?

Log in

No account? Create an account
dirty words are funnier than normal words - here is where i live

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> <3

me!
contact info
writing/art journal
flickr
youtube
last.fm
social networking and potential boning
okcupid
myspace
facebook

July 10th, 2001


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
03:14 am - dirty words are funnier than normal words
so i forgot to mention last nite.. saturday nite, watching private parts at tony's house. now, it was being played on usa, so obviously they had to bleep out some bits of the movie. have you all seen the 'made for tv' version? it's interesting, stern decided that rather than just have the naughty bits snipped, he would occasionally stroll out in front of the (paused) scene, and explain why it coudln't be shown. that's all well and good (and more often than not, quite amusing) so good for him. but some of the things that had to be blipped leave me very confused-
going in no particular order, cuz i don't remember hte order.. at one point, he's interviewing a lady on the radio who is a 'performer'. to demonstrate her skill, she eats a sausage. as in, a nice sausage you can buy at the supermarket. as in, not actually eats it, but slides it in and out of her mouth. except that on tv, it shows her holding the sausage, she says she's going to eat it, moves it towards her mouth, adn then she proceeds to put a sausage-shaped-and-colored blurry blob into her mouth. now admittedly, she's eating this sausage very sluttily, but for gods sake, she's EATING A SAUSAGE. there's no sex going on, there's nothing dirty - unless they're no longer allowed to even suggest sex (which judging from the rest of the movie, is not a problem), or maybe not allowed to show people eating food - there's no swearing or nudity or anything. and it's blatantly obvious what's being covered up. so what do they expect to achieve from blurring the sausage? so anyway, after the scene, stern comes out to explain to the audience (with visual aids, no less!). something to the effect of "in case you didn't catch that, she put hte sausage into her mouth" and points to a picture (hand drawn - badly) of a sausage, and a picture of a woman with an open mouth, with an arrow going from the sausage to the mouth.
so let's recap, shall we: the censors have no problem with us seeing the sausage, as it was shown up until entering her mouth. they have no problem wiht us seeing anything in that scene other than the fellated sausage. they have no problem with anything said. they have no problem with it being explained to us what's going on. i don't see what is being accomplished by this.
another example: at one point, stern makes a prayer. i forget exactly what the prayer was, but it went "jesus christ, [blah blah gimme something]". and the almighty tv censors decided they needed to bleep out jesus christ. !!! since when is that a dirty word?! what the shit is the problem? the rest of the prayer was left in. it was probably mildly dirty, i forget, but nothing offensive. but apparently "jesus christ" (not taking his name in vain or anything, mind you, but making a prayer. a stupid prayer, but a prayer) is now not allowed. i have never heard that bleeped on tv before, and i'm still confused.
one thing i'll give them, they did unintentionally make one scene much funnier. when stern is being chewed out for being dirty on the radio, all his bosses are telling him what he can't do on the air. one of the suits says the list of dirty words you can't say on radio, which on tv are heard as bleep bleep bleep and bleep.
really, all in all, the whole thing proved the point of hte movie much better than the movie by itself could've. so kudos to them.
oh, and they left in an unbleeped 'fuck'. oops.
state: rant rant rant
np: papa roach - dead cell

(26 shots upside the head | en garde!)

Comments:


From:ex_rainking878
Date:July 10th, 2001 02:24 am (UTC)
(Link)
only in america, my friend. we get all the shit uncensored here in holland. i think our government thinks of us as intelligent human beings who can make their own decision on what we want to see and what we don't.

in the usa on the other hand, the government thinks you're brainless creatures who go rent a random video (without looking at the cover, cuz duh brainless people can't read), and get shocked when they see someone eating a sausage.
silliest thing i ever heard...

it's so shtooopied that you can't show people making love on tv, but you can show how to shoot somebody's head of (or other body parts).
i agree with the guys behind the "urban chaos" game: ban guns, not games. fuck cen***ship.

ok. enough rambling.. hehe. sorry, i got carried away there. :)
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 12:06 pm (UTC)
(Link)
no no, they don't think everyone in the usa is brainless (well yeah they do, but not based on this example). they think the children are brainless and must be protected from smut.
this is censored stuff on tv, if we'd rented it it woudln't be censored, that'd be the real version.
as i'd always heard it, europe leaves sex as is, but censors violence instead - kinda the opposite of the usa. is that right?
fuck cen***ship indeed!
don't be sorry, i encourage rambling =)
From:ex_rainking878
Date:July 10th, 2001 02:48 pm (UTC)
(Link)
for as far as i know they don't censor anything in holland. maybe in the uk though. they were the only country that banned the michael jackson song "dirty diana" (for as far as i know). george michael's "i want your sex" was released as "i want your love" there. it's pathetic.

but holland is the country where everything is allowed (gay weddings, euthanasia, soft drugs), so censoring movies would be kind of hypocrite.
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 10th, 2001 04:33 am (UTC)
(Link)
how can you badly draw a sausage? I mean, come on, people, its a sausage. not that difficult.

fellated sausage WBAGNFAB (would be a good name for a band for those weird non-dave barry folks)
m
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 12:02 pm (UTC)
(Link)
these weren't exactly artistic renderings, it was meant to be crappily cartoonish.
shouldn't that be WBAGNFARB? it's gotta be a rock band, yo
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 10th, 2001 01:19 pm (UTC)
(Link)
it doesn't HAVE to be, althoguh thats the usual...
m
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 01:38 pm (UTC)
(Link)
without rock in there, it just doesn't roll off the tongue so well
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 10th, 2001 02:49 pm (UTC)
(Link)
maybe for you. but the world is not tailored to your whims, HAHA!
m
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 08:29 pm (UTC)
(Link)
maybe not, but it SHOULD be. i'm just doing my part to help it along
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 04:46 am (UTC)
(Link)
maybe it shouldn't be subject to the whims of someone who refuses to entertain me on AIM while I'm waiting for someone here to have some work for me.
m
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 11th, 2001 10:47 am (UTC)
(Link)
you realize i have absolutely zero sympathy for you, right? you're being paid to go online all day, revel in it!
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 11:38 am (UTC)
(Link)
yeah, but the internet gets boring after you've poured over every single website several times.
m
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 11th, 2001 12:24 pm (UTC)
(Link)
now now, i'm sure there are 1 or 2 sites left you haven't seen.
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 12:51 pm (UTC)
(Link)
nope.
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 11th, 2001 01:18 pm (UTC)
(Link)
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 01:19 pm (UTC)
(Link)
yes
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 11th, 2001 11:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
ah. good job, then. carry on.
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 12th, 2001 04:59 am (UTC)

(Link)
too late, I already did.
m
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 01:19 pm (UTC)
(Link)
come on aim or john will muder me in cold blood!
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 11th, 2001 11:23 pm (UTC)
(Link)
john, don't muder mel! bad john!
From:(Anonymous)
Date:July 11th, 2001 12:51 pm (UTC)
(Link)
come on AIM dammit!
[User Picture]
From:corsac
Date:July 10th, 2001 03:07 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I can't help but wonder if the censors were really responsible for that, Danny. As you said,
"the whole thing proved the point of the movie much better than the movie by itself could've";
the USA channel, especially late at night, has never seemed very raunch-shy to me. Or
maybe I read too much into it; I can't imagine somebody of Stern's stature orchestrating a
put-on like that.

Joel T.
[User Picture]
From:feste
Date:July 10th, 2001 05:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I am with the fox on this one. If Stern himself is explaining the censored bits, he is probably doing it intentionally as a poke at the censors.
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 07:34 pm (UTC)
(Link)
oh, he's definiltey doing hte explaining bits as making fun of hte censors. but the point is he's doing this because he had to censor things out, and since he gets to explain what's going on, there's clearly no problem in us knowing what's happening as long as we can't actually see it. yay for logic.
[User Picture]
From:kingnixon
Date:July 10th, 2001 07:28 pm (UTC)
(Link)
ok, i guess i misrepresented. stern did do this all himself - obviously, as he comes out to explain it. so, unlike when a station censors thigns itself or when different versions are made for different levels of what's allowed to be shown, there are only 2 versions of 'private parts' around - the real version and the tv version. he basically made that so it could be shown at any time of day, but still, only had removed what he had to take out for that.
[User Picture]
From:feste
Date:July 10th, 2001 08:37 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Most likely he knew they were going to censor it, and so he offered to make a version they don't have to censor, so that he has control of it and can do things like draw the sausage really badly. It is a clean version, but he shows you how stupid censorship is.

Ah, democracy. If the power really were in the hands of the people in that great land of yours, I would say that y'all had taken this foolishness on yerselves. =)

> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com