Werner Von Wallenrod
12-13-2002, 10:17 PM
We all have limits – and I have lots. I’d love to watch a lot of films, but have boycotted them because I won’t pay to see my principles violated.
Yes, inspired by a certain other horrordvds forum member's recent request, I've decdied to compile a list of peoples' movies I'd like to see edited for my own gratification... I thought about it, and I, too could care less what the Directors wanted in the film.
1) The Accused: Good drama with some kind of message or something, but man, that rape scene... I mean, hey, I don't mind the rape itself, but wow was Leo Rossi creepy in that. Does anyone know of an edited version where Rossi's footage is taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in? Saying "It starts to move towards the advocation of cutting unacceptable scenes out of all films" simply means you think it is a black and white world (or at least lack and white in thsi regard.) I don't. There are limits, and this film crosses them. The director had a choice when he shot Rossi screaming at the camera like that - and he made a bad one. I vote AB get The Accused - and they make a 30th aniversary edition with new music, and new scenes using a plastic Leo Rossi. Cutting out some of the footage as they go - should we be left with only the original because the director couldn’t be bothered with special FX?
2) You know, from what I've read, this 70's sci-fi classic Solaris sounds really interesting, but personally I'm intimidated by lots of heady, intellectual concepts without quick and easypay-offs. Does anyone know of an edited version where a lot of intellectualisms are taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in?
3) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Boy! I love computer effects and karate fighting, but that movie is just too Asian for me! Does anyone know of an edited version where those Chinese people are taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in? There are arguments for the validity of the Chinese people - but they're not for me. Hence my request. If Crouching Tiger can only exist with Asian people in it - it shows the paper thin concept of the film. There has to be a way to represent the ideas without them. Anyway, I can still "get" Ang Lee's intended message by a) knowing that Asians were cut from the film b) Reading about the snipped Asians, c) Watching what remains. If the entire message of this film revolves around Asians – what’s up with the other 6 minutes or so of footage – filler?!?!? I think Lee crossed a line when he compromised his artistic integrity. He is a filmmaker – with a film full of FX that were so realistic I thought I could fly! Yet he bailed out on the Asian people. It was lazy IMHO (so, he filmed it in China - he couldn't fly in American or British actors? actually, lazy and just done for shock value, since Lee obviously had the ability to fake this and make the Asians look white with CGI). Brave perhaps, but being brave means sometimes it will work against you.
4) And how about The Color Purple - Good flick (I like Spielberg), but the ending, where you find out that racism and violence against women is wrong, just really bums me out. The rest fo the film might have some value, though (especially when Rae Dawn Chong sings... it's like a voice from Heaven). The director wants us to see his film with his message and vision intact? Boo hoo! I bet he cries and cries and cries. Nah - bet he only cares if it SELLS. Seriously, in this case, I could care less what the sick mind of Speilberg wants. While I think it is okay for people to pursue uncut versions of films, it is equally okay if someone decides a director went too far and does not wish to see a movie uncut. From my point of view, racism and violence against women are not only OK, but necessary in terms of entertainment. A broad statement that you should be forced to watch something because that is what the Director wanted is something I cannot agree with either. If you can't see thigns exactly like I do, and then completely agree with them, regardless of contrary concepts, then there likely is nothing more I can tell you.
Sorry, I'm getting a bit sick of the "uncut" crowd. Half the time they gripe and moan about social, political and psychological signifigance of some artists expressing themselves, or providing challenging points of view - and acclaim it as a revelation. It's a bit sad actually.
I am not pro-censorship in the larger picture. But there are certain cases where it is appropriate. Namely, when it bothers me, personally.
After all, censorship happens ALL THE TIME. Censorship happens when the scripts for movies are written - they take things out because they know they won’t be allowed to show them to people. You reckon Hollywood would make a pro Al-Quada movie today? Nah. Ideas are even censored (of course, this is censorship in the larger context, since you can’t really censor something unless it exists)! My point here, of course, is that if censorshop agrees in one form, we should quit complaining, and accept it in all forms.
P.s. - "CH is real." :D
Yes, inspired by a certain other horrordvds forum member's recent request, I've decdied to compile a list of peoples' movies I'd like to see edited for my own gratification... I thought about it, and I, too could care less what the Directors wanted in the film.
1) The Accused: Good drama with some kind of message or something, but man, that rape scene... I mean, hey, I don't mind the rape itself, but wow was Leo Rossi creepy in that. Does anyone know of an edited version where Rossi's footage is taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in? Saying "It starts to move towards the advocation of cutting unacceptable scenes out of all films" simply means you think it is a black and white world (or at least lack and white in thsi regard.) I don't. There are limits, and this film crosses them. The director had a choice when he shot Rossi screaming at the camera like that - and he made a bad one. I vote AB get The Accused - and they make a 30th aniversary edition with new music, and new scenes using a plastic Leo Rossi. Cutting out some of the footage as they go - should we be left with only the original because the director couldn’t be bothered with special FX?
2) You know, from what I've read, this 70's sci-fi classic Solaris sounds really interesting, but personally I'm intimidated by lots of heady, intellectual concepts without quick and easypay-offs. Does anyone know of an edited version where a lot of intellectualisms are taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in?
3) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Boy! I love computer effects and karate fighting, but that movie is just too Asian for me! Does anyone know of an edited version where those Chinese people are taken out – but ALL the other stuff is left in? There are arguments for the validity of the Chinese people - but they're not for me. Hence my request. If Crouching Tiger can only exist with Asian people in it - it shows the paper thin concept of the film. There has to be a way to represent the ideas without them. Anyway, I can still "get" Ang Lee's intended message by a) knowing that Asians were cut from the film b) Reading about the snipped Asians, c) Watching what remains. If the entire message of this film revolves around Asians – what’s up with the other 6 minutes or so of footage – filler?!?!? I think Lee crossed a line when he compromised his artistic integrity. He is a filmmaker – with a film full of FX that were so realistic I thought I could fly! Yet he bailed out on the Asian people. It was lazy IMHO (so, he filmed it in China - he couldn't fly in American or British actors? actually, lazy and just done for shock value, since Lee obviously had the ability to fake this and make the Asians look white with CGI). Brave perhaps, but being brave means sometimes it will work against you.
4) And how about The Color Purple - Good flick (I like Spielberg), but the ending, where you find out that racism and violence against women is wrong, just really bums me out. The rest fo the film might have some value, though (especially when Rae Dawn Chong sings... it's like a voice from Heaven). The director wants us to see his film with his message and vision intact? Boo hoo! I bet he cries and cries and cries. Nah - bet he only cares if it SELLS. Seriously, in this case, I could care less what the sick mind of Speilberg wants. While I think it is okay for people to pursue uncut versions of films, it is equally okay if someone decides a director went too far and does not wish to see a movie uncut. From my point of view, racism and violence against women are not only OK, but necessary in terms of entertainment. A broad statement that you should be forced to watch something because that is what the Director wanted is something I cannot agree with either. If you can't see thigns exactly like I do, and then completely agree with them, regardless of contrary concepts, then there likely is nothing more I can tell you.
Sorry, I'm getting a bit sick of the "uncut" crowd. Half the time they gripe and moan about social, political and psychological signifigance of some artists expressing themselves, or providing challenging points of view - and acclaim it as a revelation. It's a bit sad actually.
I am not pro-censorship in the larger picture. But there are certain cases where it is appropriate. Namely, when it bothers me, personally.
After all, censorship happens ALL THE TIME. Censorship happens when the scripts for movies are written - they take things out because they know they won’t be allowed to show them to people. You reckon Hollywood would make a pro Al-Quada movie today? Nah. Ideas are even censored (of course, this is censorship in the larger context, since you can’t really censor something unless it exists)! My point here, of course, is that if censorshop agrees in one form, we should quit complaining, and accept it in all forms.
P.s. - "CH is real." :D