-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Lionsgate Press Release: Heavenly Creatures: The Uncut Version (Blu-ray)


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
11 replies to this topic

#1 of 12 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 39,577 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted October 12 2011 - 06:49 AM


http://static.hometh...um.com/imgrepo/


http://static.hometh...um.com/imgrepo/


Heavenly Creatures: The Uncut Version

Called "a visionary triumph" (Rolling Stone), Academy Award®-winning director Peter Jackson (Best Director, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, 2003) presents a true crime drama involving two friends separated by their parents. Oscar®-winner Kate Winslet (Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role, The Reader, 2008), in her big screen debut, stars alongside Melanie Lynskey (Up in the Air) in the Oscar®-nominated screenplay (Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen, 1994) co-penned by Jackson and his writing partner Frances Walsh (The Lord of the Rings Motion Picture Trilogy). The Uncut Version features ten minutes of footage not seen in the released theatrical version.

 

Based on the shocking true story, two teenage girls form an unwavering bond rooted in a fantasy world that only they share. When their parents become disturbed by the intensity of the friendship, they separate the girls and threaten to keep them apart permanently. Scarred by the decision and blinded by their anger, the two girls hatch a devastating plan and vow murderous revenge on their families.

December 13, 2011

$19.99



Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#2 of 12 Jeff Ulmer

Jeff Ulmer

    Producer

  • 5,593 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 23 1998

Posted October 12 2011 - 11:05 AM

Good to see, although I'll hold my enthusiasm until we get some feedback on the quality.

#3 of 12 Bryan Tuck

Bryan Tuck

    Screenwriter

  • 1,499 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2002

Posted October 12 2011 - 07:41 PM

Very good movie, but I sure wish they'd include the shorter, 99-minute version as well, since Peter Jackson has apparently stated that's the one he prefers.
"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle; it's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

#4 of 12 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,717 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted October 13 2011 - 05:01 AM

Very good movie, but I sure wish they'd include the shorter, 99-minute version as well, since Peter Jackson has apparently stated that's the one he prefers.

Can somebody point me to an interview where Jackson explicitly says this? Vincent

#5 of 12 theonemacduff

theonemacduff

    Second Unit

  • 297 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 2010
  • Real Name:Jon Paul
  • Locationthe wet coast

Posted October 13 2011 - 06:17 AM

The uncut version has been available in Canada in a butchered release by Alliance, which is 1080i, and (apparently; I refused to buy it) in a 1.78 ratio, whereas the OAR is 2.39. Let's hope this release is a better effort.

#6 of 12 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,717 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted October 13 2011 - 07:14 AM

There's a weird hybrid cut that's on Netflix streaming. It's mostly the short cut, but has at least one shot from the uncut version-
Spoiler
Vincent

#7 of 12 cafink

cafink

    Producer

  • 3,034 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted October 13 2011 - 07:33 AM

Vincent, are you sure that shot is exclusive to the uncut version? I only saw the movie once, a few years ago, so I'm not all that familiar with it, but I can't find the shot you describe in this list of the differences between the two versions. Maybe I just missed it among a larger change or something, though.
 

 


#8 of 12 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,717 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted October 13 2011 - 08:26 AM

Yes I'm sure. The shot is PARTIALLY in the short version,
Spoiler
It was like that when I saw HC theatrically and also on my LaserDisc and always stood out as a very jarring edit to me. I should note that the first time I saw HC was at a Miramax test screening of the uncut version, so watching the theatrical cut the first time I was very aware of most of what was removed. Vincent

#9 of 12 Bryan Tuck

Bryan Tuck

    Screenwriter

  • 1,499 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2002

Posted October 13 2011 - 10:53 AM

Can somebody point me to an interview where Jackson explicitly says this? Vincent

I admit I've never seen an actual interview, but if it's an Internet legend, it's a persistent one. On the IMDB "Alternate Versions" listing, it mentions that he prefers the shorter version, but as always that's grain-of-salt information (although that entry has been there for years). So I honestly don't know, I guess. Either way, though, there are some fans who do prefer the 99-minute cut, so I wish they'd include both. (Personally, I haven't seen either in quite some time, so I'm not sure which one I prefer, but I'm always interested in alternate released cuts).
"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle; it's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."

#10 of 12 Vincent_P

Vincent_P

    Screenwriter

  • 1,717 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 2003

Posted October 13 2011 - 01:25 PM

I admit I've never seen an actual interview, but if it's an Internet legend, it's a persistent one. On the IMDB "Alternate Versions" listing, it mentions that he prefers the shorter version, but as always that's grain-of-salt information (although that entry has been there for years). So I honestly don't know, I guess. Either way, though, there are some fans who do prefer the 99-minute cut, so I wish they'd include both. (Personally, I haven't seen either in quite some time, so I'm not sure which one I prefer, but I'm always interested in alternate released cuts).

I once asked Jackson via a post on the unfortunately now long-defunct "The Bastards Have Landed" website which cut he preferred, and he basically said something along the lines of he felt the short version would be better for general audiences, but the uncut version would be better for big fans of the film. He also mentioned that there was an even longer cut with about 10 additional minutes over the "uncut version" that he hoped to release as a special edition some day. My read of Jackson's opinion of the short cut based on that exchange is that he thought Miramax did a good job cutting it down to make it more palatable to general audiences, but not that he specifically preferred that cut. I wish that website hadn't disappeared, Jackson used to post there all the time and it was great having him respond to my question re: which version of HC he preferred, even if he did kind of skirt the question by essentially endorsing both cuts (and his mention of an even longer cut makes me wonder if that one will ever actually surface one of these days). Vincent

#11 of 12 TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,785 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted October 13 2011 - 02:38 PM

I really like Jackson's crazy horror movies but this is my favorite of his movies. Coincidentally, a 35mm print is playing at an art theater near me in Pennesylvania in a couple weeks.

#12 of 12 Bryan Tuck

Bryan Tuck

    Screenwriter

  • 1,499 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 16 2002

Posted October 13 2011 - 08:35 PM

I once asked Jackson via a post on the unfortunately now long-defunct "The Bastards Have Landed" website which cut he preferred, and he basically said something along the lines of he felt the short version would be better for general audiences, but the uncut version would be better for big fans of the film. He also mentioned that there was an even longer cut with about 10 additional minutes over the "uncut version" that he hoped to release as a special edition some day. My read of Jackson's opinion of the short cut based on that exchange is that he thought Miramax did a good job cutting it down to make it more palatable to general audiences, but not that he specifically preferred that cut. I wish that website hadn't disappeared, Jackson used to post there all the time and it was great having him respond to my question re: which version of HC he preferred, even if he did kind of skirt the question by essentially endorsing both cuts (and his mention of an even longer cut makes me wonder if that one will ever actually surface one of these days). Vincent

Interesting. From what I understand, that's basically the position he took on the LOTR films as well, not really choosing one over the other (which is kind of how I feel, too; generally speaking, I think the theatricals work better as films, and the longer cuts work collectively as a kind of six-part miniseries). Like I said, I'm just fascinated by different (official) presentations of certain movies and the effect they have on certain audiences, and I often wonder how different that effect might have been if the alternate cut was shown to that audience first instead. (Does that make sense?) I guess it's the editor in me. :)
"Flying a plane is no different from riding a bicycle; it's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes."