Bullets 'n' Babes

bradavon wrote:

romerojpg wrote:It acctually made the film better, far from uninteresting footage then

And you're so sure the same hasn't happened here?

I was jokin I aint seen the new cut of Wambooo, but I cannot wait to see it again just not that sure about splashing out £10 on it yet to find out. If it was in front of me I would watch it, I may try and borrow it and see and in 6 months the peice may e down.

Another review which lists most of the differences in the new cut

http://whysoblu.com/?p=9442

Thanks Salty.

"# There are a few more brutal real images at the beginning newsfeed."

Did anyone else feel this entire section was out of place and in bad taste? I love the film but felt that scene was unnecessary,

Well I guess Stallone wants it to hit home, that was his job he said to show how evil and brutal that place is. Newsfootage I guess did the job, mind you not my thing watchig real footage of people killing etc..

Sure that's fine but not in what is a Hollywood action movie. It has it's place in a documentary (maybe as an extra) but not in a what is at the end of the day glamorised action.

At £10.99 and considering you'll easily fetch a fiver for the old disc this looks a no-brainer for an upgrade.

I would have said it was a No brainer, if the extras had been extensive on the new disc. They could have went all out and done loads.

Hard to take in a review gives it 5 stars for extras and all it has is a 80 minute doc, guess that lad dont see many discs at all if he thinks that is 5 stars.

There's not enough hours in the day to watch the films i have let alone extras as well.They are a thing of the past for me 99% of the time.

Good extras I should have said some extras are better than the film discs they are on. I still stick the odd ones one here and there and some are well worth watching, but hell many are crap promo trash as you will know. But if they are an OK length you can fit them in between things, where as if a film is 2 hours long its harder to slot into your day.

I would have expected a new commentary on this new disc mind you. I dont mind a nice 80 minute doc on this new Rambo disc, but it seems like they had so much to say about the film in interviews and articles I have read, it may be hard to get it all into an 80 minute doc.

Any idea which is the Director's Cut? Stallone worked on the Extended Cut, so maybe that one.

You mean which one is Stallone's preferred version? I remember he said on the (original) commentary he understood he had to choose between pacing and, ehm, something, and he originally went for the more the explosive, fat free approach. But I think he also said he kinda regretted cutting some characterization scenes. At that time, nevertheless, he seemed quite happy with the theatrical cut.

At least I don't think he had any conflict with studio or "outsiders". If he now prefers the extended cut, then I think he just changed his mind.

And thanks Sam for the new link. I will skip this new version.

oh, and I think the news footage in the beginning was effective. I appreciated how Sly managed to make a hugely entertaining film that also makes a couple of good points about real life problems. You know, they never get on the way of entertainment, and they can be easily ignored, but they are there if you wanna give them some attention. Not as to change your political views but just saying "hey, enjoy the ride, and maybe when you go home you may wanna check some more info about this topic. Or just grab a beer."

HungFist wrote:You mean which one is Stallone's preferred version?

What else does Director's Cut mean? .

HungFist wrote:I remember he said on the (original) commentary he understood he had to choose between pacing and, ehm, something, and he originally went for the more the explosive, fat free approach. But I think he also said he kinda regretted cutting some characterization scenes. At that time, nevertheless, he seemed quite happy with the theatrical cut.

At least I don't think he had any conflict with studio or "outsiders". If he now prefers the extended cut, then I think he just changed his mind.

Thanks. The pacing in Rambo 4 is perfect. It's so refreshing to see a recent Hollywood film without all the fat. King Kong (2005) is a good film but there's no way it needs to be 3 hours long. Still, I don't imagine an extra 8 minutes on such a short film will hurt it much.

The Extended cut is the Stallone's preferred cut even though he supervised the theatrical cut. He admitted that he second guessed himself and took out a few dramatic scenes he wished he'd kept. Now they're back.

For french text haters the good news is i received my copy of the extended cut from playusa today and there is no french writing to be seen anywhere on the case,it's all in english.

This is region-free btw.

Word of warning:

User comments at Amazon (where the film is currently on sale for $9.99) have commented that the Director's Cut is edited to soften the graphic violence from the theatrical cut. In other words there's less not more gore than the R-rated version. Strange decision on Stallone's part. Having got used to the strength of the 'R' cut I'm not sure I could appreciate a sanitised version now.

Well when I watched the theatrical cut the incessant gore bored me, so I can understand this decision.

Then this might be the version for you...

Yup they hacked bits out some meorable bits as well, sad and a pain in the arse I say. Just knowing they cut out all sorts pissses me off, making the new cut almost worthless as you will be sitting there going hey where did that kill go, where did that stabbing go?

Well unless you have zero memory and dont notice cuts

romerojpg wrote:
Well unless you have zero memory and dont notice cuts

Not everyone watches films 50 times like you do though i was watching it for the 3rd time only and it seemed violent enough to me. There's a guy posting on Bluray.com who worked with Stallone on this,it is apparently his preferred version.i still think the film isn't that great in either version tbh.was the shot of the pig eating away at the prisoner's leg in the theatrical cut?can't remember as i have zero memory

They should've included both cuts.

Problem solved.

romerojpg wrote:Yup they hacked bits out some meorable bits as well

The throat-ripping has been cut down. That's one of the best bits.

It's because the violence was just to attract attention from gorehounds, I thought so when I saw it, and now this director's cut situation confirms it.

just buy a double blu-ray case and chuck both discs in it.the original release goes for pennies nowadays anyway

Sadly I dont even need to watch a film plenty of times to notice cuts in a new version, once is enough for me to notice plenty of bits missing (or vice versa when stuff I see is newly added in). Its just seems a bit of a pain when directors cut stuff you get used to, if this was a classic older film all hell would be going on forums saying its a joke! but people seem to be letting this one slide more than classics, no idea why myself, cuts are cuts.

I may well get the disc to see whats what, but I just dont want the cutting feeling while watching it, I notice a single cut in some films, hopefully I will not notice the amount on this new Rambo disc, still nice to see the price fall quickly. Why!? a bit crackers to go half price so soon, maybe it has not sold as well as they expected~?