Tomorrow Never Dies R1 (SE) vs UK R2 (SE) vs UK R2 (UE)

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 19 Jul 2006, 19:51

Well if it means "all previous BBFC cuts waived..."

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 19 Jul 2006, 20:55

Markgway wrote:I wouldn't say expect, as such, but the 'all previous cuts waived' at the BBFC would lead one to expect a fully uncut version, no?

No

It would lead one to expect that the cuts the BBFC cut before are no longer cut NOT that the BBFC A: Saw an alternate cut or B: Given one. Seriously is that what you were basing your hope of a longer cut on?

The BBFC merely saying the cuts they made before are no longer cut. It stands to reason the BBFC aren't going to literally mean all cuts waived as they're only concerned in their BBFC enforced cuts. It's all by their nature they see.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 20 Jul 2006, 03:32

Yeah, but unless I'm mistaken the UK cinema version was the same as the PG-13 version. Every territory got the same theatrical cut. I remember seeing the bit with Michelle Yeoh and the shuriken in the cinema release (and being surprised it hadn't been cut) which was subsequently removed for video. It seems that all they've done is waived the video cuts so that the UE is now the same (cut) cinema version that every other region already has. So by saying all cuts waived I thought that's what they meant and not merely video cuts waived. See what I'm saying now?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 20 Jul 2006, 09:06

To be fair they don't make the distinction and don't say "all film and video cuts waived", just "all cuts".
Look at the runtimes. 114m 18s - as opposed to 114m 1s or 114m 2s (with 6 secs cut).

If we add 6s on, we get 114m 7s or 8s, so there's still up to 11s extra time left after that. It could be extra black screen or something maybe...?

I guess the ultimate test would be to see if the R1 UE is longer than the 119m rough cut which included MPAA cuts (I think).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 20 Jul 2006, 16:21

grim_tales wrote:To be fair they don't make the distinction and don't say "all film and video cuts waived", just "all cuts".

All cuts should mean all cuts and not some cuts. If it was only the video cuts waived they should have denoted that.

If we add 6s on, we get 114m 7s or 8s, so there's still up to 11s extra time left after that. It could be extra black screen or something maybe...?

Could be anything - but it gave false hope.

I guess the ultimate test would be to see if the R1 UE is longer than the 119m rough cut which included MPAA cuts (I think).

I expect the R1 content will be the same as the R2. The MPAA never cut the film - the filmmakers just submitted the pre-cut UK cinema version.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 20 Jul 2006, 16:49

Bah

If a full uncut version of LTK (which was censored by the MPAA) can be released) they should do the same for the first 2 Brosnans. But you've already answered that.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 20 Jul 2006, 20:56

Markgway wrote:Yeah, but unless I'm mistaken the UK cinema version was the same as the PG-13 version.

They clearly meant "all home video" cuts waived. Why is it so hard for you guys to understand or are you just being pedantic.

You must've had some idea this is all we were going to get, especially when like I said the BBFC haven't even seen the extra footage so are hardly going to mean it.

Markgway wrote:and being surprised it hadn't been cut

Do you actually watch films when you go to the cinema or spend the whole time analysing them and making notes?

Markgway wrote:It seems that all they've done is waived the video cuts so that the UE is now the same (cut) cinema version that every other region already has.

Well durh. How on earth would you expect anything else?

The BBFC are hardly going to talk about cut footage they've not seen or mean cut footage the film-crew cut when that footage has nothing to do with them.

Markgway wrote:So by saying all cuts waived I thought that's what they meant and not merely video cuts waived. See what I'm saying now?

I always did but am amazed you managed to think this.

Everyone else is happy it's now uncut (which it is). The cuts you mention are film-maker cuts which happen to 100% of other films. You're acting like it's an odd thing to do.

grim_tales wrote:To be fair they don't make the distinction and don't say "all film and video cuts waived", just "all cuts".

They assume people have common sense and don't need to.

It's a home video submission silly so why talk about cuts or not cuts made to the cinema version? That is made in the cinema listing.

grim_tales wrote:If we add 6s on, we get 114m 7s or 8s, so there's still up to 11s extra time left after that. It could be extra black screen or something maybe...?

No offence Grim but you're really analysing those times far to much.

grim_tales wrote:I guess the ultimate test would be to see if the R1 UE is longer than the 119m rough cut which included MPAA cuts (I think).

Jeez give me a shotgun.

Markgway wrote:All cuts should mean all cuts and not some cuts. If it was only the video cuts waived they should have denoted that.

The sheer fact it's in the video listing clearly means they did. You're really expecting more than is reasonably possible.

"all cuts waived" means just that "all cuts waived the bbfc have been involved with". It's the bloody bbfc website.

Markgway wrote:Could be anything - but it gave false hope.

Only to you two. I and the rest of mankind knew exactly what the meant when they said it will be uncut and are pleased about this.

Markgway wrote:The MPAA never cut the film - the filmmakers just submitted the pre-cut UK cinema version.

Which was cut by them not the BBFC right?

So whose to say it's not now the director's cut. Without them saying it's not we'll never know for sure.

The fact they've not gone back an added extra footage (now would be the perfect time) it says strongly to me they don't want it in there and have instead included "deleted scenes".

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 20 Jul 2006, 22:07

OK Brad don't go off on one

We're just saying that the DVD shouldn't be advertised as uncut when it surely isn't.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 20 Jul 2006, 23:02

grim_tales wrote:OK Brad don't go off on one

I did go a bit over board didn't I

grim_tales wrote:We're just saying that the DVD shouldn't be advertised as uncut when it surely isn't.

Fair enough and I agree but it was advertised accurately was my point, that's all.

BTW what cuts are we talking about anyway? Were GE and TND supposed originally even stronger?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Jul 2006, 03:04

bradavon wrote:They clearly meant "all home video" cuts waived. Why is it so hard for you guys to understand or are you just being pedantic.

I don't see how they clearly meant "video cuts" at all. Clearly you know something about the BBFC the rest of us don't.

You must've had some idea this is all we were going to get, especially when like I said the BBFC haven't even seen the extra footage so are hardly going to mean it.

The BBFC saw the footage back in 1995 and 1997 respectively, and yes, I always assume the worst when it comes to DVD companies.

Do you actually watch films when you go to the cinema or spend the whole time analysing them and making notes?

It wasn't hard to spot. Michelle + shuriken. You would normally expect that to be cut for a '12' even at the cinema. So yes, it caught my attention. Do you normally watch films with your eyes closed I wonder?

Well durh. How on earth would you expect anything else?

"ALL cuts waived"

The BBFC are hardly going to talk about cut footage they've not seen or mean cut footage the film-crew cut when that footage has nothing to do with them.

I don't know why I'm debating this as you clearly haven't been listening and know nothing of which you speak.

I always did but am amazed you managed to think this.

Be amazed then.

Everyone else is happy it's now uncut (which it is).

It isn't.

The cuts you mention are film-maker cuts which happen to 100% of other films. You're acting like it's an odd thing to do.

We're talking about cuts made at the "suggestion" (read: request) of the BBFC. To me that's censorship and not cutting-room floor footage, even if it was done before official submission. The BBFC still list the cinema release as cut. So everyone thinks it was cut but you, Brad.

grim_tales wrote: They assume people have common sense and don't need to.

Rubbish. To hear the words "common" and "sense" from you is a joke. I've explained the situation 20 times and you still don't get it. You might be able to talk down to Grim, because he's too nice to say anything, but I'm not he, so watch your step.

"all cuts waived" means just that "all cuts waived the bbfc have been involved with". It's the bloody bbfc website.

The BBFC were involved with ALL the censorship cuts made to the film at each stage.

Markgway wrote:Which was cut by them not the BBFC right?

The BBFC don't cut anything ordinarily. They just suggest cuts for a particular rating. Saying TND wasn't cut by the BBFC (or more properly on behalf) is like saying Spider-Man 2 wasn't cut by the BBFC... and don't say it wasn't.

So whose to say it's not now the director's cut. Without them saying it's not we'll never know for sure.

Listen to the audio commentaries.

The fact they've not gone back an added extra footage (now would be the perfect time) it says strongly to me they don't want it in there and have instead included "deleted scenes".

I wouldn't count that as definitive proof. Even the early films for which cuts were effectively ordered have not been restored.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Jul 2006, 12:33

MLAM · Post by **MLAM** » 21 Jul 2006, 13:39

grim_tales wrote:

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Jul 2006, 20:31

And that's just my shade... matches my feather boa and heels. 8)

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Jul 2006, 20:48

Just jesting guys.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 22 Jul 2006, 01:46

I wasn't. Oo-er, missus!

chenlung · Post by **chenlung** » 26 Jul 2006, 01:33

Seems like some noise filters have been applied, again.