Sometimes, for a movie’s DVD release or theatrical reissue, the filmmakers will add some previously unseen scenes and call it a “special edition."

The trouble is some of these movies are only special in the same way that the kid in the back row who ate all the paste was “special.” Here, we present some of the worst offenders.

E.T.

The original:

ET is Steven Spielberg’s heartwarming tale of several selfless government operatives who valiantly struggle to protect a young boy from a horrific alien monster.

The special edition:

For the ET 20th anniversary edition, Spielberg decided to digitally replace the officers’ guns with walkie-talkies to avoid traumatizing children, because in Spielberg's world, no child has ever watched TV and seen a gun before.

Presumably, any subsequent anniversary editions will excise the iconic flying bicycle scene to prevent impressionable children from steering their bikes off a cliff. One must wonder why ET didn’t just ask to borrow one of those walkie-talkies and use that to phone home. It’s not like they didn’t have enough of them.

Of course, if Spielberg actually wanted to avoid traumatizing children, he would have kept the guns and ditched that horrifying goddam ET puppet. That thing looked like something Jim Henson would design while taking the brown acid. If we came across ET in a dark forest, then we would definitely want something more potent than a walkie-talkie to protect ourselves with.

In yet another pointless change to a practically innocuous, the line of dialogue where Elliot’s mother berates him for wearing a terrorist costume has now been redubbed so that she objects to Elliot dressing as a hippie. Those crazy hippies with their turbans, army fatigues, and crude incendiary devices!

That said, we have to give Spielberg credit for keeping the unaltered version on shelves as well. It would be so easy for him to abandon his original film at the bottom of the same landfill that already hosts some other high quality ET merchandise.

But he took the high road and released both versions of his film on DVD. Well, that only makes sense, right? What kind of hack would monopolize the market with a bastardized version of a beloved film that no one demanded?

The Star Wars Trilogy

The original:

The three separate tapestries of George Lucas’ Star Wars Trilogy intertwine to tell the heartbreaking story of Luke Skywalker. When the soldiers of a totalitarian regime brutally murder his family, Luke is drafted into a cult and becomes a leading member of a terrorist organization. He also briefly enters into an incestuous relationship.

The special edition:

That’s right. We’re complaining about Star Wars. On the internet. We’re just that groundbreaking and original.

Since you’re reading this online, you probably know that George Lucas used the late nineties theatrical reissue of the trilogy as an opportunity to make alterations to the classic series. The trouble is, these changes were entirely unnecessary, given that they were basically the most popular films in the world, even then.

Perhaps the most annoying thing about the Special Editions is that George Lucas never met an intrusive special effect that he didn’t like. Thanks to advances in digital technology, Lucas could finally fulfill his dream of interrupting every scene so that a robot could walk out, do a pratfall, tap dance, and deliver an adorable catchphrase. (This robot would then go on to inspire a line of action figures, several “expanded universe” novels, and fan-fictions numbering in the hundreds of thousands.)

More unforgivably, Lucas also edited many of the more violent scenes.

Apparently, that red glow on the fellow to the left's chest was deemed unsafe for general audiences by the MPAA. When will Hollywood learn that our children need to be informed of the risks of blaster abuse? Also, why not really protect our children and just have Han Solo throw a walkie talkie at him?

By the way, they reportedly made a little change to the scene where Han Solo confronts Greedo, but we doubt that anyone would get upset over such a minor alteration.

The Return of the King

The original:

Peter Jackson’s Oscar-winning conclusion to the Lord of the Rings trilogy effectively combines majestic sweeping battle sequences with touching and subtle character moments, including one in which Gandalf leers at some hobbits, bringing JRR Tolkien’s beloved novel to life.

Also, that part where the giant elephant thingies crushed everything was damn awesome.

The special edition:

The extended edition actually contains a few cool new scenes (such as the final defeat of the wizard Saruman). But the film is marred as a whole due to the addition of a few scenes that should have been left on the cutting room floor.

For example, in one new scene, Sam and Frodo sneak into Mordor by disguising themselves as orcs and joining a platoon of Sauron’s soldiers. Their brilliant scheme seems somewhat less impressive when you realize that Sam and Frodo are three feet tall, have differently colored skin, and are an entirely different species than the rest of the army. Yet somehow, no one notices them, even though their disguises are about as convincing as the ones that Bugs Bunny used to trick Elmer Fudd.

Eventually, the two hobbits escape by inciting a brawl among the soldiers, because when you’re going undercover, it’s always a good idea to draw attention to yourself while giving an army of monsters a reason to take a swing at you.

In another scene, Aragorn speaks with a messenger of Sauron who threatens him in no way whatsoever, and decides to end the conversation by riding up and cutting the guy’s head off. Sure the guy was probably evil, but still. Dude. Literally killing the messenger is going a bit too far. What do you think this is? SPAHHRTA?

The extended edition isn’t a bad film by any means. Still, it serves as a sobering reminder that sometimes less really can be more.

Peter Jackson's King Kong remake

The original:

This remake of the classic tale of the dangers of bestiality tells the story of actress Anne Darrow and how she comes to care for a giant monster that killed most of her friends.

The special edition:

If there were ever a film that needed to be shorter, it was Peter Jackson’s King Kong. The longer the film goes on, the more we start to realize that we’ve invested three hours of our lives into a love story about a big gorilla. The extended edition of King Kong adds a few more scenes of the “computer generated monster attacks, extras die” variety. This may seem exciting in theory, but in practice it quickly becomes monotonous and slows down what was already a poorly paced film. It doesn’t help that some of the new special effects are so obviously green screened that our heroes look like weathermen predicting a forecast unusually full of swamp monsters.

Besides, the more monsters the crew encounters, the less likely it seems that they would persist in attempting to find Anne. How many heavily armed soldiers need to die before they realize that a defenseless woman probably won’t have lasted long on an island swarming with monsters?

"Unrated" versions of every terrible sex comedy ever

The originals:
Some kind of slob, presumably one in a run-down frat house or is a loser in a highly stratified public high school, takes on some sort of snob. Through his or her slobbish ways, most of which would get one arrested in reality, the slob in question saves the frat house or becomes the most popular kid at the high school or wins the girl, etc.

The special editions:
Ugh… just ugh.

Why are there so many of these things? Who the hell is the target audience? Is there a reason why Good Luck Chuck couldn’t convey its complex and multi-layered narrative in the time allotted to it by theaters? For fuck’s sake, the only thing that the Film-Genre-Title Movie series had going for it was that its installments were all mercifully short. You had to go cock that up too?

Of course, being free from the confines of censorship, the filmmakers behind these modern day classics are now free to abandon their old storytelling tactics (i.e., coming up with innovative new ways in which the protagonist could get his penis caught inside of things) and pursue their true artistic vision. And by true artistic vision, I mean showing titties. Lots and lots of titties.

Of course, any actual celebrities in the film will keep their tops firmly in place (even if the film appears to have a naked Elisha Cuthbert on the goddamn cover in one of the grossest disappointments in DVD cover history). No, they just get whatever Playboy bunny (or in lesser films, Penthouse Pets or Hustler Guinea Pigs) the publisher was willing to loan them for the day to flash her rigid, unmoving, silicone-injected breasts for an extra 30 seconds.

Now, I know the promise of titties is exciting, but before some of you rush out to buy the films in question, consider this: there are means of looking at fake tits without having to give the cashier at Blockbuster $9.99 and your dignity. (Hint: you’re looking at one right now, and I don't mean a humor website.)

cautionarytalesofswords@gmail.com