Disney+ Pulls Hollywood Classic After Shocking Animal Scene Sparks Uproar

A CINEMATIC GEM OVERSHADOWED

The Abyss, a lesser-known but visually ambitious entry in James Cameron’s celebrated filmography, stars Ed Harris, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, and Michael Biehn in a tale that plunges viewers into the ocean’s depths to recover a sunken nuclear submarine under mysterious circumstances. It earned four Academy Award nominations, winning for Best Visual Effects—a testament to the film’s technical innovation at the time.

However, among its many underwater marvels, one particular scene has remained a point of contention since its debut. It features a live rat submerged in an oxygen-rich fluorocarbon liquid to simulate “liquid breathing”—a real scientific concept, but one that proved ethically divisive when brought to screen.

A SCENE THAT STIRRED LEGAL AND MORAL WATERS

Upon the film’s original UK theatrical review in 1989, the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) consulted the RSPCA and legal experts before concluding that the scene violated the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act of 1937. The decision led to a mandated cut of the sequence before it could be shown in UK cinemas or aired on television.

A BBFC spokesperson explained:

“The Abyss was originally submitted to the BBFC in 1989, containing a scene in which a character submerges a live rat in liquid. We sought expert legal and veterinary advice at the time which confirmed the scene constituted the cruel infliction of terror on an animal. Its exhibition would contravene the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937.”

“As a result, the scene was edited from the film in order to be legally exhibited in the UK. The scene remains cut from all BBFC-classified versions for cinema and home entertainment release.”

Yet the arrival of streaming services—often operating outside the bounds of older UK media laws—has complicated the regulatory landscape. When Disney+ uploaded The Abyss in April, it featured the unedited version, reintroducing the controversial scene to British audiences, many of whom were unaware of its troubled history.

RSPCA: ‘THIS ISN’T CANCEL CULTURE’

The RSPCA responded quickly to the film’s streaming release, renewing its long-standing objection and raising fresh alarms about modern-day content governance.

David Bowles, Head of Public Affairs at the RSPCA, addressed the issue, saying:

“This isn’t about cancel culture. We’d welcome Disney+ reinstating the film to their platform—just with this troubling scene removed, as is already the case in cinemas, on TV and on DVD.”

“This is instead about highlighting a loophole that currently exists allowing animal abuse scenes deemed unacceptable elsewhere to be streamed freely and legally into our homes.”

Bowles emphasized the inconsistency in how animal welfare standards are enforced across various entertainment mediums. While strict guidelines exist for television broadcasts and DVD releases, current streaming laws do not offer the same assurance to viewers.

“It doesn’t make sense that we have robust safeguards for animal-related content shown in cinemas, on DVDs or on traditional television channels—yet those protections could go out the window when you turn on a major streaming service.”

A SCENE ANALYZED UNDER A SCIENTIFIC LENS

The disputed sequence has also been examined by behavioral scientists, with results painting a disturbing picture of the animals’ distress. Dr. Charlotte C. Burn, Associate Professor of Behaviour Science at the Royal Veterinary College, studied the scene and offered the following assessment:

“They defecated in the liquid, which is a common response to intense panic.”

“It was clear that the rats experienced terror because they struggled desperately, their extremities turned blue-ish white and they were shown gasping 12 times with their mouths stretched open the widest they could possibly go.”

“To add insult to injury, a rat was then lifted out of the liquid by the tail and dangled for a full six seconds, during which time she exerts great effort as she struggles and her ears are laid flat against her head.”

According to Burn, lifting rodents by their tails is not only distressing but can also cause physical harm, further cementing the RSPCA’s case that the scene was more than just uncomfortable viewing—it was a clear act of cruelty.

THE LOOMING MEDIA ACT AND FUTURE GUIDANCE

With the UK’s Media Act now in force, Ofcom is expected to issue a new set of video-on-demand regulations by the end of the year. The RSPCA believes this will be a crucial moment to address the regulatory gap currently exploited by streaming platforms.

Bowles noted:

“We hope a new code of conduct under the Media Act will help close this loophole.”

“People deserve to be assured they will not be inadvertently exposed to content which promotes or showcases cruelty to animals.”

A FILM OF DUAL LEGACY

Despite the outcry, The Abyss remains highly regarded by fans for its technical achievements and emotional storytelling. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film enjoys an 89% approval rating, with many reviewers hailing it as an underrated gem in Cameron’s portfolio.

One viewer commented:

“James Cameron’s best film IMO. A work of art that was very difficult to make, but it was worth it. The performances, set design, storyline and special effects are beyond amazing.”

Another fan wrote:

“Packaged with relatable and interesting people, the stakes are always high and the action never stops, as Cameron takes you deep underwater in this claustrophobic epic.”

Still, opinions diverge. One dissenting viewer remarked:

“Very bad honestly. It would have worked much better as a sci-fi horror movie. Wasted potential for a plot.”

The temporary disappearance of The Abyss from Disney+ is more than just a programming update—it reflects a wider conversation about ethical responsibility in entertainment. As audiences shift toward streaming and digital consumption, regulatory frameworks must evolve to keep pace. For now, a decades-old scene continues to challenge the industry’s boundaries between creative expression and compassionate standards.