It was definitely there...mine was perfectly clear in High Def... unfortunately i saw it when my 5 year old decided he likes seeing things in slow motion because he gets a kick out of it. The bad part of that was my 4 year old daughter who wanted to know why he had "that thing" hanging from between his legs - - which I promptly said Daddy would answer your question...I ended answering it anyway. Definitely think I am going to not let my son watch anything in slow motion until i check it first.
The reason why I mention Simon's filming not because his skills are in question. It reminds me of probably the one and only time I watched a football game from beginning to end. I don't remember the teams or the date but I do remember that every other shot was of a football player's rear-end. (I'm not into watching sports on TV - usually). People kept talking about this phenomenon on the radio. They eluded to this cameraman's orientation, etc. Eventually, he was fired.
The message was more of a way to alert Simon that there are a lot of bozos out there. I know he just shoots what he sees without thinking this way. However, he needs gain control again for all of the crew's sake.
Bear seems to have quite a following amongst younger viewers so it is unfortunate that Discovery felt it necessary to allow this to be shown. Makes you wonder if perhaps the ratings are slipping and they feel the need to step it up another notch on the shock scale.
No worries Simon, you know I luv it and thanks for keeping it real.
quote:
so it is unfortunate that Discovery felt it necessary to allow this to be shown
I find it hard to believe DC knowingly gave the green light on that one, considering the potential repercussions from the FCC. To me it was clearly the blurr-overer's error, and then again missed by the editor on the final proof. I'm sure there will be a nice blur there in the next rerun.
I find it hard to believe DC knowingly gave the green light on that one, considering the potential repercussions from the FCC.
Actually the FCC does not regulate content on cable networks. Discovery is not legally obligated to blur out anything and the only repercussions they’d have to be concerned with if they didn't would be public disapproval and the potential loss of revenue from sponsors that would come with it. It’s not like they need to scrutinize every moment of the show so it seems unlikely that somehow they’d miss something in the 30 seconds worth of programming that requires their attention.
Actually the FCC does not regulate content on cable networks. Discovery is not legally obligated to blur out anything.... it seems unlikely that somehow they’d miss something in the 30 seconds worth of programming that requires their attention.
It was more like 1 second maybe 2. If they aren't legally required to blur over certain parts then I'd stay up late for a 1 am airing of MvW unblurred
As a Lady I would be lying if I said I did not find Bear attractive, but M v W is a family show (or at least I thought it was) not a "let's see how many times we can spot Bear's un-blurred naughty bits and pieces" show. Although I appreciate his fine physique just like the next gal, the nudity in the last two episodes was a bit too gratuitous and frankly, as much as I hate to admit it as a fan of the show, it takes away any valid added value the show possesses if all people are focusing on are Bear's nude bottom and snippets of his junk. The editors need to be more vigilent for future episodes.
I think we need to ask Bear directly about those shots.
Bo79, I see your point and tend to agree.
I think every time Bear undresses, dollar signs go up. Bear's not stupid. He's doing this on purpose as a self-survival tactic to keep his show on the air.
Let's all Twitter him and ask the same question as Dr. Phil would say:
but M v W is a family show (or at least I thought it was)
quote:
The editors need to be more vigilent for future episodes
Although I'm not a parent, I've always been a bit surprised that people consider the show suitable for young children, or expect it to be. I think the onus is on the parent to be more vigilent in what they allow their children to view. Maybe prescreen it and edit out yourself anything you don't want your children to see. Personally I would be more concerned about an impressionable young kid viewing some of the animal dispatching and gross eats than I would worry about nudity.
Although I'm not a parent, I've always been a bit surprised that people consider the show suitable for young children, or expect it to be.
I completely agree with you Erin, parents should be responsible for what shows their children are watching but whether we like it or not, this show does have a young following and and the producers, editors, etc should be cognisant of that. Perhaps the show could be aired at a later time or during the school year when kids should be asleep by or well before 10 pm.
Well ladies at least we can agree the man has a fine physique if not on the moral compass issues. (KK I think you and I are like Senators Ted Kennedy and Orin Hatch when it comes to divergent viewpoints, but friends nontheless )
If they aren't legally required to blur over certain parts then I'd stay up late for a 1 am airing of MvW unblurred
Well I see in commercials that Comedy Central shows uncut movies late at night on the weekends so who knows, maybe you’ll get lucky and Discovery will start doing the same.
Well, they still didn't blur his treasure in the rerun of Nam during the marathon - not complaining But now they are blurring his butt in Eps. where it had been previously unblurred. That is just wrong to blurr over such beauty. He'd be better off to wear his skivvies in which he is more photogenic than the blurred stuff. But seriously I'm happy when the man just takes his shirt off, I'm not greedy.
slow mo is kinda blurry but tantalizing 
. My new dream job; editing MvW footage (maybe there's a job opening up?)
- which I promptly said Daddy would answer your question...I ended answering it anyway. Definitely think I am going to not let my son watch anything in slow motion until i check it first. 
but I still have the original. 
