My Bloody Valentine Special Edition Coming From Lionsgate, But... (1 Viewer)

[Wesley Ray]

To cash in on the upcoming 3-D remake, Shock Till You Drop is reporting that Lionsgate will be releasing a special edition DVD of My Bloody Valentine in January. According to STYD... "Special features will include never-before-seen lost footage, a featurette examining the back history of the making of the film and the Ultimate Slasher interactive guide that allows the user to delve into the evolution of the slasher film/horror genre."

While I am excited that this film is getting a much-deserved second chance on DVD, this release isn't good enough. We all bought the first release in good faith that sometime down the road, the uncut version would be released. This is the one opportunity we have for that, and it's not happening.

Write Lionsgate today. There is still time to make an uncut version happen. It doesn't have to be the best of quality (in my e-mail to them, I use Anchor Bay's Silent Night Deadly Night as an example). We just want the film as it was originally intended. We want a bloody "VALENTINE".

This could be our very last chance to make the uncut release happen. In tight economic times, I simply can't justify buying another copy of the theatrical version. I hope all of you Harry Warden fans will take the time to write Lionsgate Home Video a very polite, but heart-felt e-mail about how much finally getting to see the uncut version of this film will mean to you...but most importantly...how much more likely you are to purchase the disc if it is included. I know e-mail campaigns are a dime a dozen, but what will one more hurt? And remember, as evidenced by Columbia's last-minute decision to add the theatrical poster art to the insert of Happy Birthday to Me, E-MAIL CAMPAIGNS CAN WORK!!!

Repost this on any and all other forums you visit. We have to get the word out hard and fast.

I found this address... [email protected] but if anyone knows of a better, more direct one, feel free to post it as well.

 

[Simon Caleb]

Thanks for the email link Wes. I fired off a polite and detailed request for an uncut release of this atmospheric slasher.

I guess only time will tell if enough people write, call and email Lionsgate with their request...

 

[Michael Elliott]

The "lost" footage is the cut footage.

 

[TravisR]

Like Michael alluded to, are you sure that the 'lost' footage isn't reincoportated into the movie?

 

[Wesley Ray]

The way it was reported at Shock Till You Drop, it sounded as if the lost footage will be on the disc as an extra feature. If the footage IS intended to be cut back into the film, all of our e-mails will hopefully prompt Lionsgate to issue a press release to clear up the confusion. As of now, I'm still operating under the impression that the original report implies the footage will be an extra feature only.

Which is better than nothing, but really...if they already have the footage, and a fanboy in his basement can probably whip up a fan edit in a matter of hours or less, there is no reason at all that Lionsgate can't slap together an uncut composite similar to what Anchor Bay did with Silent Night Deadly Night. They could include a dislaimer at the beginning explaining to viewers the difference in quality of some scenes. Seamless branching is another option, but if cost is prohibitive, I'd be perfectly happy with a composite of the remastered R rated and lesser grade uncut footage. Both theatrical and uncut versions could be included.

Also, a new e-mail address has surfaced... [email protected]

If you've already sent an e-mail, I'm sure that'll suffice, but just in case, I went ahead and copied my original e-mail to the new address.

 

[Simon Caleb]

Michael's rather stating the obvious. What else would it have been other than cut footage.

No one has reported the cut footage will be reinstated, so far.
What has been reported or carefully worded is deleted scenes, extra features.

A good friend worked at Paramount during the time of Valentine's release, had the enviable job of reinserting a gore shot (a character ripping his own arm off) from a reel of the US MPAA censored gore.
Said reel was thrown away when Paramount UK had an annual cull. This reel was I'm informed, sent to most territories for the distributor to use dependant on local censorship at that time.

What I do know is it played pretty much uncut in Southern Germany, Japan and Greece. And the UK had one extra gore scene, the aforementioned arm ripping.

What everyone knows, come the time of MBV's home video release, every territory was supplied the North American R rated cut. A similar annoying procedure happened with 'A Nightmare on Elm Street' which played in UK cinemas in unrated form and initial vhs, only to be replaced with the R rated cut for dvd.

But I digress, we have a very short period of time in order to campaign politely yet loudly to Lionsgate, to restore rather than simply supplement this golden 9-10min reel the producer has in negative form.

Wes for what it's worth, I resent my initial email to the new address. Thanks!

 

[TravisR]

I'll send off an e-mail. Like you said, hopefully this will get clariication of Lion's Gate's plans one way or the other.

If the footage is in horrible shape (like the Friday The 13th box set where the Part VII footage looks like an 80th generation dub), I can understand Lion's Gate not using that. However, if the footage is in a state similar to Silent Night, Deadly Night then I think they should definitely reincorporate it into the movie.

 

[Michael Elliott]

To my understanding, Paramount owns the "theatrical cut" while Lionsgate owns the "uncut version". Kinda like how KILL BILL is owned by one studio while the uncut is owned by someone else. NATURAL BORN KILLERS is owned by Warner in its theatrical version but Lionsgate (and actually Oliver Stone) owns the uncut version.

The uncut print was complete so there's no reason for the uncut scenes to be there as an extra as I don't think Lionsgate could release the theatrical cut anyways. I guess we'll have to wait and see though.

 

[Ruz-El]

I sent in an email, despite remembering not liking the film much the last time I saw it. I saw it as a kid and it gave me nightmares, so I'll pick up this release if it's uncut.

 

[Simon Caleb]

Oh well, it was worth a try... just received this reply from Lionsgate,

"Dear Consumer,

Thank you for contacting the LIONSGATE customer Service Department.
>From what I've been told we were unable to make an uncut version of this movie for the release.
The Special Edition will include uncut scenes, but it will be separate
from the movie itself.
We are very excited to be able to share with you the Special Edition and
hope you enjoy the extra features.

Thank you for your enthusiasm and patronage to LIONSGATE films!

-Lionsgate Ent"

So that puts any hope of an uncut version to bed. To say I'm gutted is an understatement!

And who was it saying Lionsgate wouldn't release the same version Paramount put out...

 

[Michael Elliott]

Thanks Simon but that's just downright crazy. IMDBpro has no info on Paramount selling their rights of the film to Lionsgate. Lionsgate got the remake rights but it doesn't mention them buying up the original film. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens but I wouldn't put too much faith into CSD.

Even stranger is that producer John Dunning sent out countless e-mails a couple years back stating that he had found the original negative, which included 8 to 11 minutes worth of extra footage. He claimed that this was the complete version before it was sold to Paramount and before it went to the MPAA. "His" version of events is that he kept this print for himself but ended up losing it. For years the only thing in Paramount's vault was the R-rated, MPAA cut version.

According to the producer, he found this uncut print and took it to Paramount for them to release it but they weren't interested. He then "had permission" to shop the "uncut" version around.

Again, it's strange that there's no mention of Lionsgate buying the original film but apparently they have. If so, what happened to this uncut print that the producer found and sent e-mails to everyone about? Several people at various horror sites got this e-mail and even photos of some of the uncut footage was shown.

But yeah, it's too late to do anything now as Lionsgate has a screener listing out now.

 

[Michael Elliott]

Untitled Document

Check out that link for a longer story about the film. The original e-mail from the producer is not there but I'm still looking for it.

That "sequel" they mention in the piece was also talked about quite a bit several years ago. I'm curious if that sequel was turned into the remake or if this remake is something else all together.

 

[cineMANIAC]

I've said it before: owning copies of my favorite movies in the longest possible version is the ONE thing I care about the most. When a director turns a movie over to the editor it is almost always two or three hours long. He whittles the film down to the studio board-room-mandated 90 minutes and presumably ditches everything he cuts either into a vault or trash can. Unfortunately, the latter is often the case. Every film turned in always exists as an epic before the final cut is released, including low-budget slasher flicks. I want to see the long version. I don't care what condition the footage is in. If i were in charge of a studio I would release every DVD that way.

 

[TravisR]

nevermind

 

[Wesley Ray]

That's the same exact reply I received. I followed it up with yet another e-mail, asking if they could at the very least, include the uncut version as only a bonus feature. That way, they wouldn't have to pay to have it restored, and though it would be rough...we'd at least get to see the complete film as was intended in 1981. I'm not giving up just yet.

If the footage is good enough quality for them to include on the disc as an extra, there's no reason they can't slap together a quickie edit and put it as a bonus feature on the disc.

My optimism is fueled by my experience on the e-mail campaign for Happy Birthday to Me...which was a partial success. Columbia made a very last minute decision to include the original theatrical art on the liner notes insert (the cover art was already printed, but the inserts were not), and even made reference to the fact by placing a sticker on the DVD's cellophane packaging saying something to the effect of "Includes original theatrical poster artwork inside". Better than nothing, for sure. At least we can now use the insert as the cover on our DVD shelves. Now, why else would Columbia have went through all the cost and trouble to manufacture and print stickers advertising this fact on the disc, if they didn't realize that they had made a mistake?

Keep e-mailing them. My Bloody Valentine has many more fans than Happy Birthday to Me does, so garnering people to e-mail shouldn't be nearly as tough as it was for HBtM. We have to show Lionsgate that this decision will affect their sales of this title.

 

[Simon Caleb]

As far as I understand it, the producer, John Dunning stated he found the negatives of the trims, not a complete copy of the uncut film. Nowhere was he quoted as saying he had a complete print in negative form AFAIR.

As I mentioned before, the costs to remaster this footage and create a new uncut master, was I assume too much for Lionsgate to bother with. Especially so, for a 27 year old slasher film.
Until such time horror is treated with the same respect of the likes of 'Metropolis' etc, we're lucky to see this cut footage at all.

Wes using Columbia's change of heart over artwork, isn't in the same league costs wise of striking a new restored master. I fear LG won't budge on this. Still no harm in trying...

If you really want to go action stations on this, perhaps set up a page with an explanation, and contact details. Then alert every horror/film/blog site/page going.
It should spread like wildfire. A similar course of action worked for me this past Summer with the 'Psycho' uncut/unrated on German TV.

If you need some help in spreading it around feel free to PM me.

 

[Wesley Ray]

Double post, sorry!

 

[Wesley Ray]

The cost to remaster the uncut and R-rated footage would be pretty high, I admit. What I'm asking Lionsgate now (and I think it's a fair compromise) is for them to include the existing R-rated cut as the main feature (as it is right now) and to put together an un-restored, rough workrprint cut as a bonus feature. This cut would be rough, but as an extra feature, viewers couldn't expect too much. We'd get to see the feature as was intended, and their remastered, quality R-rated release would still be front and center on the DVD.

Again, though I'd love the uncut one to be remastered with pristine quality, I think having a rough, workprint type version on the disc just for the fans is a more than fair compromise. They could slap together a rough uncut workprint in a day or so, with no other restoration required.

As long as the quality of the uncut scenes isn't much worse than those in Anchor Bay's Silent Night Deadly Night DVD, I don't think this would be that bad at all.

 

[Michael Elliott]

I could have sworn that original e-mail said he had found the negative. This was sent out many years ago so I can't remember it exactly though, although other horror site owners might still have their copy.

I think Lionsgate is making a big mistake here because I'm sure boots will get out there with fans putting the footage back into the film. I'm also curious if these "lost" scenes WILL be the gore or perhaps just extended dialogue sequences that were originally cut out.

 

[Simon Caleb]

No, he found the negatives to the trimmed footage. Not the entire film.

I'd imagine the negative to the actual feature would have resided with Paramount and moved over to Lionsgate.