LAND OF THE DEAD dvd (1 Viewer)

[Michael Elliott]

John, you've made some good points but I guess it all goes back to the director. Horror fans are usually very anal about certain issues but I honestly don't think you're going to find too many upset about this issue. Most people are going to want the unrated version and won't care about the theatrical cut. A double standard? Perhaps but most people only complain when it's something they actually want. I don't think too many want the theatrical cut in this case.


I've been screwed three times this year with MASK, CRY BABY and SLING BLADE. All three are new "director's cuts" and the movies went down a bit due to new scenes being added. I would certainly prefer the theatrical cuts but I'm not--and can't-- fight with the director so you've pretty much gotta take what they give or want you to have.

I'm sure you're saying we're using this "director's want it that way" to make a strong argument and perhaps we are. I'm sure if Argento said his prefered cut of DEEP RED was the 96(?) minute version, not everyone would throw away the longer cut.

Going back to page two, AB's DAWN set is certainly one of the greatest releases out there but I was actually VERY disappointed that the "Drive-In" cut wasn't included.

 

[Vincent_P]

Well, there would be at least one big difference- LAND OF THE DEAD was shot in Super-35, so the "full-frame" release won't be nearly as compromised as a pan-and-scan version of the anamorphically-shot STAR WARS films were.

Vincent

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Yes, well, either open matte or pan and scan, shit is still shit, no matter what color it is.

 

[Vincent_P]

There are two "official" versions of DEEP RED- the Italian PROFONDO ROSSO release which runs 126-mintues, and the English-language DEEP RED export print which runs 104-minutes. Both are "official" versions of the film that were edited in Italy under Argento's supervision, and actually I *WAS* and am a bit peeved that Anchor Bay didn't release the shorter cut as well as the long version- for one thing, the switching between English and Italian language- often in the middle of scenes- is a bit jarring in the Anchor Bay version. But, I certainly would never "boycott" the Anchor Bay release because it lacks the shorter cut (although their tampering with the end credits was really stupid, but I digress), although the inclusion of the shorter, tighter edit (with the English-language inserts and credits) in a beautiful anamorphic widescreen presentation would be most welcome, as some fans prefer that cut of the film.

The U.S. theatrical release (and early video releases) of DEEP RED are actually further cut down from the 104-minute English export version to an approximately 98-minute running time. Some violence was trimmed, as well as a few dialogue and transitional scenes. It is NOT an "official" version in the slightest- it's more akin to the butchered PG-13 cut of Dimension Film's release DARKNESS.

Vincent

 

[Ruz-El]

Am I the only one that regularly skips theatrical horror movies in anticipation of seeing the directors cut on DVD, and is dissapointed when that doesn't happen?

Really, in this day and age of filmdom, is the theatrical cut really that important? I know that if I was making a horror movie, I would try to get in my contract to release it uncut on DVD, wilingly compromising whatever I had too in the theatrial cut to get my movie made.

As far as LOD Theatrical cut, Lucas and Star Wars, ALexander, what ever, I always choose the Directors cut, better or worse, as that is the way it was intended to be seen, irregardless of what played or didn't play in the theater. It not the Directors job to make us happy, it's the directors job to create his vision of the film, what people think is subjective, and can;t be the film makers concern. don't get me wrong, I don't like walkie talkies in ET, Gredo shooting first in Star Wars, or most of the add ons to Apocalypse Now Redux, but I'm not going to piss and moan about it because of some over sentimental nostilgic notion to recreate what I saw in the theaters.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

That's cool, Russell, that you prefer DC's whenever available. But, certaintly you wouldn't begrudge one who asks for the theatrical cut to be presented correctly, would you?

Alright, so the R-rated cut doesn't have as much gore, or is not as long etc, but when I saw it in theaters I enjoyed what I saw, I had a good time watching it, it's not unreasonable to ask for that cut in it's OAR, is it?

I really don't think so.

 

[Kevin M]

By "unexpected opposition" I mean that you seemed to grab up the OAR torch and yelled WE'RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER..RIGHT? CHARGE!!! before running a few steps & looking behind you to find that no one was following you, then basically blushing and saying "well....that's just my opinion"....

As I said, that's how it played out to me when I looked back on the thread....no real offence meant but perhaps a bit of a ribbing.

 

[Ruz-El]

John, I don't really begrudge you, just don't understand you. It's great that you liked the theatrical cut, what happens if you love the DC? Will you watch the TC as much? Well you care.

I like TC cuts as well, Natural Born Killers has a choppy feel to it that actually works for the movie, but in most instances where 6 minutes is being added, like in this case, it serves to flesh out characteriazation, make the story better. I could understand your passion if it was a radically changed cut, like "Alexander", but that's not the case. And beside, you can still see you TC, just with a little more compromise to an already compromised version that isn't supported by the Director (if I'm understanding Vincent P's posts correctly.)

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Nah, I knew that when I posted that, there was about a 80 to 20% chance that it was a kamakazi maneauver on my part.

You have a way with word's, my friend.

 

[Kevin M]

I realize that I never actually stated where I stand on the subject, I don't agree with the above opinion. I think the TC should be offered in the AR that it was presented in at the theaters....if they have to do P&S then offer both versions for those that want a choice.

IMO this is simply a cost cutting choice from a studio that wants to hedge it's bets on a financial disappointment by cutting back on the cost on the amount of discs it needs to produce.....or are they going to offer the DC in P&S as well?

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

To be honest, Russell, I probably would like the DC better and watch that one the most, but I still would like the theatrical cut just to have because it's the one that I enjoyed at the theater.

Two reason's...

1. I strongly believe that we need to preserve what was in theaters.

And

2. It's the completest side of my brain that needs to buy both.

 

[Ruz-El]

I understand, but in this case, I personally would rather pay for the director approved cut. Seeing how there is a (IMO) preffered cut offerd in OAR, in this case, this is battle that seems to be won, actually not really to exist. Manly because I have no interest in the TC, and am selfish and don't care about what others want

You must have a pretty a good theater that you goto, the last thing I would want a DVD to do was replicate what I typically see when I go out!

 

[Blake Siefken]

I used to think people who wanted both versions were nuts, then I saw the director's cut of "The Abyss". If that was the only version availible, then I'd be really angry, because it sucks (my opinion, I respect yours). I think they should put both versions on the same DVD via semless branching.

Or! With Land of the Dead, they should do what they did with Dawn, and release a four disc edition with every version of the movie. That would be cool.

The original version of Dawn is Romero's perferred version, the extended cut is there for people who prefer it and are interested in seeing it. They should do the same with Land.

I hope the director's cut of Land has more explosions. I like the parts when things get exploded.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Russell, , yeah, us Anne Hathaway loving OAR Sith Lords are always getting the shit end of the stick!

 

[Vincent_P]

"What was shown in theaters" IS preserved, in the form of 35mm pre-print film elements. A standard-definition, MPEG-2 compressed DVD release does not a preservation element make.

Vincent

 

[Vincent_P]

They are, as both versions are being released. One (the compromised version) just happens to be full-frame, and the other anamorphic widescreen.

Vincent

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Well, Vincent, a 35mm pre-print does nobody any good if it sits in a vault at Universal and rots into nothingness. Not exactly my definition of preserve.

Also, dvd is a damn fine method of preserving something, it may not be up to the quality of film, but at least people can own it and see it.

I'm growing weary of this topic, I think i've said pretty much everything I wanted to say, so farewell, my fair weather OAR supporters.

 

[Vincent_P]

Wow, you're a true martyr. And to think, I considered myself a cinephile who supported the proper presentation of movies, what with my having bought a laserdisc player in 1989 at age 16 and having started to collect OAR laserdiscs at that time (and using them to educate friends on the wonders of letterboxing).

Vincent

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Deleted.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Apologies, Vincent, I didn't mean that, everyone's cool in my book.