So, is it a Given now that Films will have scenes removed just to add them on the DVD
04-01-04, 07:13 PM
#1
Suspended; also need updated email
Thread Starter
So, is it a Given now that Films will have scenes removed just to add them on the DVD
It seems more and more that scenes are being cut out of movies, not for artistic merit or Director's vision, but just so the scenes can be put back in on the dvd.
It's a total given for any raunchy sex comedy that there will be an unrated version with "more nudity etc" plastered all over the cover
This trend seems to have spread to other movies and it sucks!
It's a total given for any raunchy sex comedy that there will be an unrated version with "more nudity etc" plastered all over the cover
This trend seems to have spread to other movies and it sucks!
04-01-04, 07:19 PM
#2
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think it takes a lot of the fight out of the film maker. Before it would be that it was either in the film or never seen again left on the cutting room floor. Now with the ability to show all those scenes cut, film makers are just telling themselves "Well, I could cut this after all and still include it on the dvd". Takes a lot of the fight to push it to get the scene in the film away.
Eurotrip is one that comes to mind. the trailer had shots that never made it to screen. I'm sure it will be tossed in the "unrated" version simply to sell it.
Eurotrip is one that comes to mind. the trailer had shots that never made it to screen. I'm sure it will be tossed in the "unrated" version simply to sell it.
04-02-04, 07:02 AM
#3
DVD Talk Legend
Practically every movie in existance has had a scene cut from it, or at least bits of dialogue and such. It's part of the editing process. I don't think DVD has made it more prevalent, but it has increased our awareness of it.
Also, just because a scene is shown in a trailer doesn't mean it was something the director wanted in the final cut. Trailers are edited seperately, sometimes before the film in question is even done being shot, let alone edited. Trailer editors just use the footage they think works best for the trailer, and that footage sometimes includes stuff that is cut out of the finished film.
I also don't think DVD has caused directors to compromise more. Rather, it shows us just how often compromise usually occurs. Directors are one part of a collaborative process, they still have to answer to the producers and the studio regarding the final product.
About DVDs having "more nudity," Hollywood productions typically shoot way more footage than they need for any given scene. To add nudity to an unrated DVD edit of a film, I doubt the director has to deliberately shoot any more footage than he regularly would've. However, I've never seen a DVD advertised with the actual phrase "more nudity" included.
In fact, concerning most unrated cuts appearing on DVD, the added material typically isn't that raunchy. All "unrated" means is that the studio didn't submit that particular edit to the MPAA for a rating. A film could theoretically remove nudity and be unrated. However, the studios know that most people consider "unrated" to mean "more nudity" and be raunchier, which is why they use it for teen sex comedies and such.
Most unrated cuts are for films that are rated R in the first place. Studios won't release anything rated higher than an R into the theatres, so the added raunchy material would've been cut anyway, even if the director knew the footage wouldn't appear on DVD.
However, I do think studios are creating too many "director's cuts," "extended cuts," "unrated cuts," etc. Some of these didn't need to be totally new cuts, and the added footage would've been better presented as a seperate "deleted scenes" feature on the DVD. However, the studios are just releasing what they think will sell, and so far consumers have by and large enthusiastically bought these alternate cuts.
Also, just because a scene is shown in a trailer doesn't mean it was something the director wanted in the final cut. Trailers are edited seperately, sometimes before the film in question is even done being shot, let alone edited. Trailer editors just use the footage they think works best for the trailer, and that footage sometimes includes stuff that is cut out of the finished film.
I also don't think DVD has caused directors to compromise more. Rather, it shows us just how often compromise usually occurs. Directors are one part of a collaborative process, they still have to answer to the producers and the studio regarding the final product.
About DVDs having "more nudity," Hollywood productions typically shoot way more footage than they need for any given scene. To add nudity to an unrated DVD edit of a film, I doubt the director has to deliberately shoot any more footage than he regularly would've. However, I've never seen a DVD advertised with the actual phrase "more nudity" included.
In fact, concerning most unrated cuts appearing on DVD, the added material typically isn't that raunchy. All "unrated" means is that the studio didn't submit that particular edit to the MPAA for a rating. A film could theoretically remove nudity and be unrated. However, the studios know that most people consider "unrated" to mean "more nudity" and be raunchier, which is why they use it for teen sex comedies and such.
Most unrated cuts are for films that are rated R in the first place. Studios won't release anything rated higher than an R into the theatres, so the added raunchy material would've been cut anyway, even if the director knew the footage wouldn't appear on DVD.
However, I do think studios are creating too many "director's cuts," "extended cuts," "unrated cuts," etc. Some of these didn't need to be totally new cuts, and the added footage would've been better presented as a seperate "deleted scenes" feature on the DVD. However, the studios are just releasing what they think will sell, and so far consumers have by and large enthusiastically bought these alternate cuts.
04-02-04, 01:20 PM
#4
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well yes, The Editing process always leaves the task of choosing which are the scenes that are less important and/or ruin the flow of the film left on the editing floor. That is not new.
The scene I speak of in Euro trip is where the female lead flashes the trucks passing by showing a bra to hitch hike. in the film they did everything else in the scene and just skipped that. Now the film is not long by any counts and the removal of the scene does nothing bad for the story or the flow of the film. This would be an example where they decided to keep something on the side for a "unrated" release. unrated as in a marketing ploy since the material wouldn't have costed the film any higher of a rating.
It's no lie that many of these Unrated cuts wouldn't have gotten any higher of a rating if it was submitted again. But they choose to keep it as unrated to sale a couple more. This is an added incentive to leave some small piece as the above mentioned scene out in order to try to "justify" the reason it is unrated.
Now with that option film makers in other cases don't have to fight for something to stay in. They can easily say "Well, we could put it in on the dvd". The scene could or could not easily provide some material that really would help the film. But with the incentive of getting it on the dvd only (so folks who saw it in theaters will need to see it on dvd in order to truely see the film). The fact that studios also take part of this creative idea and would love to market the dvd unrated on dvd than of course they choose to go for the double views by the audiance and suggest to keep stuff on the editing bay floor to have enough new material to the viewer to justify the double dip in a sense.
The scene I speak of in Euro trip is where the female lead flashes the trucks passing by showing a bra to hitch hike. in the film they did everything else in the scene and just skipped that. Now the film is not long by any counts and the removal of the scene does nothing bad for the story or the flow of the film. This would be an example where they decided to keep something on the side for a "unrated" release. unrated as in a marketing ploy since the material wouldn't have costed the film any higher of a rating.
It's no lie that many of these Unrated cuts wouldn't have gotten any higher of a rating if it was submitted again. But they choose to keep it as unrated to sale a couple more. This is an added incentive to leave some small piece as the above mentioned scene out in order to try to "justify" the reason it is unrated.
Now with that option film makers in other cases don't have to fight for something to stay in. They can easily say "Well, we could put it in on the dvd". The scene could or could not easily provide some material that really would help the film. But with the incentive of getting it on the dvd only (so folks who saw it in theaters will need to see it on dvd in order to truely see the film). The fact that studios also take part of this creative idea and would love to market the dvd unrated on dvd than of course they choose to go for the double views by the audiance and suggest to keep stuff on the editing bay floor to have enough new material to the viewer to justify the double dip in a sense.
