MovieChat Forums > The Watcher in the Woods (1981) Discussion > Hiding History

Hiding History

posted 21 years ago by kevinp8192
12 replies | jump to latest

I noticed in the trivia for this movie that Disney wouldn't allow Anchor Bay to release the original version. I wonder why studios care about this? It seems like it would sell a lot more DVDs.

What do the studios have to save face on? The fact is, by now even casual movie fans today know how the process works: studios test movies with audiences, and then often re-shoot different parts when things don't work. It is absolutely common knowledge. Why try to hide it? They should just let us see it. That's what makes even crappy movies somewhat interesting.

[–] AND77 21 years ago

They didn't want the original version released because it was a huge embarrassment. It's very rare that a test audience, especially one from the late 70's/early 80's, laugh themselves silly at the ending of a mystery/suspense/horror film. I would say that the test audiences' reaction to the original version of this movie is one of the biggest embarrassments in Disney history, and they probably don't want to be reminded of that.
I agree with you 100%, by the way; i'm just theorizing as to why I think Disney treated this movie so badly over the past 25 yrs or so.

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] AND77 20 years ago

not to mention The Black Cauldron - one of my favorite Disney animated feature films. only in the past 2 years has Disney ackowledged that this film was even made.

[–] cuckookazoo 19 years ago

"The Black Cauldron" was okay -- if you haven't read the books! Oh, I'm glad it's available on home video, but having seen it for the first time after reading the books (5 book sereis "the Chronicles of Prydain" by Lloyd Alexander; movie based on first 2) -- I was disappointed. On the other hand, it was a slight departure from the animation norm for Disney, and that was nice.

[–] TelevisionJunkie 19 years ago

This is sort of a long story. Anchor Bay wasn't going to release the "original" version, they were going to release a new director's cut. Director John Hough has offered, on several occassions, to fly to the US and create a director's cut of "Watcher" (for free, I might add), but Disney keeps refusing. He had no say over the special effects of the Watcher itself (or the Other World Sequence) which were completed after his involvement on the film. In addition to the alternate endings that appear on DVD (the effects were never completed on those versions, by the way), there's a wicked-sounding alternate opening that Disney flat-out refused to let Anchor Bay to release.

And as for the initial audience laughing the Watcher off the screen, I think that was an off-the-cuff remark that Hough made that's been taken too literally.

Disney licensed a few of their films to Anchor Bay, then got freaked out that AB released superior editions that were critically hailed (namely their release of "The Happiest Millionaire"). I guess they thought this was going to soil the Disney name, I dunno. In any event, they were real bastards when it came to the subsequent films they owned that Anchor Bay released. There's far more about this subject available here:

http://www.geocities.com/ditcin4/watchermystery.html

[–] danatania 18 years ago

thanks for posting this, that's interesting info. It sucks that people can't just enjoy the movie because of all the bureaucracy!

[–] celia_cyanide 18 years ago

"there's a wicked-sounding alternate opening that Disney flat-out refused to let Anchor Bay to release."

what's the alternate opening?

[–] lunabug89 18 years ago

There is a girl playing in the woods with a doll, the watcher zaps the doll, and it shows the dolls face being burned through the opening credits. Sweeeeeet. lol j/k

[–] reneekyndra 18 years ago

Where did you find that info???

[–] VinnyM27 18 years ago

WHich was the actual ending shown in theathers....the long alternate ending, with the Tron world? Or the shorter one? With the exceptation of the alien and the world, both were actually better, which the director said, too.

Also, it's hard to tell but when Karen comes back in the ending used on the Anchor Bay DVD...is she supposed to be older, or is it just a different actress than the one used in the other endings. They never get a close up on her, so it's hard to tell, but her hair is a lot darker than in the scenes where Jan sees her.

[–] ziggypotter 18 years ago

Not sure what the original theatre ending was, I assume it's the one that you don't have to go out of your way to access . . . However about the different Karens at the end -- I think it was neat how in the alternate endings there were different Karens -- I think the biggest difference that they were deciding on was -- Should Karen age or not? In this world that she goes to is she there for a time-gap as long as everybody elses, or is there some sort of time loop in the alternate dimention to where she's only gone for a week or so in her mind -- Or is it a mysterious planet where people don't age at all -- They had a lot to play with. I love what they finally decided on . . .

[–] Grinnygog 16 years ago

The Karen in the ending we've been watching all these years is NOT the Karen that was blindfolded throughout the movie. That's why her hair did not match. But since the ending had to be refilmed, the original Karen was not available and they used another girl!!! And Bette Davis refused to film anything more than "you're home" in the chapel doorway for the new ending - the shot of her walking up to Karen and hugging her is a stand-in. She told them the director had already finished the film!!! Good for her!

As for the original ending - it is definitely the longer alternate ending but minus the Other World sequence. That footage is WHY TWITWoods failed at the premiere - it wasn't finished yet. Eye witnesses at the premiere will tell you that the audience was scared and very moved by the film AND the Watcher itself. John Hough thought it looked silly, but the audience didn't react that way. Unfortunately though, without the Other World scene, the ending made no sense. This alien picks her up, then a few seconds later steps out of a hole of light with Karen. She explains it a little to Ellie at the very end, but without the visuals people were pissed off. Especially when they heard that a scene was missing and still being worked on.

Di$ney rushed the film out for it's premiere to coincide with Bette Davis' 50th Anniversary in films. If they had just held out until all effects were finished.....we would have a much longer and better film today.

The original film ran 100 minutes......so there is quite a bit more extended scenes here and there than just the missing original opening and ending. I purchased a copy of the script (i think it was from Script City) and found quite a lot of longer scenes.

The original opening was quite a chiller and perfect mood setter for the film: a little girl playing in the woods with her doll. The Watcher (camera point of view) coming up behind her. The girl turns and screams in the camera. She runs away leaving her doll. The doll is levitated and thrown against a tree. Then (i believe) the blue lightning strikes it and it begins to burn. The opening credits roll over the melting face of the doll..........God, I wish I could see that!!! And it almost made it to the Anchor Bay DVD if it hadn't been for one person at Di$ney who butted in and said it made Di$ney look bad. Why should they care. The Di$ney name was removed from mostly everything and it was released by Anchor Bay.

Anyway, everyone should really read the disgusting story behind the politics of this film and why we don't have it today. Here's the link again:

http://www.geocities.com/ditcin4/watchermystery.html

Now with Blu-Ray - a new format - maybe Di$ney will come to their senses and allow John Hough to reconstruct this film. Let's hope some new blood at Di$ney will make this a reality for us.