Posted: 18 Jul 2006, 03:47
They look identical to me. 
https://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/
https://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2184
When all you do is up the bitrate and don't do any remastering that's all that happens. I suspect this is all they've done anyway.grim_tales wrote:I did expect the UE's of TND/GE too look better though.
What? Pierce is clearly redder.Markgway wrote:They look identical to me.
I meant between my R1 cap and MLAM's R1 cap. Yes, the R2 UE is redder.bradavon wrote: What? Pierce is clearly redder.
So did I. You honestly can't see one is redder than the other?Markgway wrote:I meant between my R1 cap and MLAM's R1 cap. Yes, the R2 UE is redder.
What's still missing has always been missing and I suspect always will. It's nothing new to cut footage on the editing floor.grim_tales wrote:and what still is missing?
Nope. It's like the same cap posted twice in a row. Why would my R1 cap be redder than MLAM's? I have applied no special features to the captures.bradavon wrote:So did I. You honestly can't see one is redder than the other?
But it's different when it's at the behest of the censors rather than the filmmakers.bradavon wrote:It's nothing new to cut footage on the editing floor.
It's not, MLAM's is clearly redder than yours. Have a look at the two of Pierce by the plane at the top of this page and you will see the first is redder than the second, or at least you should anyway.Markgway wrote:Nope. It's like the same cap posted twice in a row. Why would my R1 cap be redder than MLAM's? I have applied no special features to the captures.
Yes but that was always understood. Only you and Mark were somehow expecting anything more.grim_tales wrote:So the R2 UE's are just the same as the R1's in terms of footage then?
Agreed but then I thought Grim was asking for more footage again.Markgway wrote:But it's different when it's at the behest of the censors rather than the filmmakers.
I've now fixed it on Marks' behalf. No offence but you're a mod too you could've done the same. I've also deleted your post as it no longer makes any sense.grim_tales wrote:grim_tales wrote:
It's nothing new to cut footage on the editing floor.
Hey, I didnt write this!!
Lol, nope, they still look identical to me. 8)bradavon wrote:It's not, MLAM's is clearly redder than yours. Have a look at the two of Pierce by the plane at the top of this page and you will see the first is redder than the second, or at least you should anyway.
Presumably.I've no idea why I wasn't asking that. You are both using different software though I presume.
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?grim_tales wrote:Yes but that was always understood. Only you and Mark were somehow expecting anything more.
NoMarkgway 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?
All cuts should mean all cuts and not some cuts. If it was only the video cuts waived they should have denoted that.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".
Could be anything - but it gave false hope.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 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.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).
They clearly meant "all home video" cuts waived. Why is it so hard for you guys to understand or are you just being pedantic.Markgway wrote:Yeah, but unless I'm mistaken the UK cinema version was the same as the PG-13 version.
Do you actually watch films when you go to the cinema or spend the whole time analysing them and making notes?Markgway wrote:and being surprised it hadn't been cut
Well durh. How on earth would you expect anything else?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.
I always did but am amazed you managed to think this.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?
They assume people have common sense and don't need to.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".
No offence Grim but you're really analysing those times far to much.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...?
Jeez give me a shotgun.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).
The sheer fact it's in the video listing clearly means they did. You're really expecting more than is reasonably possible.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.
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:Could be anything - but it gave false hope.
Which was cut by them not the BBFC right?Markgway wrote:The MPAA never cut the film - the filmmakers just submitted the pre-cut UK cinema version.
I did go a bit over board didn't Igrim_tales wrote:OK Brad don't go off on one![]()
Fair enough and I agree but it was advertised accurately was my point, that's all.grim_tales wrote:We're just saying that the DVD shouldn't be advertised as uncut when it surely isn't.
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.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.
The BBFC saw the footage back in 1995 and 1997 respectively, and yes, I always assume the worst when it comes to DVD companies.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.
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?Do you actually watch films when you go to the cinema or spend the whole time analysing them and making notes?
"ALL cuts waived"Well durh. How on earth would you expect anything else?
I don't know why I'm debating this as you clearly haven't been listening and know nothing of which you speak.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.
Be amazed then.I always did but am amazed you managed to think this.
It isn't.Everyone else is happy it's now uncut (which it is).
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.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.
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.grim_tales wrote: They assume people have common sense and don't need to.
The BBFC were involved with ALL the censorship cuts made to the film at each stage."all cuts waived" means just that "all cuts waived the bbfc have been involved with". It's the bloody bbfc website.
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.Markgway wrote:Which was cut by them not the BBFC right?
Listen to the audio commentaries.So whose to say it's not now the director's cut. Without them saying it's not we'll never know for sure.
I wouldn't count that as definitive proof. Even the early films for which cuts were effectively ordered have not been restored.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".