Blu-Ray = R-rated, DVD = unrated...why?
 

I see that there are a few titles coming out where the dvd has an unrated cut while the Blu-Ray disc only has the R-rated version(Basic Instinct 2 & Ultraviolet) and am wondering if this will be the next trend. you want Blu-Ray but also want the unrated cut you need to make double purchases of both dvd and blu-ray. why not offer both versions on the blu-ray disc?

I wonder if the goal is to:

1) keep the number of SKUs down (so no separate R-rated/unrated releases)
2) keep the prudish folks happy by not offering R-rated and unrated on the same disc
3) reconciling #1 and #2 by only having an R-rated version

I agree that it's colosally stupid. My guess: Sony would rather just have one disc per movie at launch, and they think that if there's only going to be one disc, it makes more sense for it to be rated.

Do we need to have 2 versions of every movie? THAT is the bigger question.

Yet another reason I am not liking Blu Ray at this point....

yeah!

Just because we have a new disc format doesn't mean they are going to change the silliness that sometimes appears. We'll still have multiple releases of some movies, no doubt enough to make us insane.

Sony et al. are the king of double dipping. Prepare to se unrated versions on blu-ray later.

Maybe they are having issues with seamless branching on BD??

This is a possibility. I haven't heard anything about it from either camp. Is it possible?

hey with all that space (lol), why not put both versions in full on there.

Well, I suspect that some director's/unrated cuts are not already put together in full length.

They just insert the new/alternate scenes using seamless branching. This might be the issue they are running into. So, putting both full versions on it is not an option.

Im just speculating though because Im obviously not an editor.

Not saying this is just a problem with BD either. HD-DVD could have similar issues, but I dont know.

Has seamless branching even been discussed by either camp?

I dont know, but since BD is using MPEG2 encoding AND single layer discs (25gb) for a while, it very well may not fit on one disc.

Are people really interested in watching the unrated version of the movie? It's always struck me as being like the "director's cut" scam where the studio trys to convince you you're missing out if you don't watch this version. Extra footage is better off being included as deleted scenes, IMHO.

That's what I was thinking.

Another reason could be that if they're only going to release one version, they figure it should be the theatrical cut for the "purists."

Really depends on the movie. Sometimes I prefer deleted scenes separate, but sometimes they are so good I wish they were just in the movie.

One possibility is that retailers have demanded fewer versions of the early movies, in order to use less shelving real estate for such low volume formats.

Sorry, just wanted to type "shelving real estate" : it makes me feel like such a pro. :D

I agree. They chose the rated one so that retailers like Walmart will carry it.

Yes, if there were cuts to the movie due to the MPAA. High Tension is a perfect recent example as well as The Hills Have Eyes remake.

Thank You. These titles will probably be released numerous times in various forms.

Perfect example would the the original Star Wars movies vs. the SE versions.

Does Wal-Mart not carry any unrated versions? Or are they just selective as to which unrated titles to carry (like BBV)?

If the former, just another reason for me to hate WM. ;)

It depends on whether the title would get an NC-17 rating. If it would get an R or even a PG-13, they'll carry it.

Yes, those add-ons should be kept separate. Like still buried in a closet somewhere on Skywalker ranch.

Ah, so they are like Blockbuster then.

"They're driving me CRAZY. These Baptists are stupid. Stupid. STUPID."

jk ;)