Scenes So Bad They Were Pulled From The Movie

In many films you watch, there’s often a moment that falls short or doesn’t quite hit the target. This could be due to poor pacing, an off-putting performance, or some other issue. Usually, there’s at least one scene that needed adjustment. However, some movies suffer from numerous problematic sequences so severe that they were excised from the final cut after their initial release. Even with audiences knowing what these scenes were intended to be, they were such a burden that they had to be eliminated. The editing process continued for these unique productions even after the rest of post-production was completed.

Why might a filmmaker or studio feel compelled to take such drastic steps as removing scenes from completed films? Sometimes, it’s due to controversial elements like racist stereotypes or tobacco use, which would not be acceptable for a young audience. At times, visual effects that were deemed unsatisfactory by viewers required additional refinement. In certain instances, scenes were disrupting the movie’s flow so significantly that they had to be removed even after high-profile premieres. Regardless of the reasons behind these unusual decisions, these films serve as examples of productions that continued to require adjustments and edits well into their theatrical runs due to challenging circumstances. Here is a group of unconventional movies that underwent tweaking and trimming even during their cinema releases.

Cats

Filmmakers occasionally return to their movies years later to make adjustments or improvements, even decades after their original release. For instance, David Fincher’s 4K version of the 1995 crime thriller “Seven” featured numerous tweaks that better aligned with his creative vision, including changes to camera movements. Similarly, George Lucas is known for adding digital effects to films such as “THX 1138” and the original “Star Wars” trilogy. However, it’s unusual for scenes to be removed and updated during a movie’s initial run in theaters – but that’s exactly what occurred with the controversial release of “Cats” in 2019.

Initially, the film version of “Cats,” directed by Tom Hooper, faced criticism months before it was even released, which continued as its disappointing box office earnings mounted. To add insult to injury, Universal Pictures declared, on the first day of the movie’s release in theaters, that a revised version of “Cats” would be shown, featuring enhanced visual effects in various scenes. Due to time constraints, the original screenings of the film displayed issues such as Judi Dench’s CG cat character appearing with a human hand (including her wedding ring) and other visually distracting elements.

In an attempt to enhance certain “Cats” movie scenes with updated visual effects, it failed to boost either its box office performance or critical acclaim. Not even Rum Tum Tugger himself would have been enticed enough to watch this cinematic disaster, regardless of how many adjustments and re-releases were made.

Mean Girls (2024)

It’s probable that, if you attended the 2024 musical remake of “Mean Girls” in a bustling theater, the appearance of Lindsay Lohan during a debate scene drew applause from the crowd. The audience was thrilled to see Lohan on the big screen once more, particularly since the movie tied back to one of her iconic roles. However, Lohan reportedly wasn’t fond of one particular joke in the production. In one of the film’s montage scenes, a cameo by Megan Thee Stallion included the singer exclaiming that “Y2K fire crotch is back!” This was likely meant to evoke nostalgia for viewers who remember the iPod Nano era, but it didn’t sit well with Lohan. After all, “fire crotch” was a term used against her harshly in the past and continues to be referenced negatively towards her even today.

In a public statement, Lindsay Lohan found the crude joke particularly painful, and to honor her feelings, the “fire crotch” gag was removed during the digital release of the “Mean Girls” remake. This decision meant trimming some lines from Megan Thee Stallion’s cameo appearance, but it enabled the production team to uphold the preferences of one of the original “Mean Girls” cast members. Now, Lohan can take pride in being associated with applause in movie theaters rather than old, sensationalist tabloid terms from the 2000s.

Roman J. Israel Esq.

Showcasing a new adult drama at a significant film festival can bring either great fortune or disappointment. If the stars align, your film is met with thunderous applause and sets sail for cinemas riding a wave of positive reception. However, if things don’t pan out as planned, viewers are alerted early on to brace themselves for an underwhelming production. This was the fate that befell “Roman J. Israel, Esq.”, a movie starring Denzel Washington and helmed by Dan Gilroy, the director of “Nightcrawler”. The film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2017, prior to its theatrical release. Unfortunately for everyone involved, it was met with mixed reviews, particularly receiving criticism for its pacing. As a result, some adjustments were necessary before the movie’s widespread release.

Approximately a month after, it was disclosed that Gilroy and Washington made significant changes to “Roman J. Israel, Esq.” in the editing room, resulting in a revised version that was 12 minutes shorter than the one originally premiered at TIFF. One of the numerous modifications included eliminating an entire substantial side-plot, which Gilroy stated only reinforced attorney Roman J. Israel’s internal struggle. Altering and deleting key scenes from a movie following its film festival debut is quite unusual, but unfortunately, this adjustment did not boost “Roman J. Israel Esq.” at the box office, as even in its shortened form, the movie struggled to attract audiences in cinemas.

Fantasia

As a dedicated gamer and movie enthusiast, I’ve always held Disney’s 1940 masterpiece, “Fantasia,” in high regard. Over eight decades since its initial release, this cinematic marvel continues to captivate audiences with its breathtaking fusion of music and visual artistry. The creative blend of classical orchestral music with animations that could only be achieved through this medium is a testament to Disney’s innovative spirit, something I believe deserves to be cherished for future generations.

However, it’s important to acknowledge a less savory aspect from the film’s history – a scene in “The Pastoral Symphony” segment that stirred controversy due to its racially insensitive portrayals. Thankfully, in today’s home video releases of “Fantasia,” these questionable images have been carefully omitted.

It’s a reminder that even the greatest works can contain elements that are out of step with modern values, but it also underscores the ongoing importance of preserving and learning from our shared cultural history.

In the heart of stunning visuals featuring galloping horses, elaborate structures reminiscent of ancient Greece and Rome, and abundant waterfalls, the original version of “Fantasia” once displayed distressing portrayals of African women that reinforced outdated stereotypes. It’s not surprising these images were eliminated from “Fantasia” in the late 20th century and have yet to be reinstated since then. Unlike other Disney animated films like “The Aristocats” or “Peter Pan,” which continue to include racial stereotypes in their modern releases, albeit with a disclaimer about “inappropriate stereotypes,” the offensive representations in “Fantasia” were so severe that scenes involving them were completely excised. This unfortunate legacy of prejudiced characters has cast a shadow over an undoubtedly remarkable achievement in American animated filmmaking.

Bruce Almighty

In an unexpected twist, it’s not the transphobic scenes from Jim Carrey’s “Ace Ventura” movies that were edited out for later releases, but a scene from “Bruce Almighty.” This movie, where Jim Carrey plays an ordinary man named Bruce given divine powers, originally had a scene where God gives Bruce his phone number. The number was not the typical 555 used in fictional films, but one that actually existed – belonging to a real reverend named Bruce. Within a week of the film’s release, it was disclosed that this number was indeed real, causing quite a stir.

In the initial release of the movie “Bruce Almighty”, the phone number shown wasn’t just Bruce’s personal number. Families from Florida, as well as individuals from states like Arkansas and Colorado, also had this number. Consequently, they received numerous calls from people checking if the “Bruce Almighty” phone number was valid. Initially, a representative from Universal Pictures explained that the choice of this number was appropriate because no one in Buffalo, New York (where the movie is set) possessed it. However, it soon became clear that this decision would result in regular citizens receiving endless phone calls for years to come. To prevent this, the original phone number was replaced with a harmless generic one in all subsequent home video versions of “Bruce Almighty”. Interestingly, this turn of events turned out to be the most contentious aspect in any of Jim Carrey’s numerous comedies.

Alien: Romulus

In the self-contained “Alien” film titled “Alien: Romulus”, a figure that’s remarkably similar to an old acquaintance appears about halfway through. This happens when a heavily damaged android named Rook, who bears the visage and voice of the “Alien” android Ash (previously acted by Ian Holm), makes his appearance. The cinematic version of “Alien: Romulus” stirred up quite a debate due to this robotic character’s return, as it seemed to bring back the late Holm, and because the digital effects used to create this character were met with widespread criticism.

A few months after the theatrical release of “Alien: Romulus”, director Fede Alvarez admitted that he was personally dissatisfied with how Rook appeared in the final cut, stating that there wasn’t enough post-production time to make it perfect. Consequently, minor adjustments were made for the digital and physical media launch, which involved providing visual effects studios with the funds needed to rectify the issues related to Rook’s appearance.

In the revised version of “Romulus”, they replaced or eliminated the initial “Romulus” shots that highlighted a completely digital representation of the character, focusing instead on a physical puppet portrayal of Rook. This change was intended to lessen the ‘uncanny valley’ effect experienced by many viewers when first seeing Rook. For Alvarez, the modifications made to the old footage were like day and night compared to the initial version. The controversial effort to cater to fans in “Alien: Romulus” necessitated additional cosmetic adjustments just to make Rook more acceptable to the audience.

Show Dogs

Movies directed by Raja Gosnell, such as “Beverly Hills Chihuahua,” “The Smurfs,” and “Scooby-Doo,” are often criticized for their poor quality. However, his 2018 film “Show Dogs” stirred up a level of controversy that was unexpected for a Gosnell production. In “Show Dogs,” the canine character Max (played by Ludacris) experiences a distressing situation where he has to endure having his private areas touched by a dog show judge. Other dogs advise him on how to handle this, suggesting things like going to a “happy place” during the process. This scene, which is unusual for a comedic sequence in any context, was found particularly offensive when it appeared in a children’s movie.

The movie “Show Dogs” faced accusations in certain circles that it was promoting the act of grooming children. However, some, like the British Board of Film Classification, argued this interpretation was inaccurate and didn’t align with the content of the film. Still, the controversy grew so intense that Global Road Entertainment issued an apology for the questionable scene and promised a revised version of “Show Dogs” would be shown in theaters. From its second weekend onwards, viewers noticed changes to the movie, particularly in jokes concerning Max’s situation. Thus, the controversial portrayal of a pivotal “Show Dogs” sequence has undeniably left a significant mark on an otherwise insignificant film within Gosnell’s body of work.

The Current War

Similar to “Roman J. Israel Esq.” and “The Current War” faced challenges beyond their capabilities during their premiere at the fall film festival. Like “Israel,” it premiered at the 2017 Toronto International Film Festival, receiving mixed reviews. These critical assessments suggested that the portrayal of Thomas Edison in “The Current War” may not be one of Benedict Cumberbatch’s finest performances. However, following its debut, the film encountered turmoil due to Harvey Weinstein’s persistent scandals, who was initially involved with its production and distribution through The Weinstein Company. After the company’s collapse, “The Current War” remained on hold for two years before its theatrical release in October 2019 under a drastically altered form. This transformation included additional scenes shot during reshoots, a revamped orchestral score, and a runtime reduced by ten minutes compared to its September 2017 version.

The shortened length of the film resulted from eliminating numerous smaller sequences, creating a faster pace that mirrors the intense competition between Edison (played by Michael Shannon) and George Westinghouse. Additionally, certain parts focusing on Edison were eliminated to provide more screen time for Nicholas Hoult’s portrayal of Nikola Tesla. Despite some scenes raising initial concerns among critics, “The Current War” managed to be released, even in a shorter version that was closer to the original vision of director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon. This release was a success in itself, considering the film’s eventual fate in the box office and award seasons.

Saludos Amigos

Goofy, a well-known Disney character, has numerous reasons for his fame, not just due to the curiosity surrounding why he can speak while Pluto cannot. This comically clumsy hybrid of dog and man has undergone various transformations over the years. From his early days playing sidekick to Mickey and Donald in classic cartoon shorts, to his modern appearances in “A Goofy Movie” or “Goof Troop,” Goofy has adapted with the times. However, it might surprise some that he was once used to promote tobacco products, as seen in one of Disney’s “package features” from the 1940s. One segment from 1942’s “Saludos Amigos” titled “El Gaucho Goofy” depicts Goofy as a cowboy learning to become a gaucho in Argentina and promoting tobacco along the way.

Initially, “How to” shorts starring Goofy, such as “The Art of Skiing,” which he started in the early 1940s, might appear to be just regular variations of these short films. However, a unique aspect of this Walt Disney Animation Studios title was a segment where Goofy smoked a cigarette on-screen. Given today’s standards, showing tobacco consumption by one of Disney’s main mascots would not be acceptable. As a result, for various home video versions of “Saludos Amigos,” this smoking scene was removed to preserve Goofy’s family-friendly image, ensuring that promoting cigarette smoking wouldn’t harm the character’s reputation in the future.

The Rescuers

In regards to movies like “Dumbo” and “Peter Pan,” it’s not surprising that recent news about Disney removing another potentially offensive character from their home release versions has been making headlines due to its controversial nature. As for “The Rescuers,” a 1977 film, it seems unlikely to stir up any significant controversy within the Disney Animation library. Despite being initially held back by Walt Disney as too political, “The Rescuers” is now widely regarded as one of the most underrated and delightful productions from a darker period in Disney’s history. However, when it first became available on VHS, the movie did indeed cause trouble with Disney executives due to its negative impact.

Using VHS tapes, viewers were able to pause movies and notice intricate details like an animator secretly inserting a topless woman into frames of animation in “The Rescuers.” This went unnoticed for many years. When it was discovered, Disney was quick to act, recalling the tapes and producing a revised version without the controversial scene. In this way, the movie’s reputation was saved and Disney managed to dodge any additional complaints from parents… that is, until their children found the racially insensitive moments in “The Aristocats.

2025-01-31 15:31