Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by JohnS, Apr 10, 2002.
This is a good thing!I really enjoyed RE and I think the "gorier" scenes will definately add a more horror-like tone to the movie which I thought was more action orientated.I still do not understand the R rating for this movie(maybe for some nudity)when compared to a movie like Blade 2,which was extremely violent.
I do hope the movie comes out uncut on DVD. The cuts are precisely the reason I didn't pay to see it in theaters.
DVD of Mulholland Drive changed from theatrical version = BAD
DVD of Resident Evil changed from theatrical version = GOOD
Am I missing something here?
Your talking apples and oranges here.
The edit in Mulholand drive, was at the wishes of Naomi Watts(per her contract)
To respect her privacy,a s to online sex geeks doing things with screen captures.
Resident Evil, was originally shot in NC-17.
The gore was taken out, to get an R rating.
DVD, is the godsent of having the original rating of movies(usually)
Where was this on IMDB? I looked for it and it wasn't there.
If you go to the movie on imdb:
This link -> http://us.imdb.com/Title?0120804
Then check under Alternate versions on the left-side of the page you will find the information refered to in the first post of this thread.
hmmm. Okay. Thanks. Those "Alternate Versions" links on IMDB aren't totally reliable as they are comprised mostly of user submissions.
It was Laura Ellana Harring's wishes that her nude scene be "blurred" in Mulholland Dr. NOT Naomi Watts. And I don't believe it was in her contract, I believe she requested it of David Lynch. Someone please correct me if I am mistaken.
Tino is right (that it was Laura Ellana Harring's wishes that her nude scene be "blurred").
I thought the film was OK, if not good, but I do think that they should make a Director's Cut DVD. I remember hearing a lot about how they wanted to include all the gory stuff, but had to pull it out.
I highly doubt this would happen, when has Columbia ever released an unrated version of a movie on DVD. MGM on the otherhand has always supported unrated versions and longer cuts.. And on the Mulholland Dr issue I don't care if its only 2 seconds it should never of been altered, period!!!
I just saw this at DVDfile this morning:
I didn't see it in the theaters, but as a fan of the games, this should at least be worth a rental.
You can read on IGN that the running time on the DVD is the same as the theatrical version.
First off, I wouldn't trust IGN too much, I find them to be unreliable or just slow with the info. Secondly, isn't there a chance that with less gore in the movie, it made it better that way? My imagination was going wild as to what was happening to these people instead of actually seeing it. Just wanted to raise that point and see what the respponse would be. I'm all for the director's original version coming out and I hope Paul W.S. Anderson gets it released. He did say that Europe was getting the directors cut but he didn't talk about the R1 release.
Before you bash my site, here's a DIRECT CUT AND PASTE from the official spec sheet put out from Columbia TriStar:
I enjoyed this film and will look forward to spinning this one up (director's cut or not).
I will get this movie, but I'll tell you what, any of Romero's gory zombie movies did the job a hell of lot better than Resident Evil did.
I liked this movie, but i would have preffered if it should have been more faithful to the video-game.
But i liked it.