Page 1 of 1

Dawn Treader DVD/Blu-Ray: "Seasick Gag Reel"?

PostPosted: Apr 17, 2011 7:52 pm
by 220chrisTian
This was rumored to be on the Dawn Treader DVD and/or Blu-Ray. But so far, no one's found it on their personal copy. I don't think it's on any official (Fox) list of DVD/Blu-Ray extras either.

Aslan's Country and NarniaFans reported the gag reel. Their source? Family Christian Stores (single DVD and Blu-Ray). I later discovered that this gag reel is also listed on ChristianCinema.com (Blu-Ray) and CatholicMovies.com (Blu-Ray).

Finally, I learned that a Brazilian fan on Twitter claims the gag reel is on a local Blu-Ray, which she didn't buy because of the cost. But she says she may.

@AslansCountry yes, just the ''seasick gag reel'' is on the Blu-ray, I didn't buy. But I will buy at once. The better of Narnia! :)


So does anyone have the "seasick gag reel" on their copy of the DVD or Blu-Ray? Do they know anyone else who does? Is this extra for real or not?

Re: Dawn Treader DVD/Blu-Ray: "Seasick Gag Reel"?

PostPosted: Apr 18, 2011 1:23 pm
by 220chrisTian
The mystery has been solved! I contacted Family Christian Stores on Twitter a few days ago about the gag reel on their website. They replied today with this:

@AslansCountry I was just told that the actors did not approve the "gag reel" Thanks for the catch! We are changing our copy.
Source

Can you believe this?! :(( I wonder what was on the gag reel, that the actors wouldn't approve... :-s

Re: Dawn Treader DVD/Blu-Ray: "Seasick Gag Reel"?

PostPosted: Apr 18, 2011 2:28 pm
by Liberty Hoffman
wow. weird. how could they have had the gag real and then make it go away? this doesn't make sense!

Re: Dawn Treader DVD/Blu-Ray: "Seasick Gag Reel"?

PostPosted: Apr 18, 2011 8:56 pm
by stateofgreen
That's strange. If something in the reel were objectionable, I would guess they would just remove the objectionable parts...unless most of it was objectionable. /:)

Re: Dawn Treader DVD/Blu-Ray: "Seasick Gag Reel"?

PostPosted: Apr 19, 2011 4:20 am
by starkat
They may have simply decided it was too silly or it was just something they didn't want public and vetoed it. It doesn't have to have anything objectionable in it.

Thanks 220chrisTian for the research into that! :) Now that it is no longer a rumor, I'm going to go ahead and close this thread.