Brilliant Ways Movies And TV Shows Have Snuck Stuff Past The Censors
Censorship is supposed to protect viewers from being exposed to things like nudity, gore, explicit language and disturbing situations, basically all the things viewers usually want in movies or TV shows.
That's why creators are constantly battling the censors to keep their shows intact, censor despised content and all, and their struggle sometimes forces creators to flat out lie about what's happening on the screen.
Censors hate blood, and they actively force filmmakers to remove any trace of blood from their trailers, but back in 1980 Stanley Kubrick got away with telling the censors that his iconic blood flood in The Shining was really just "rusty water".
Because of Kubrick's lie the trailer, complete with that disturbing shot of the "rusty water" flooding towards the camera, briefly made it to theaters before being pulled by the MPAA.
Are you wondering why Fonzie was featured in the lead image? Believe it or not, Happy Days also had trouble with the censors about one issue- Fonzie's leather jacket.
The Fonz looked like a total Potsie without his leather jacket, but censors claimed only criminals wear a leather jacket when they're not riding their bike, so show creator Garry Marshall started working a motorcycle into every scene.
Read 6 Brilliant Ways Movies & TV Shows Stuck It To The Censors here (contains NSFW language)
We hope you like this article!
Please help us grow by sharing:
Get Updates In Your Inbox
Free weekly emails, plus get access
to subscriber-only prizes.
Also, I would point out that you should have used parentheses instead of commas to separate the words "it's capitalized" from the rest of your sentence. Otherwise, it's a sentence fragment.
Plus, your capitalization correction for the term "grammar nazi" is not a cut-and-dry issue, either. Some prefer to reserve the capitalized term for references to the Nazi party itself, and to keep the lowercase for general terms. Others insist that both words should be capitalized, which makes a little more sense to me than your suggestion. However, I disagree. There may be rare times when it could be used as a title, or for emphasis, but it's most often a common noun.
A grammar nazi is not referring to a member of the Nazi party, or to misguided adherents of the Nazi principles. But, it works nicely for emphasis in such exclamations as "You, Sir, are a Grammar Nazi!" (note that I also capitalized Sir, for emphasis)
Regardless, you can act as though your comment was to somehow benefit the writer all you want, but it was not productive (nor was your catty follow-up response). In the end, the entire point was trying to prove your own intelligence which you really don't need to do here. Corrections for the sake of proving one's intelligence aren't beneficial to anyone but the one making the comment and almost universally unappreciated by everyone except that person.