmakers already endure cuts from their films for showings on airplanes and on network television. Why can’t they let families enjoy edited renditions of their movies at home?
Another company edits out any reference to homosexuality, the words “God’ or “Jesus Christ’ when used in a profane way, along with other content. Electronic tagging technology makes the filtering process easy.
A number of notable film directors blast the sanitizing of movies as offensive as well as illegal.
Third-party editing, the directors say, goes against the freedom of expression guaranteed in the First Amendment. Besides, it is a violation of their artistic integrity. Some films are made for adults and simply are not meant to be screened by families with children, they contend.
“Saving Private Ryan’ is among the films trimmed by those who prefer a less disturbing viewing experience. Gruesome sights in the first half- hour (a soldier screams “Mommy’ as his guts spill out) were deleted by a film sanitizer who found them potentially unnerving to families.
“It was supposed to be upsetting!’ protests director-producer Marshall Herskovitz, taking the artists’ point of view.
For their part, the sanitizers give each customer a copy of the original DVD along with the toned-down one, as a way of ensuring that they are acting within the bounds of “fair use’ in copyright law. Nobody is losing money, the smut fighters say. They claim their own First Amendment right to edit movies.
Hollywood contends it’s less about money than integrity.
But even the esteemed directors in this documentary – Michael Apted (the “7 Up’ documentary series) and Taylor Hackford (“Ray’) among them – would admit other forms of creative editing, like parody, are protected under the law.
These days, as everyone becomes an at-home editor, control is shifting from the studios to the masses. One argument in favor of the sanitizers suggests that, if the government can’t dictate what people watch in the privacy of their own home, then the Directors Guild can’t, either. Anyone with a computer editing program can create his or her own “final cut.’ Amateurs can share files in cyberspace and let the world judge their filmmaking or film-altering ability.
Legal scholars and lawmakers debate this issue – the protection of intellectual property in the digital age is an emerging field – and the very definition of what a movie is may change in the process. In an age when fans can attach an alternate ending, wipe out a sex scene or skip the gore, every DVD becomes a rough draft.
Just as unauthorized music remixes became the rage in nightclubs a generation ago, now movie re-edits are becoming cheaper and easier to do. And there’s no going back.
TV critic Joanne Ostrow can be reached at 303-820-1830 or jostrow@denverpost.com.
