Pearl Harbor Director's Cut is EDITED?

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by David Ruiz, Sep 22, 2001.

  1. David Ruiz

    David Ruiz Second Unit

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2001
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    1
    I read on my posts that Pearl Harbor was released theatrically as PG-13, and that a Director's Cut will be released as Rated R, but what I don't understand, is that they will take out ALL of the love scenes, from the PG-13 version. If this is true, what will make this Rated R? Bad language? Which version will be better? PG-13 WITH love scenes or Rated R version WITHOUT love scenes???
     
  2. Inspector Hammer!

    Inspector Hammer! Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 1999
    Messages:
    11,067
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Real Name:
    John Williamson
    My guess would be that in addition to the deletion of the love scenes (thank you God) they'll be cutting more violence and bloodshed into the attack sequence. I think that the new R rated version will be superior because the PG 13 version didn't convey just how aweful the attack really was, it was bloody, and the PG 13 version failed to convey that reality.
    ------------------
    God bless the USA and the men and woman of our military and their families!
    [Edited last by John Williamson on September 22, 2001 at 03:16 AM]
     
  3. Mathias Klemme

    Mathias Klemme Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ummm... sure it's edited. Isn't that the idea behind a director's cut? Anyway, I guess taking out the love scenes won't make a whole lot of sense plot-wise, would it? Where did you hear this? Anyway, I do hope they'll add some more violent footage to the battle scenes, not for the sake of having violence, but because it'll make it more realistic. I thought that making a PG-13 movie about the Pearl Harbor attack was a stupid idea to begin with.
    Mathias
     
  4. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell
    editing does not mean only removing footage. adding footage counts as editing, as well.
    DJ
     
  5. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell
     
  6. Gavin K

    Gavin K Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2001
    Messages:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    The point of TTT was to explore the events leading up to the attack from both the American and the Japanese points of view. And I think it succeeded.
    The point of the battle scenes in Pearl Harbor, in the wake of Private Ryan, apparently was to put the audience in the middle of the battle, to show the horror of war so one can better understand the tragedy and the heroism involved. By watering down the battle scenes, instead of showing the attack as the tragedy it was, it becomes merely a plot contrivance to justify the raid on Tokyo.
    A movie about Pearl Harbor without graphic violence is not stupid.
    A movie trying to depict the horrors of war and the devestating effect it has on individual human lives and relationships without realistic, graphic violence isn't necessarily stupid, either. But I'm not sure Michael Bay was the right man for the job.
    I loved the Rock and really enjoyed Armageddon. But if you look at those two films, yes, the action is great, but there is also a lot of cheesy humor and really cheesy melodrama. I was hoping Bay could do justice to Pearl Harbor, but for me it is filled with just as much cheesy melodrama, but with none of the humor required to balance it out.
    So I'm hoping that the R-rated version will cut some of the hokey, contrived love story, and balance what is left with some powerful, haunting war images.
     
  7. Matt_Stevens

    Matt_Stevens Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2000
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only God could improve this POS film. The entire mid section is an absolute disaster and takes forever to get through. Finally we get the action, but by then, who cares? Then we see the aftermath in soft PG-13 focus. [​IMG]
    Bay cannot direct a film. With The ROCK, he did not have total control. He was constantly being told what to do by the producers (thank God). With ARMAGODAWEFUL, he had much more control and it shows. The film is laughably bad. With PEARL HARBOR, we got a 3 hour music video and the worst script in recent memory.
    It was also a grand PC insult to why the war happened and to the men who fought in it (like my Grandfather who proudly carried shrapnel in his back until the day he died).
    [​IMG]
    ------------------
    www.deceptions.net/superman
    [Edited last by Matt_Stevens on September 22, 2001 at 09:47 AM]
     
  8. Mathias Klemme

    Mathias Klemme Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2000
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    re-read my post. I said a film about the Pearl Harbor ATTACK shouldn't be made as a PG-13. If it's about the whole story, the events that preceded it etc., than it's fine. But other than the attack (and a love-story) Michael Bay's "Pearl Harbor" didn't offer much.
     
  9. Christopher Carr

    Christopher Carr Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2000
    Messages:
    74
    Likes Received:
    0
    i heard that only some of the love scenes were going to be cut, the over-all love story if it was cut out, the actions that some of the characters did would be confusing and wouldnt make sense.
    Plus the DVD is a three disc DVD...2 for the movie (yes that means u have to get up off your butt and switch the discs) and a third for extra features...
    The Movie will have I think around like 3-4 commentaries and DTS sound, plus the movie being enhanced it must be too much space for one disc. SE7EN disc had around 4 commentaries and it fit on one disc with DTS sound and no feautures. PEARL HARBOR must then have a lot of their old scenes intact with extra footage. I'm thinking the movie will probably be a little longer than the original cut, but will cut out SOME love scenes, and then add more fighting scenes. Remember this IS the directors cut, and BUENA VISTA knowing the stars in the movie would bring in the money made it so that the original cut would be PG-13 rated. THANK YOU BUENA VISTA for giving a chance to release another cut that people could probably appreciate more.
    ------------------
    "I don't want to kiss you here...I want to kiss you- there."
    "You can put it anywhere"
    "Kathryn, the only thing you are going to be riding is me!"
     
  10. Sean Moon

    Sean Moon Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasnt he original story on the directors cut of this movie saying that there would be partial nudity added in on Kate Beckinsale in one of the love scenes? I remember reading that in the original story about the Vista Series DVD...like a shot of her butt during one of the scenes.
    Will try to dig up the link to see if I am remembering correctly.
    ------------------
    [​IMG]
     
  11. Chad R

    Chad R Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 1999
    Messages:
    2,179
    Likes Received:
    1
    Real Name:
    Chad Rouch
    Bay's not cutting out the love triangle, he's toning it down. Making it less scmaltzy.
    To make it R he's using alternate shots during the attack and the following hospital scenes. And yes, there was a mention of a butt shot, which when coupled with the new gore Bay said the new cut will be more male oriented. As if all males care about is blood, guts and T&A.
    Oh, wait. Yeah, that's about right.
     
  12. Jeff Kleist

    Jeff Kleist Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 1999
    Messages:
    11,286
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm glad he cut it, now I may watch the first hour when I get it [​IMG]
    Jeff Kleist
     
  13. Bill McA

    Bill McA Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2000
    Messages:
    5,969
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  14. Dave Barth

    Dave Barth Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2000
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Time Code was edited? Maybe it doesn't count as it wasn't shot on film.
    I'm sure there are short films that aren't edited, though! (Unless I misunderstand what an editor does, in moviemaking.)
    [Edited last by Dave Barth on September 23, 2001 at 12:16 AM]
     
  15. Lannie Lorence

    Lannie Lorence Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2000
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes Timecode was edited. The filmmakers had to decide which take to use. What frame to begin the movie and what frame to end the movie. Then they had to decide which angle goes into what corner of the screen Possibly other things as well, but I haven't seen it yet and wouldn't want to make assumptions.
    Sure the editing job was much simpler than most, but still, there you go.
     
  16. FilipM

    FilipM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    0
    About the violence and gore..
    People don't just fall down and pretend to sleep when they are hit by 20mm High Explosive cannon shells as fired from the wing weapons of the strafing A6M Zeros over Pearl Harbor.
    The obviously PG13 PC Pearl Harbor depiction of this was really terrible. I saw it as a true insult to the suffering of the poor men who were ripped apart in the strafing attacks. People were literally cut in half, many were decapitated and lost limbs.
    I think its clear that none of us here who ask for more blood and violence do so simply for the sake of more violence. We do ask for a more realistic representation of the real events. SPR showed it was possible to do this in a decent and respectful manner, moreover it succeeded in relaying the true personal horrors of war like few or no other war movies before.
    I personally doubt any amount of revision can ever fully save this unprecedented disaster of a movie. However any attempt to cut out or reduce the pathetic soap opera love story and focus more on the films sole strong point depicting the attack can't be all that bad. Though to be honest the attack sequence was very poor and just plain unbelievable in many respects. Remember the dogfight scenes where they flew between hangars while they set up the Zeros to be shot at by people armed with rifles who they guided by hand-held radio to the top of a high air control tower. Even the sentence describing this scene sounds farfetched and ridiculous.
    In conclusion I can only repeat that Tora Tora Tora is a vastly superior movie in every way save some, and I strongly emphasize some, of the special effects.
    [Edited last by FilipM on September 23, 2001 at 02:30 AM]
     
  17. Mark E J

    Mark E J Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2000
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Flip,
    You said the the PG-13 was an insult to those who suffered at Pearl Harbor, yet you say TTT was a superior film in every way execpt some of the FX. TTT was rated G and had no violence whatsoever. You hardly even saw anyone get hurt much less killed. That film never even mentioned how many people were killed, just how many ships were sunk and planes lost. Now in regards to the politics and planning before the attack TTT is flawless, an absolute classic that PH will never even touch. But the attack sequence in PH is 10 times more gritty and realistic even at PG-13 than TTT.
    By the way according to a guy who worked on the set of PH Michael Bay actually filmed shots of people getting cut in half, arms and legs ripped off, eyes knocked out of there sockets, and bellys being ripped open spilling intestines.
    And according to mutiple eyewitnesses planes WERE being flown between hangars that day. This was talked about on a history channel documentary.
    [Edited last by Mark E J on September 23, 2001 at 04:12 AM]
     
  18. FilipM

    FilipM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2000
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Mark!
    You bring up an important difference between TTT and PH. TTT was more about the real "big picture" than PH was. And its very true that TTT did shy away from violence and gore. However it was made in a time where such things weren't acceptable to the studios and society at large. TTT simply didn't attempt to cover that aspect. Further along these lines TTT is more of a historic documentary that recounts the events in a very fair, balanced and impartial manner. Its intention was to depict the entire massive attack and the lead up from all sides. It was not to show suffering of men and women on an individual level, rather it wanted to show the suffering of the nation.
    Now PH is entirely different in this regard. It is intensely personal. It's done in a first person perspective following the two guys. When the attack happens they are right there. When people get shot we see it right in front of us.
    This is where my dislike of the presentation comes from. While TTT avoided such a personal level of gore altogether and focused on the overall conflict, PH massively and graphically sets up carnage, then just shows people falling down. So much of the movie runs like a dumb video game. Do you remember the scene I talked about before? Where they guide the people who run up a tower to shoot the Zeros with their rifles while they are dogfighting several other planes. Doesn't that strike you like a video game. The sad thing about all this is the fact that there were two particularly brave US pilots in the Pearl Harbor attack who actually did some amazing things in the battle. They even managed to kill a Zero that tried to strafe them on takeoff as the zero overshot its firing pass and ended up before their guns. But noo that's not cool enough for Bay and Bruckheimer they have to have people with guns in towers.
    The point I'm trying to get across is that PH's attempts at showing the attack were disgraceful and idiotic. They sort of showed the violence but not as anything more than a concept. It simply struck me as just another dumb action movie that happened to take place
    in WW2. It's like those scenes we see in bad action movies where the good guy rolls across the floor with a single pistol and kills a dozen bad guys all armed with machine guns and hand grenades. They just fall down and he looks really cool.
    I've heard of these extra scenes Bay shot, and I believe they will be in this new director's cut disc. I have also heard that Bay is petitioning the studio for a theatrical re-release of his version later this year or in 2002.
    These may help.
    But I still think PH is shameful and ridiculous and TTT is much better at what it's trying to do.
    I guess I'm personally upset at PH's half assed and insincere attempt at showing the carnage. TTT completely avoided it and focused on the big ideas. PH just did what all too many action movies do these days, and I don't believe this is appropriate when dealing with Pearl Harbor.
     
  19. John_McKittrick

    John_McKittrick Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 1999
    Messages:
    226
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I'm still getting both versions.
    John
     
  20. Calvin Watts III

    Calvin Watts III Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    920
    Likes Received:
    0
    Same here, John [​IMG]
    I liked Pearl Harbor. While it had its moments,both good and godawful, I still want to see what Bay will do with his Director's Cut.
    And for those of you who think Armageddon is crap...try watching Zorro,The Gay Blade. Now that is true crap [​IMG]
    Calvin
    [​IMG]
    ------------------
    "Never give up!!! .......... Never surrender!!!!!!!!!."
     

Share This Page