It's not obvious to me and I've seen this movie at least a dozen times.
Get your vision checked then, or maybe stop viewing the movie on your iPhone???
Apparently, you are the only one on this rather large board to claim to have seen this alleged "blooper".
No, Mr. Arrogant, not only have many people noticed it, it always gets brought up under any YouTube clip that has the infamous dance sequence where it happens. Before you blather on that it's some kind of "meme" or something, it's not. I noticed it all the way back in the 80s when I first saw the movie.
YouTube clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO5gKgjzsFw
Comments:
Shannon Johnson3 years ago
Nuts ain't the half of it get the Video slow it down scene by scene Dicks showing more than just leg.....hysterical
---
Max Power 2 years ago
If you look closely at 0:26 you can see his balls.
---nathar404 years ago
Around 0:26 - 0:28 Dick Shawn`s first name hangs out of his shorts. Then it happens again around :34-:36. I always try not to notice it.
---
ssur zzip 4 years ago
Right after the 0.26 mark his shlong peaks out of his shorts a few times....
---
Psychoderelict01 5 years ago
I hate to be the one to point this out, but once you see it, you'll never miss it again. Look between Sylvester's legs at :0:27. It's even more pronounced on a bigger screen too.
If you have the attention span (and that's a big if) and study the entire sequence with Sylvester with the girl, you'll notice that he's wearing two different versions of the red shorts. The first pair is more like gym shorts, hanging loose. The second pair is more like bathing trunks, more tightly fitted. It was obvious that someone at some point noticed the problem with the first pair of shorts and the scene was reshot, but the scenes with the gym shorts accidentally got left in there. You'd have to blind as a bat (or particularly dense) to not notice the wardrobe change or the wardrobe malfunction that prompted it in the first place.
---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=
reply
share
hammer4
9 years ago
I rewatched the first dance sequence with Shawn and Barrie Chase from the Criterion Collection DVD (both the general release and extended versions) on a 40 inch television.
Watching it through in "real time" I detected nothing unusual. From the You Tube clip I concentrated on that 30 second segment, using slow motion, frame by frame advance and zoom. Only then did I notice that for a very brief period (less than a second) a small portion of what appears to be Shawn's scrotum is exposed. This occurs at 56:45-56:46 on the general release version and at 1:05:06-1:05:07 on the extended version.
I don't think one person in ten thousand would pick this up without knowing about it in advance and without the use of home video.
reply
share
holbrookp
9 years ago
I see his underwear but not his actual nude privates.
"All necessary truth is its own evidence." - Ralph Waldo Emerson
reply
share
hammer4
9 years ago
It could be his underwear or part of his scrotum. It's hard to tell. I don't believe it's a significant issue one way or the other.
reply
share
BugisStreetAnnie (1296)
6 years ago
it always gets brought up under any YouTube clip that has the infamous dance sequence where it happens
I remember this, but I never noticed it until it was said on here and then one day the movie was on
THIS.tv so I watched it again. Did my eyes deceive me?
reply
share
[deleted]
6 years ago
I remember thinking I saw it but dismissed it. Analog TV was nothing to base an argument on.
All these years and I thought that Harvey Korman was playing that character. Not Dick Shawn. They DO look similar though.
reply
share
[deleted]
5 years ago
You can see up his shorts. As mentioned above, if you watch the clip you'll see that he's wearing two different versions of the same pair of red pants. It doesn't make sense why Dick Shawn would've been asked to wear two different versions of those shorts if there hadn't been a wardrobe malfunction.
reply
share