The truth revealed (formerly "Now an entire subplot of OCEANS ELEVEN is being cut! ")

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Matt_Stevens, Sep 21, 2001.

  1. Matt_Stevens

    Matt_Stevens Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2000
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    (MODERATOR'S NOTE on 5/10/02: This thread was started shortly after September 11, based partly on a news report about possible revisions to Ocean's 11. Much of the discussion is badly out of date now that the film has been released to theaters and on DVD. For a discussion of what changes were eventually made, please skip to the second page of the thread, near the end.)
    And it's a big part of the film. Why don't they just delay the film until next Summer instead?
    http://us.imdb.com/PeopleNews/
    ------------------
    www.deceptions.net/superman
     
  2. SteveGon

    SteveGon Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2000
    Messages:
    12,267
    Likes Received:
    1
    Matt, that link doesn't seem to be working. Anyway, I have to agree that things are getting a bit out of hand...
    ------------------
    He thought on homeland, the big timber, the air thin and chill all the year long. Tulip poplars so big through the trunk they put you in mind of locomotives set on end. He thought of getting home and building him a cabin on Cold Mountain so high that not a soul but the nighthawks passing across the clouds in autumn could hear his sad cry. Of living a life so quiet he would not need ears. And if Ada would go with him, there might be the hope, so far off in the distance he did not even really see it, that in time his despair might be honed off to a point so fine and thin that it would be nearly the same as vanishing.
    -- Charles Frazier, Cold Mountain
     
  3. Michael Reuben

    Michael Reuben Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 1998
    Messages:
    21,769
    Likes Received:
    2
    Here's the story in its entirety:
     
  4. Paul_D

    Paul_D Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is the first piece of film related news concerning the effect of the terrorist attacks that has really pissed me off. I think its totally appropriate to postpone or even cut (in extreme circumstances only - i.e. collateral damage, when the links sound very strong) a film, set for release days or at the most weeks after the event, that makes DIRECT reference to terrorist explosions, but to HACK a film released in 3 months time, only because there is an explosion at a Las Vegas hotel, named after a city where the terrorist attacks takes place is ABSURD.
    As far as I'm concerned this is thefilm I'm most eagerly anticipating - way ahead of episode 2, harry potter, LOTR etc.
    This move is FAR TOO REACTIONARY, and totally inappropriate!
     
  5. Edwin Pereyra

    Edwin Pereyra Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 1998
    Messages:
    3,501
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. Adam Lenhardt

    Adam Lenhardt Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2001
    Messages:
    16,971
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    Location:
    Albany, NY
     
  7. Edwin Pereyra

    Edwin Pereyra Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 1998
    Messages:
    3,501
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  8. Paul_D

    Paul_D Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think its impossible to reserve judgement of the cuts if you've never seen the film in its original, pre-terrorist form. Don't get me wrong I think it is a totally responsible, sensitive thiing to do, to edit/postpone movies to avoid causing audience distress, but this can easily be taken too far, and I think this (as reported) is a clear example of taking it too far.
    You need to ask these questions to get to the root of the problem.
    Will Ocean's 11, after these cuts? Almost definately, but certainly not as good as it could have been.
    Will it be the original vision? No.
    Is compromising this vision necessary? NO.
    Also, I refer to it as a hack, because the final film will be a product of circumstances outside of the director's control, which needed and shouldn't have any bearing on his final version. Thus an unjust actering of HIS film.
     
  9. Matt_Stevens

    Matt_Stevens Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2000
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  10. Allen Hirsch

    Allen Hirsch Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1999
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would think Soderbergh would have enough "clout" to insist that that subplot stay in, and make the suits just hold off releasing the movie for another few months. That is, IF he felt the editing out of that subplot compromised the vision or integrity of the movie.
    I think Hollywood in general is going overboard, but I'll reserve judgement on OE until I see it.
    Smetimes, the deleted scenes on SE DVDs give us an inkling of MAJOR subplots dropped, etc. - yet, the same movie often "works" as well or better without the deleted stuff. In any event, who's to say what the artist's "original vision" was - unless there's a director's cut later that is materially different from the first studio release. It's almost always a collaborative effort in the end.
     
  11. Scott Weinberg

    Scott Weinberg Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    7,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    And here I thought nobody would ever find the way to "cure" movie violence.
    I'd agree that if a filmmaker chooses to re-shape his film before release, that's his right.
    But to cut a huge sequence out of a completed film due to some overly-sensitive social pressures is the exact opposite of art.
    As always, IMO.
    Also, here's a very cool related piece from chud.com:
    http://www.chud.com/news/sept01/sept24pins.php3
    ------------------
    Scott
    Check out my Movie Reviews at Epinions. Help support my debilitating DVD addiction!
    AOL IM: TheAngryJew29
    [Edited last by Scott Weinberg on September 25, 2001 at 12:27 AM]
     
  12. Wes Ray

    Wes Ray Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2001
    Messages:
    508
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thousands of families have loved ones in New York that are still missing, and all most of you seem to care about is if the new Steven (overrated) Soderberg movie will have something cut from it. Simply amazing.
    If they leave the footage in, and it does prove to be as bad as they evidently think it is (or else they wouldn't suggest cutting it from a finished film) then most of you same posters would be complaining about how inappropriate it was for Soderberg to cut the footage. It's a catch 22 situation for all involved.
    I'm not for censorship at all. There was no reason for Sony to pull the Spiderman teaser. From what I could tell, it looked like a stand-alone teaser, which didn't have anything to do with the film at all (kind of like the early Godzilla teasers). Teasers disappear once the real trailers start showing up. Plus, the Spiderman teaser showed the World Trade Center in an iconic, heroic light.
    Releasing a film where New York or even a casino which resembles New York (as New York, New York does) has an explosion or gets destroyed would definitely be insensitive at a time like this. I know this may ruin some of your favorite movies and directors, guys, but that's life. There are things more important than movies.
    Personally, I'd rather see the film delayed than cut (because I'm not a big fan of censorship), but if delayed, it would have to be for quite a long, long time. That would cause more bitching and moaning from most of you, so we're back to square one.
    If a film rests soley on one major plot point, then the film wasn't that strong to begin with. And as I said before, there are more important things to worry about than Oceans Eleven. I swear, some of you make me flat-out ashamed to be a movie fan.
     
  13. cafink

    cafink Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 1999
    Messages:
    3,047
    Likes Received:
    36
    Real Name:
    Carl Fink
     
  14. Edwin Pereyra

    Edwin Pereyra Producer

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 1998
    Messages:
    3,501
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  15. Dawn_R

    Dawn_R Extra

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2001
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was horrified when I first heard rumours of this and hoped I was vastly mistaken, that it *was* only an unfounded rumour at most. What's deeply troubling me *now* is that it appears they're in fact going ahead with making these cuts to the film - reacting blindly, I think, supremely overreacting and truly not stopping to consider the other options they *do* have. In other words, like others have said, I don't think it's necessary to compromise and alter "Ocean's 11" this severely. I can understand the need to be sensitive and aware of peoples' feelings in the aftermath of this tragedy - *believe* me, I understand, for there are some films I'm still not able to watch and I feel this strange twinging ache in my heart when I see travel books for NYC with the Towers....or a program with flyby shots or dissolve sequences with the Towers....it *still* catches me off-guard, even now, and thus I wholly understand the need to be sensitive of everyone's feelings, to give us the time we need to heal....time *away*, I guess that's it. Yet by the same token, is it really all that necessary for them to cut that sequence out of "Ocean's 11"? They could *delay* the release date, as has been suggested....heck, the movie hasn't been scheduled to come out until December anyway, nearly three full months to go as it *is*. Even though this is the *one* film I've been angling for and eagerly anticipating for *many* months now, and....well, aside from "Harry Potter", for me this is it [​IMG]....well, all the same I would gladly, readily wait until, say, January of next year, even February or *March* if it meant that "Ocean's 11" need not be altered in *any* way. That's a compromising of the original vision, deliberate alterations that despite the care and sensitivity intended, I'm not sure that they may be all that warranted....and if that means waiting for the film so we can see it in its true, original form, then fine. I'll do that only so long as these cuts need not *happen*!
    Another thing I suppose they could do is place a small message of acknowledgement either before or after the film - say, before the opening credits roll, just as an example - basically saying that the film was shot well before the tragedies at the Towers, and that no offense or pain is meant by keeping mention of that New York, New York casino explosion in, or anything of that nature....and that the events of the film are just that, they're part of the story, and are not intended to harm anyone at all. Would that not be sufficient? At the very least, I think we would find it a *lot* more tolerable than the notion of - of *cutting* out such a hefty scene from the film....egads, I'm speechless with frustration and dread at the mere thought of it.
    One more thing I've been given to wonder - do you think there would be any hope or merit in us putting forth another petition (I hope they haven't been overused since they *have* seemed to work admirably in the past) to the filmmakers, the studios or whoever....getting this issue out in the open to ET or AH or news sites or the like, whoever would listen....and to ask them to please, *please* reconsider their decision, because while we *do* understand and agree with the need to be sympathetic and sensitive to peoples' feelings at this time - still I *cannot* believe that people would want to see this film so drastically altered because of it. I agree it's a difficult, chancy line to walk, but it just seems like they're not making the right, the best decision here for us all, much less *creatively* to boot....and so don't we have to make our feelings felt, our voices known and heard loud and clear on this issue? I honestly think if we did it....they would listen. And I'd just like to say right here that in the sole interests of saving my long-awaited and *most* precious "Ocean's 11" - I am *all* for it!
    In understanding and hope,
    Dawn.
     
  16. Paul_D

    Paul_D Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2001
    Messages:
    2,056
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  17. Glenn Overholt

    Glenn Overholt Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 1999
    Messages:
    4,207
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was going to skip this, but it finally got to me. I don't know if I should laugh or cry.
    It is almost funny because as I see it, this 'subplot' should have never have been there in the first place. It wasn't in the original, and although I realize that they can and do change stuff for remakes, I feel that it only shows that Hollywood has to put more violent scenes in, just to satify today's audience. They should be ashamed at that.
    'Jackel' was a good remake, even if it was almost completely different. Ocean's 11 does not need any explosions of any kind. One of the reasons I really liked it in the first place was that no one got hurt, (If I remember correctly), and the only explosion needed was for downing the power line.
    Glenn
     
  18. Matt_Stevens

    Matt_Stevens Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2000
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    The storlyline of the original is barely even in the remake. The new version just took the basic concept and ran with it. The explosion is not just some dumb subplot thrown in for kicks. It's an essential part of the film.
    ------------------
    www.deceptions.net/superman
     
  19. Adam Lenhardt

    Adam Lenhardt Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2001
    Messages:
    16,971
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    Location:
    Albany, NY
     
  20. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,588
    Likes Received:
    0
     

Share This Page