Canadian unrated "american psycho" vs. the killer collector's edition

Discussion in 'DVD' started by Johnny Jr., Oct 20, 2005.

  1. Johnny Jr.

    Johnny Jr. Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey guys,

    I bought the orignal canadian unrated american psycho when it was released and I have been eyeing the new killer's collector's edition. I was just wondering if both the canadian unrated has all it's extras ported over to the killer edition or if it's still worth to hang on to the initial release. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.
     
  2. Mike Wadkins

    Mike Wadkins Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    969
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    same here any views i also have the unrated i hope they shed some light on why the most gruesome bits from the book were omitted
     
  3. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig
    Watched the Canadian KCE edition recently. It appears to be the same as the U.S. KCE release as best I can tell: the slipcover is Lion's Gate and is the U.S. one, yet the keepcase cover is the Canadian Maple edition...disc content matches the better-detailed LG slipcover.

    Slipcover uses both terms uncut and unrated, unrated doesn't mean much, and uncut to me means "uncut compared to what??".

    I can't answer your question as I don't have the original disc to compare or have a detailed enough ref. And re uncut: any hint how to quickly tell if truly "uncut" compared to elsewhere? Besides the "hole" word in that scene (discussed a bit in the doc).

    The deleted scenes are not presented at all typically: there are interview tidbits interspersed with the scenes, as well as an optional commentary.

    I can say the KCE edition has a pretty decent 2.35 pic, some EE noticed but not horribly distracting. And properly flagged EX audio, music usually plays towards the back/surrounds. The doc is quite good, tells some of the trouble (lots) this production had. But not all of it. I don't think it totally explains why the movie doesn't match the book much...depending on your interpretation may not really match at all. I suggest you look (even shallowly) into the backgrounds/sensibilities of the scriptwriters/director and all will be clear, even without the (good) doc...[​IMG]
     
  4. Russell G

    Russell G Fake Shemp

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,487
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Deadmonton
    Real Name:
    Russell


    Nice! [​IMG] The feminist vibe from the doc could rattle your fillings.

    The co-writer sure was hot though! I could watch her talk all day![​IMG]
     
  5. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig


    That's EXACTLY what I thought. And why I was fishing for "uncut hints" as an excuse to go back to that scene. She looked pretty good in the movie, would have liked to have seen "more", though her character was incredibly annoying.

    You are being polite by saying "feminist", I would suggest possibly a notch or two beyond that...
     
  6. seanOhara

    seanOhara Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    820
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The documentary was good, except for that guy billed as the "celebratant". Other than proving that the "Me Generation" referred to more than yuppies, is there a reason we're subjected to his self-centered recollections of clubs he attened in the '80s? He was like a reject from a VH1 nostalgia series -- "No, sorry, the part of Flamboyant '80s Icon has already been taken by Boy George, who was, you know, an actual icon."

    As for the writer, yes she's hot but she's playing for the wrong team [​IMG]
     
  7. Russell G

    Russell G Fake Shemp

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,487
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Deadmonton
    Real Name:
    Russell

    Bald guy who kept talking about his hair? Yeah, I had to turn it off, after hot girl talked about wearing earings that matched a VJ, I got sick of hearing about how New york in the 80's was the absolute pinnacle of all culture in the history of the world.

    Did hot girl show up again?
     
  8. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig


    Maybe for 10 seconds.

    When I mentioned "good doc", this isn't the one I meant, it's not at all about the film. Unless you lived in NYC in the 80's this doc doesn't tell you much. But I guess it was supposed to give you some background for the film's milieu...sort of.
     
  9. Russell G

    Russell G Fake Shemp

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,487
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Deadmonton
    Real Name:
    Russell
    And really, the good doc is a littel dry. Fair doc, and crappy doc are better descriptions.

    Is it just me, or did the director looked frightened when talking about the film? She sure as hell didn't feel comfortable about it. Not like Hot Girl, who seems to have fun doing anything she does.
     
  10. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig

    Agreed.

    I thought the film doc was good, good compared to the vast majority of them I watch when disc "extras" I mean...well, at least I wasn't totally bored with it, like usual...

    But let's face it, by not specifically mentioning where they're coming from personally (which might have taken a few seconds), they aren't telling the one thing that explains it all...
     
  11. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell


    What one thing that explains what?

    DJ
     
  12. Johnny Jr.

    Johnny Jr. Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I ended up buying the new release and compared it to the original release. The new version is indeed uncut and has the so called "saucy" line when mr. bateman indulges with two ladies of the night. The extras on both discs are completely different. If you are a huge fan of the film you will probably enjoy owning both releases. Christian Bale has about a 5 minute interview on the Canadian unrated release which I found quite informative. It takes you briefly through his method for developing his character.

    If you are looking for the best package definately pick up the killer's collector's edition. The picture quality is slighty better and there are way more extras then on the initial release. If you can live with one word removed from the movie and fewer but, interesting extras then keep the initial release. If you are a completist get both.
     
  13. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig


    Darmin: I'll try to not be too long-winded. I've only seen the film once when it came out, and now the DVD. As a couple of the interviewees mentioned, the film is what you could call "slippery", in that its meaning is hard to grab onto. It is more serious than the book, and not at all as obviously (to me!) satirical. So clearly there was something else at play in the filmakers' minds.

    Let me tell you, until I saw the doc, never once did I think there *might* be some kind of "feminist" agenda behind the film. In fact, I clearly recall at the time this film was made around here, of probably a dozen being locally produced at the same time in those days, *this* was the film that got press because of the protests by *feminist* groups. Protests by feminists of a film with a feminist agenda? I'm still not sure of that.

    OTOH, if somebody in an interview dared mention the L-word, *then* I might have said "aha". It fits better with what I saw, and explains why things might have been done a certain way at least. But the film ending still leaves the whole film open to personal interpretation. Not to say it has to have a meaning...
     
  14. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell


    Finding out that Mary Harron is a lesbian would probably come as quite a shock to her husband. [​IMG] Guin Turner may be a lesbian, but, to put it bluntly, I think your "aha" moment would be an entirely false one. I don't think the single fact of someone's sexual orientation (not to mention that Guin is only the co-screenwriter) gives any necessary insight into their actions.

    As for the ending of the film, I've seen both Guin and Mary discuss it in person. They had a very specific opinion as to its meaning, although they acknowledge that they probably failed to make it clear enough in what appeared on the screen (possibly because of the use of one specific take over another).

    DJ
     
  15. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig
    That's the thing. Everyone had different interpretations, and I don't *know* the filmakers' intended one because I didn't hear it. So let's just say I interpreted the book and film very differently than you. I thought they were both pretty funny though...

    Reminds me of "Swimming Pool", that also had a last act VERY open to interpretation (unlike twists a la Sixth Sense which are quite clear), and that then threw the previous acts into even more interpretation. I recall that *not one* of the interpretations during the film discussion here was what the director intended...another "slippery" film. It was not until the director actually said what was meant (I saw it in a doc on the Canadian release DVD) that I had a clue...didn't reduce the film's enjoyment at all, better to have something to talk/think about.

    I just found it strange that in the American Psycho doc nothing much was said about intent, even the "pros" didn't have a firm grasp of the film, but a decent one of the book (I thought). I suspect the director had to make changes she didn't particularly want, maybe that's why she didn't say too much insightful, she did appear to be quite uncomfortable for whatever reason.
     
  16. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell


    Although I have the new disc (the third DVD of the film that I have purchased), I haven't watched any of the extras, but I'll take your word for it that they don't discuss this issue in the documentary. Have you tried the commentaries?

    DJ
     
  17. CraigF

    CraigF Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    2,796
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    4,110
    Location:
    Toronto area, Canada
    Real Name:
    Craig
    Darmin: No, I have not listened to the commentaries. I hope I haven't given the (false) impression that I get deeply into films. I do have an "enquiring mind" to a certain extent, but I tend to watch movies strictly as entertainment. Sometimes I do wonder "what the hell went on there"...

    I appreciate your insights and information though, always like to find out new stuff.
     
  18. Damin J Toell

    Damin J Toell Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,762
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Real Name:
    Damin J. Toell


    And I hope I haven't given the impression that I think there's only one way to watch a film. [​IMG]

    DJ
     
  19. Vincent-P

    Vincent-P Second Unit

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    337
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    110
    I watched the "Killer Collector's Edition" for the first time last night. I've never seen the film before, either in theaters or on a previous DVD. I am confused though, because when watching the DVD, it looked like a PAL-NTSC transfer. Now, I know it's not, because there's no combing or ghosting that I can see, everyone's voice sounded correct (I'm really sensitive to the PAL speed up) and according to all the resources I can find, the running time is correct. But I can't shake the feeling when I'm watching it that something isn't right with the look of it. The picture looks exactly like the way things look when I'm watching a PAL-NTSC transfer. Does anybody else know what I'm talking about? Does anybody know anything about how the film was shot? Was this an intentional look? Do the older DVD releases have the same odd quality?
     
  20. Magnus T

    Magnus T Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2003
    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've never noticed what you describe, Vincent. The Killer Edition looks pretty, darn great to me. It does have some grain in the beginning, though, but with the small budget this movie had I'm sure they used optical effects on the opening titles instead of digital compositing. Everything after that looks great.
     

Share This Page