Well if a film is heavily cut. Then their's good reason to be peeved & to avoid the cut release. House falls into this catagory despite still being a pretty hard R. It was much 'harder' from the reports of those who caught early glimpses of the film. even Zombie recently stated in a interview that the film was butchured drastically by over 15-20 minutes before earning a R.

So with the news that we would have to either A-suffer the cut version in theaters...& then B-see/wait for the real uncut version on dvd depending on if you want to wait even longer to catch a glimpse of the film.

I saw it once in theaters & enjoyed it as best as i could with the news that i would be able to see the real version of the film in a few months.

So i had'nt planned on ever seeing the R rated version again once the dvd was released. Yet now they may not be releasing a uncut version yet,or at all. More reasons to be peeved. We've waited years to see the film. Sat through the cut version..& are dieing to see the real version.

Now if the dvd included a branching option to view the unrated version. Then i would be happy. If the footage is only included as a 'extra' for now. That is a ripoff since the footage should be IN the film itself.

So we'll just wait & see how the news goes upon release of what the dvd really contains.

i liked the theatrical cut but even while watching i knew i would get to own the unrated full cut. we know the cut footage exists and we know zombie wanted/planned to make the dvd og his cut.
now lions gate isn't delivering, why?

i can only think the news is wrong or they want to double dip. i'm not going to let the studio rip me off, even if it was a movie i want to own. i can hold out. 3 years from now and no uncut SE, well then if i can find the dvd for 5 bucks, then i'll compromise.

another screw up from a DVD company. I remember hearing at almost every site that the movie was being released R-rated in the theater and then Unrated when it hits DVD. Rob himself said he was working on an Unrated DVD in an interview in this months Sound & Vision. I wonder what happened there? will we have to wait until next yr. right before part 2 hits the big screens to finally be able to see this Unrated cut? Maybe Lions Gate is going to go the way of Universal and rerelease this every few months, like American Pie?

I've got this weird feeling that we're going to see an uncut DVD of this, exclusively through Rob Zombie's website...just a hunch

The R rated cut isn't gory at all. In fact it should have been rated PG instead.

They better deliver the UNCUT version soon.

I'm not boycotting the film I'm giong to buy it, but I do have to say that I'm going to be somewhat disappointed.

If the DVD has deleted scenes, then you should just be happy to see that. I would like to see an unrated version of the film, but if there is none then boo hoo, I guess I'll have to settle for the rated version. I could understand if it was cut from the theatrical version, but it wasn't so just settle.

And you misspelled "dying" just to point that out!

P.S. The Lions Gate Version of "American Psycho" is rated R not uncut

This story just keeps getting more confusing.
http://www.creature-corner.com/dvd/jun10corpsesdvd.php3

No Unrated cut, no sale for me. It will come out UR eventually, I'll bet on it.

If this is the R-rated cut, then they just lost another sale.

Nice job, guys.

From the above Creature Corner article:
“Lions Gate has a strong tradition with horror films which allowed us to see the genius in Rob’s work and was instrumental in our being a great partner for him. Some parts of this film are very graphic, too much so that we had to tone it down for the theatrical release. But in the DVD, it’s all here, just as Rob intended, in all its striking and vivid detail. HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES is a true horror fan’s delight.” - Peter Block, Lions Gate President of Home Entertainment, Acquisitions, and New Media.
WTF?

Yep very confusing. Could be talking about the deleted scenes on the dvd or the film is uncut themselves & people have just got the current info wrong for obvious reasons. Well will have to wait & see what really becomes of it.

Well since this is not a case of the cut footage being in bad unusable condition,that we'd have to settle for them as deleted scenes only. The film is new,the footage meant to be in the film & in good enough condition. Therefore no reason to not release the uncut version.


+ who cares if it wasn't cut from the theatrical release. It was cut before the release in order to get released in theaters in the first place. Rob tryed to release the uncut version,but the studio wanted to get it into as many theaters as possible. Thus it had to be heavily cut down. We're not talknig a few measely seconds as in most of the 'mainstream' unrated versions released today. We're talking about plenty of graphic footage.

Also with the news that we'd be getting the uncut version on dvd. Thats got our hopes up. Yet now with the confusing news of late. If it is R rated only,then that feels like a huge cop out compared to what was stated before.


ps- American Psycho sucks..the book rules though

You guys are just not getting what I'm saying are you?

I don't care one way or the other, I would love an UR version, but if not too bad, I guess I'll cry myself to sleep

But if it had been released uncut then cut for the release that would be something wrong. If I haven't seen the footage then it's not that bad, if I had then were deprived of it then I would be upset.

You know, I remember you (JulieWalker) getting upset over a few seconds cut from Jason X

I guess it comes down to the director’s original intent. Rob made the movie EXACTLY the way he intended it to be seen and was forced to cut it by the studio. I didn’t see it in the theater the same way I wouldn’t buy a DVD that was cut against the director’s wishes. If they do not release a full uncut version of this movie I won’t bother with it, the same way I wouldn’t bother with a 90 minute edit of The Godfather (OK, by comparing this flick to the Godfather I may have lost any credibility I had).

As I watched this movie, I kept saying to myself, "Man, I can't wait to see what that scene was supposed to be like", knowing full well that there was much that I wasn't seeing. But you're right, if we had no clue that there was additional footage then this would be a non issue, but that just isn't the case. Right from the start all sources led everyone to believe that the theatrical release was just to whet our appetite for the real version.

Actually i was not 'upset over the cuts to that film since they were litterally so minor(a frame here & here). It would be of no real interest to see. In fact those expecting a huge all out gorefest would feel ripped off. Since the film is very dry besides a brief scene or two that a unrated version would make no different in tone/impact at all.

I did feel ripped off in how the director copped out on the gore level considering it was supposed to be a all out gorefest with the huge bodycount it had. Yet the kill scenes were pretty unoriginal & boring(expect for the headsmash/freezing scene),compared to what they could have done.


I also agree with the previous poster on the directors intent. The R version is not what he intended. It was a compromise for release,with the real version planned for release on dvd.

We're not talking a completely revisionism thing here years after the fact ala Spielberg,Lucas among many others. We're talking about simply scenes/footage cut/toned down in order to get a R rating instead of NC-17. In this case,it was cut severely & shows in many scenes. So thats another reason to be upset if only the R version is being released.

Yet some people just don't understand that. It's the same reason i will avoid buying My Bloody Valentine(rather get it used,than have $$ go to the studio) which is also severely cut(& the footage does exist!). If Paramount were to ever decide to restore that film. Then i would gladly pay full retail for it.

I can't believe I'm chiming in here, and I understand both sides very well.

Julie Walker said "If Paramount were to ever decide to restore that film. Then i would gladly pay full retail for it."

I'm going to look at this from a business angle, which if you haven't noticed by now is what gets these little DVDs into our collections. If we didn't buy them, they wouldn't make them.

Exactly how many copies of "My Bloody Valentine" do you think were sold? If you were to add up the costs involved to put out even a bare-bones edition on DVD, it's a miracle we have some of these little movies out at all. I understand that there are many fans of many films everywhere.

However cut it may be, if it was released to theaters that way, then I would only expect it to get the same release on DVD, with deleted or unrated (a term far too loosely thrown onto packaging) being icing on the cake. Let's face it, DVD has let too many directors tinker around with their work (often years after the fact).

Mr. Zombie was clearly paid well enough to allow Lions Gate to get this film into theaters at any cost (There's that word again!) He will probably be alot more judicious when filming the sequel, knowing full well the problems that he had with the first film.

I watched "House Of 1000 Corpses" on DVD last night, and while I knew that it had been heavily edited for its theatrical release, I was pleased enough with what I saw.

Let's also keep in mind the time it takes to get a "special-edition" of a lesser known effort prepped for DVD release (all the time keeping in mind the cost to the studios for even so much as a "TV Spot" to be included, commentary, etc.). If it's only going to sell to a small number, then why do it? Because you'll be well-liked by a few thousand DVD fans? (We all know any business fails unless you're making more than you're spending.)

Case in point: While I'm rather disappointed with the full-frame and featureless release of one of my favorite films ("Miracle Mile"), I'd rather have it on DVD any way I can get it. Some of the questions and posts about some of these small movies getting "the special edition treatment" just makes me roll my eyes. Come on, if you think you're ever gonna see a special edition re-release of "Miracle Mile" (or even "My Bloody Valentine"), then you're simply deluded.

Rather than complain about these big studio DVDs, I'd rather applaud the work of the "Anchor Bays" and "Blue Undergrounds" of the DVD landscape, who are driven by both profit and love of the films they release on DVD.

I'm not siding with the studios, just looking at this realistically.

I'm going to get down off of my soapbox now and offer this advice: If you don't like it, don't buy it...but don't ever expect it to get better.

Mao, i understand your viewpoint and feel the same way on some releases, but not all. i thought one of the great things about dvd is it's lost cost, for us and the studio.

i don't know the actual cost of extras, esp commentary. but i do know that mgm has quite a few budget titles that are ample in special features. while these films may be "cult" titles and not blockbusters, i feel it is then even more important to do them right the first time. i can see a movie in a theater or a can rent it. either way i've seen the film. now if they want me to buy a film for my collection, the expense must be justified.

regardless, i feel house of 1k corpses is it's own seperate beast.
we all new it was graphic and cut. we also knew from what zombie had said that there would be a unrated edition. so there is an expectation. to not deliver the goods, when the whole movies is practically about those goods, is strange. nonetheless, i did enjoy the theatrical cut, but while sitting in the theater i was also speculating which scenes were cut short and anticipated their viewing in the film when i bought the dvd.

and to add to it, we still don't know sure what is going to happen.
will all the cuts be inserted using seamless branching, or just included with the deleted scenes, who knows for sure. but i can't possibly imagine this dvd not being re-released down the road as a UR DC dvd. and if i or anyone else wants to play the waiting game hoping for the best, so be it. and as fans of the film we also have a right to cry foul play when what we want isn't being made available to us.

Off-topic....

Saw the latest San Diego Comic-Con mailer and looks like Rob Zombie and cast members will attend next month. If anyone (other than me) is planning on going maybe you can ask hm what the deal is....

See thats the point though. Paramount has had ample time & opportunity to do various releases right to make sure they sell the maximum amount possible. Yet they choose to ignore it instead,with the possibility of 'SEs' later on if they sell well. Well mostly they reserve SEs for the latest big blockbuster or there more profitable franchises. Hence the Star Trek SE's..& now the news of F13th SE's(yet will they be uncut remains to be seen).

While that may be considered 'smart' business move for the more popular titles. How do they expect more than just the fans to pick up all there other unknown/small/cult titles?


MBV could have sold most likely more copies than it has in it's current state if if were uncut. The mere fact that it would be the first time anywhere to ever see the uncensored version of the film. Would bring in the curious & fans in general to purchase the film...thus hiking up the sales. Heck market it around Halloween,when the mainstream is more into purchasing 'scary movies,a nice price..& they are guaranteed to pick it up blind.

Also since a uncut print does exist..& the producer has it in his possession. Why turn away the chance to make the most possible profit by releasing the same old butchured R version which will drive people away,rather than to?

Also if costs are a issue with restoring prints & all that. Well why waste $$$$ on the version that people don't want..instead of the one they DO want? Where's the logic in that?

Also since Blythe said the films would be released 'as requested',refering to the hometheaterforum.com B movie poll from awhile back. MBV was #10 on the list(pretty good for a cult movie)..& clearly had it listed as MBV:UNCUT. So you would think if they released the films 'as requested'. They would go for the uncut version right?

Instead they give us the R rated version in a nice looking print i'm sure. Yet since it's the same old butchured version we've seen for the past 20 years. Why bother owning it,when i can rent it or catch it on cable instead? It's a classic horror movie i think. Yet the severe editing is just horrendous & destroys impact of all the murder/suspense sequences. That it's really not worth owing at the moment..unless you can find it really cheap used.

+ I see nothing wrong with them releasing the uncut version of this or other heavily censored films. Cry all you want over 'revisionism' which is a entirely different issue over uncut releases...which are the 'real' versions of the film whether you like it or not.

The day i see the uncut gore from MBV. I'll be a very happy fan..& gladly hand over my $$ to purchase the release...& would love to sit there & enjoy the film without any of those nasty choppy jump cuts which ruin a otherwise great film. "Revisionism"?..i think not. Great..yes

Now if they went & CGI'ed the entire film & drastically altered it today to make it 'modern'. Then you can bet your ass,i'll be boycotting & voicing my opinion. Yet again this is NOT revisionism. It's releasing the film as intended,but the ratings board prevented.

So can you put two & two together & see that they are not exactly equal & entirely different beings?

From what I read somewhere (as soon as I find it again, I'll post it) there is no unrated version of this film. There may have been stuff cut out, but the version that is in theaters is the way Rob Zombie wanted it. It's funny, because Rob Zombie recorded an audio commentary on the R rated version. Hmmm...makes you think, huh?

P.S. Julie Walker, you really need to work on your English. "AN unrated" not "A unrated"

Actually the facts seem to be rather contradictory. First he states only a few seconds were cut,really minor stuff. Then he states over 15-20 minutes were cut & that the film was butchured.

Now he may have had to keep quiet on just how much was cut before release. Otherwise it would keep the die hard fans away from the film in protest until a uncut version is released(as some people avoided the theatrical release because of this). Afterall if a film were butchured beyond recognition & you knew the facts before release. Would you still want to support 'that' version of the film & while not being able to enjoy the film the same way as you would in uncut form knowing it's butchured to death?

Also just because he recorded a commentary for the R version does not mean much. Afterall Lions Gate released the R rated version of Return of the Living Dead 3. The cast & crew were not aware of this until durring the commentary & point out many times how unhappy they are with the R version & the FX guy even tells people to complain to the studio & demand the unrated version be released!

Now maybe if/when Rob does record the commentary. We'll get the entire story & finally know just how much or little was cut. Yet even if it were only a few seconds. I'd want to see them. The opening burglary/murder sequence was obviouslly badly edited to cut out all the onscreen violence & made those brief few seconds very confusing.

P.S. Julie Walker, you really need to work on your English. "AN unrated" not "A unrated" [/QUOTE]

Oh boo hoo,so i missed one letter & said A instead of AN. I have more important things to do,than worry about one mispelled word online,unlike some people.

Well i found this information on davisdvd.com. This may have been the blurb mentioned before.


»_06.14.03__ FINAL WORD ON '1000 CORPSES'
_So I guess the DVD won't include the unrated edition: speaking to Video Store Magazine, director Rob Zombie has finally given us the official word on the House of 1000 Corpses DVD. Confusion has abounded as to which cut of the film will be included on the disc, but according to Zombie it's the 'R'-rated version. Zombie adds that a future unrated version is not out of the realm of possibility. "At this point, that [unrated] version doesn't exist. This is really all there is right now." The article goes on to mention that Zombie plans on regrouping the cast in full makeup to shoot live-action interactive menus.

__________________



Now just because he saws the unrated version 'doesn't' exist does not mean the R version was the way he intended the film to be seen!

He could be stating that a unrated release does not exist at the moment(only the R version was used/transfered to dvd ect ect). Yet it may be released down the line(probably when the sequel is released). So unless Zombie states otherwise on the commentary & the 'graphic' footage is nowhere to be found in the extras department. We won't know for sure just how much was cut until the unrated version is released to compare the two.

Now will i buy the dvd since it looks like it amy be a year or so until the unrated verison may be released? Thats still up in the air. Had it been unrated. It would be a must buy on release day. Now thats it's the R version. It's something i can put off to the side for now. Have to many great dvds(including uncut releases) to purchase at the moment. So it's more of a wait & see now.

Am I the only one who wants the theatrical and uncut versions of films. You should want the original version and the "uncut" versions of films, so you can get the whole idea of what is missing and what has been added in.

If it doesn't exist what makes you think that all of a sudden it's going to appear out of mid-air. IT DOESN'T EXIST!

Could you mean, says?

Could you mean, may?