2007-09-17 08:05:06 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Comics & Animation
EDIT:that should read "Requested was removed"
2007-09-17 08:09:39 · update #1
Kesokram was basically correct. I have seen the laserdisc in question, and there is not much to see in a couple frames. It does appear to me to be the correct shape, size, placement, et cetera, to be a woman's private parts. She appeared to have been recently shaven. (insert your own puns about hareless rabbit, aso/asf.)
It doesn't surprise me that it was requested that be removed. I may have missed it, but I am not aware of any other scene in which her dress is hiked up to definitively prove that she was SUPPOSED TO BE wearing panties...!!!
17 SEPT 07, 2323 hrs, GMT.
2007-09-17 11:20:10 · answer #1 · answered by cdf-rom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Jessica Rabbit Controversy
2016-10-03 03:20:56 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
What did the "Naughty" British animators add to Jessica Rabbit, that the US producers request where removed
2015-08-13 14:53:11 · answer #3 · answered by Maurie 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Check out the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Framed_Roger_Rabbit
Pay special attention to the part entitled "Controversies and Easter eggs".
Taken from bookrags.com:
When the laserdisc version of Who Framed Roger Rabbit was released, there was a lot of media controversy about a scene where supposedly Jessica Rabbit's private parts are flashed on camera. During a scene, Jessica and Eddie are both thrown from a taxi. Jessica spins out of the car, causing her red dress to hike up her body and her legs to spread apart briefly. For a few frames of Jessica's second spin her underwear supposedly disappears, revealing her pubic area. The frames in question are frames 2170-2172 on side 4 of the laserdisc version. During these three frames Jessica's pubic region is darker than the surrounding flesh-colored areas of her legs and certainly not a dark red like the color of her underwear. Animator and Disney historian Mark Kausler studied those frames carefully and concluded that it is just a paint error.
Quote: "I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way".
If you Google the name and go to "Images", you should find the controversial pic of up Jessica's dress, and most likely the edited picture, too. Interesting view....
2007-09-17 08:19:52 · answer #4 · answered by Kesokram 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Check out the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/who_framed_...
Pay special attention to the part entitled "Controversies and Easter eggs".
Taken from bookrags.com:
When the laserdisc version of Who Framed Roger Rabbit was released, there was a lot of media controversy about a scene where supposedly Jessica Rabbit's private parts are flashed on camera. During a scene, Jessica and Eddie are both thrown from a taxi. Jessica spins out of the car, causing her red dress to hike up her body and her legs to spread apart briefly. For a few frames of Jessica's second spin her underwear supposedly disappears, revealing her pubic area. The frames in question are frames 2170-2172 on side 4 of the laserdisc version. During these three frames Jessica's pubic region is darker than the surrounding flesh-colored areas of her legs and certainly not a dark red like the color of her underwear. Animator and Disney historian Mark Kausler studied those frames carefully and concluded that it is just a paint error.
Quote: "I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way".
If you Google the name and go to "Images", you should find the controversial pic of up Jessica's dress, and most likely the edited picture, too. Interesting view....
2007-09-18 00:49:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
I know this!
They removed her panties on one scene. When she crossed her legs (Sharon Stone stylee) there was to be a brief glimpse of her gutted rabbit.
This was done in response to the dissatisfaction by the animators, to the unusual demands of the producers.
2007-09-17 08:19:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
some people say than on one of the scene when she was through out of a car her clothes was lift up and her unde wear was missing; and that you could see her private part. any way take care.
2007-09-17 13:06:41 · answer #7 · answered by Rosalinda 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nipples?
2007-09-17 08:12:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/awvuu
Oh darling the Simpson woman has nothing on me x
2016-04-10 21:45:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I heard that there was one scene where you could see up her dress and she wasn't wearing underwear !
2007-09-17 08:21:34 · answer #10 · answered by t.bone 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋