Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: RE:

  		Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 9:43:54 AM   
Osric


Posts: 107
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: Hebden Bridge
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 121
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 9:58:24 AM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

It would obviously have to be an action movie. But you're an absolute retard if you think that swearing and blood is what makes a Die Hard movie a Die Hard movie.

John McClane. That's what makes it a Die Hard movie. If he's there, then that's all you need. Like I said, if the film's shit, it would have been shit anyway, and if it's great, the rating it's given shouldn't matter.

PS - There are four uses of the word 'fuck'. In a 12A movie.


This is the issue I had with DH4 and it looks like it has been repeated on this new one: Willis' character just doesn't seem to be John McClane any more. He's become some Generic Action Hero (TM). No wise-cracking and no real peril, just a grumpy old man with a gun.

Incidentally, I saw this on Twitter the other week which kind of takes the edge of some of the disappointment in the direction of the series: Why ‘Unbreakable’ is the Secret Meta Sequel to ‘Die Hard’ (click). It basically offers a theory as to why JC seemingly can't be killed now...




You don't think after he's saved a building/airport/city from three separate terrorist plots, it makes sense that he's gotten better at the action stuff by the fourth time?
There's also plenty of wise-cracking.

And he could never be killed. Action movies of this kind aren't known for their downer endings...

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 122
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 10:07:37 AM   
FoximusPrime

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 11/12/2005
But the difference between McClane and the likes of Johns Rambo or Matrix is that he was clearly in over his head and there was always the sense that he was fallible. He was the archetypal everyman that most action heroes of the 80s weren't.

And no matter how many terrorists you thwart, you aren't going to nonchalantly walk away after you fall off a fighter jet you've just shot down with a lorry. That was shark-jumping, fridge-nuking overkill in my eyes.

I genuinely don't remember any witty one-liners that betrayed his NYC roots in Die Hard 4.0. There was something about an "Asian hooker bitch" I think, but that's not quite what I was hoping for.

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 123
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 10:13:35 AM   
FoximusPrime

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 11/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


I remember reading that the theatrical version was the intended version at the time. Looking at the BBFC site, they say "All known versions of this work passed uncut." (click) and it's listed as 12, as of the 2007 release date. Admittedly, I could be interpreting this wrong and there is no extended guidance from what I can tell.

(in reply to Osric)
Post #: 124
RE: - 12/2/2013 10:31:45 AM   
Wild about Wilder


Posts: 1480
Joined: 9/4/2010
From: Hertfordshire
 It's about time the BBFC took the A out of 12A as it's just a joke I remember seeing kids 5 & under watching the 2nd Nolan/Batman film all because they're acomponied by someone over the age of 12???

(in reply to jimbaf)
Post #: 125
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 10:39:19 AM   
Osric


Posts: 107
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: Hebden Bridge
quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


I remember reading that the theatrical version was the intended version at the time. Looking at the BBFC site, they say "All known versions of this work passed uncut." (click) and it's listed as 12, as of the 2007 release date. Admittedly, I could be interpreting this wrong and there is no extended guidance from what I can tell.


BOTH cuts are 15 over here, aren't they? The extra swearing and blood made no difference to the BBFC in this particular case. That's certainly what the DVD boxes say. MelonFarmers is a useful site for this sort of thing. "The BBFC commented on their 15 rating as follows... The BBFC’s Guidelines at ‘12A’ state that ‘violence must not dwell on detail' and that 'there should be no emphasis on injuries or blood’. Throughout the film there are several moments where the violence does focus on injury and it was these moments, in combination with the sheer relentlessness of the film's frequent action violence, which placed DIE HARD 4.0 more appropriately at '15'. The film also contains one use of strong language (‘motherfucker’), which was clear even with the end of the word obscured by the sound of gunshots..." (http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/hitsdb.htm)

Anyway, question still stands. Who says the theatrical version is the "official" one?

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 126
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 10:40:15 AM   
FoximusPrime

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 11/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild about Wilder

It's about time the BBFC took the A out of 12A as it's just a joke I remember seeing kids 5 & under watching the 2nd Nolan/Batman film all because they're acomponied by someone over the age of 12???


What you actually saw was someone over the age of 12 taking kids of 5 and under to watch TDK because the adult fancied watching the film and couldn't be arsed exercising responsibility. I saw a similar thing when I watched TDK: a couple of kids dicking about while their adult ignored them and watched the film. That's a significantly different situation to a parent believing their child can handle a 12A.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand...I always thought Die Hard 4 was a 12A in cinemas but keep seeing mention of it on these pages as being a 15. Was I imaging the 12 cert or was that just for DVD? I don't know.

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 127
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 10:48:36 AM   
FoximusPrime

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 11/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric


quote:

ORIGINAL: FoximusPrime


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


I remember reading that the theatrical version was the intended version at the time. Looking at the BBFC site, they say "All known versions of this work passed uncut." (click) and it's listed as 12, as of the 2007 release date. Admittedly, I could be interpreting this wrong and there is no extended guidance from what I can tell.


BOTH cuts are 15 over here, aren't they? The extra swearing and blood made no difference to the BBFC in this particular case. That's certainly what the DVD boxes say. MelonFarmers is a useful site for this sort of thing. "The BBFC commented on their 15 rating as follows... The BBFC’s Guidelines at ‘12A’ state that ‘violence must not dwell on detail' and that 'there should be no emphasis on injuries or blood’. Throughout the film there are several moments where the violence does focus on injury and it was these moments, in combination with the sheer relentlessness of the film's frequent action violence, which placed DIE HARD 4.0 more appropriately at '15'. The film also contains one use of strong language (‘motherfucker’), which was clear even with the end of the word obscured by the sound of gunshots..." (http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/hitsdb.htm)

Anyway, question still stands. Who says the theatrical version is the "official" one?



20th Century Fox since that's the version they released in cinemas, surely? It isn't as though there was a huge gap between the theatrical version and the 'uncut' version, during which time fan pressure and growing legend of the mythical uncut edition forced the studio's hand to release Len Wiseman's true directorial vision, unfairly hacked apart by a snivelling studio "yes-man" editor in order to increase ticket sales by catering to as large an age group as possible.

Much more likely that this was the plan all along.

(in reply to Osric)
Post #: 128
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 10:59:27 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch
Yes, the BBFC is much better than it was, and went through something of a golden age in the 2000's, but this decade has seen a slide back towards the scissor happy days of old. There are still far too many films coming through with butchered cinema versions:

Die Hard 5
Taken 2
Jack Reacher
The Woman in Black
The Expendables
The Hunger Games
Savages
The Inbetweeners Movie
The Three Stooges
The Knot
Now Is Good
The Cold Light Of Day
Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Part 1


Again, none of that was the BBFC's fault it was the studios wanting lower certificates and in this day and age it makes no difference as the time between cinema and home video is much shorter now. Also, because of Blu Ray, we get most them in uncut versions anyway, that never happened in the 80s and 90s.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 129
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:00:55 AM   
Osric


Posts: 107
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: Hebden Bridge
 @FoximusPrime - You're missing my original point. Yes, it's normal practice for a studio to release a slightly milder theatrical cut-down version and then a stronger full version on disc. But the general view tends then to be that the stronger version is the definitive one, and everyone subsequently ignores the theatrical version. Right? What Shift Bench is saying is that the definitive version of DH4 is the milder theatrical one, and that the stronger version is some sort of fake cut that's been dubbed and FX'd to appear swearier and more violent. He's saying that the studio have faked a stronger version. I want to know the source for that info.

< Message edited by Osric -- 12/2/2013 11:01:46 AM >

(in reply to FoximusPrime)
Post #: 130
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:02:53 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


On the commentary, the director talks about filming in order to get a PG-13 rating and if you watch the harder cut you can tell the swearing is dubbed over. A lot of it happens where you can't actually see the actor's mouths. That's my understanding of it anyway, if I am wrong, I am wrong

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to Osric)
Post #: 131
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:11:29 AM   
DancingClown


Posts: 3546
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


On the commentary, the director talks about filming in order to get a PG-13 rating and if you watch the harder cut you can tell the swearing is dubbed over. A lot of it happens where you can't actually see the actor's mouths. That's my understanding of it anyway, if I am wrong, I am wrong


Who would've been responsible for sanctioning those additions? Would Wiseman have been involved?

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 132
Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:15:58 AM   
Normal Control


Posts: 72
Joined: 11/11/2012
I could watch a Die Hard movie without any cussing at all if it had a tight story, balls, and was technically brilliant. See movies 1-3. The sad fact is that Bruce Willis is a lame one-trick pony milking his only franchise that never should have gone beyond 3 classic movies. Let him carry on the Sky TV ads, that's the sum of his ambition. I agree with previous posters - boycott this shite.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 133
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:22:59 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench


quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Die Hard 4 was never cut... the stupid version with dubbed over swearing and CG blood hits...



Where does this belief come from? I've seen people making similar claims (that the PG version of Die Hard 4 is the correct one, and the "Harder cut" was manufactured for the people that complained and is somehow not legit and fake) on a thread on Amazon, but I can't find any evidence to back that up. I'm not saying it's wrong - just where have you read that that's right? Not on IMDb, not on Wikipedia... It seems very odd to me that a violent action film's director's cut is the PG version, and that it was dubbed and edited UPWARDS later to make it swearier and more violent. Is there any other single instance of an edit happening this way round? What's your evidence that it happened here?


On the commentary, the director talks about filming in order to get a PG-13 rating and if you watch the harder cut you can tell the swearing is dubbed over. A lot of it happens where you can't actually see the actor's mouths. That's my understanding of it anyway, if I am wrong, I am wrong


Who would've been responsible for sanctioning those additions? Would Wiseman have been involved?


Ok, the version the MPAA got to classify was the PG-13 version, they did no edits to it. Bruce Willis has complained that it was the studio that wanted the lower certificate and that it was they that ordered cuts. I think the original script was rated R (McClane's gotta swear) but was edited while filming so the PG-13 version is the version they filmed. This would also explain why there is only a commentary for the PG-13 version (in which they talk about filming to retrieve that rating).

I think the harder cut is the original shooting script version so in retrospect,if that's true, I was half wrong. The PG-13 is the version given to the MPAA though, so I was right that they didn't cut it which was the original intention of my previous statement.

And in answer to another question from earlier, they re-dubbed the film to release it on home video in two separate versions to get more money. Fox loves its money as evidenced with what they did to DH5.


< Message edited by Shifty Bench -- 12/2/2013 11:23:16 AM >

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 134
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:23:36 AM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 6208
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: Normal Control

I could watch a Die Hard movie without any cussing at all if it had a tight story, balls, and was technically brilliant. See movies 1-3. The sad fact is that Bruce Willis is a lame one-trick pony milking his only franchise that never should have gone beyond 3 classic movies. Let him carry on the Sky TV ads, that's the sum of his ambition. I agree with previous posters - boycott this shite.


Really? I mean, he did Looper last year. Didn't you lik... oh, wait a minute. Looper is pooper, right? Gotcha.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

Who would've been responsible for sanctioning those additions? Would Wiseman have been involved?



More likely Fox tinkering with it to tempt the die hard... er, Die Hard fans into buying what's supposed to be a more violent, swearier cut of of a PG-13 film. Pretty fucking cynical, but there you go. I don't know if Wiseman has enough clout to contest additions or cuts to his finished film. Once he turned the film over to Fox they could have pretty much done whatever they wanted with it.


< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 12/2/2013 11:29:17 AM >

_____________________________

C*** and mocker of board members since March, 2011

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Normal Control)
Post #: 135
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:26:53 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

Who would've been responsible for sanctioning those additions? Would Wiseman have been involved?



More likely Fox tinkering with it to tempt the die hard... er, Die Hard fans into buying what's supposed to be a more violent, swearier cut of of a PG-13 film. Pretty fucking cynical, but there you go. I don't know if Wiseman has enough clout to contest additions or cuts to his finished film. Once he turned the film over to Fox they could pretty much do whatever they wanted with it.



Yes, this. Sorry DC, I just realised I quoted you and didn't really answer your question. Well, kind of did but only kind of

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 136
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:30:17 AM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wild about Wilder

It's about time the BBFC took the A out of 12A as it's just a joke I remember seeing kids 5 & under watching the 2nd Nolan/Batman film all because they're acomponied by someone over the age of 12???


The only reason they added it is because so many parents complained that they couldn't take their kids to see Spider-Man. BBFC should have stuck to their guns and said "it's rated 12 for a reason", as far as I'm concerned...

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Wild about Wilder)
Post #: 137
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:33:31 AM   
Osric


Posts: 107
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: Hebden Bridge
quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

More likely Fox tinkering with it to tempt the die hard... er, Die Hard fans into buying what's supposed to be a more violent, swearier cut of of a PG-13 film. Pretty fucking cynical, but there you go. I don't know if Wiseman has enough clout to contest additions or cuts to his finished film. Once he turned the film over to Fox they could have pretty much done whatever they wanted with it.



That is AMAZINGLY cynical if it's true. Jeeeezus.

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 138
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:36:36 AM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 6208
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

More likely Fox tinkering with it to tempt the die hard... er, Die Hard fans into buying what's supposed to be a more violent, swearier cut of of a PG-13 film. Pretty fucking cynical, but there you go. I don't know if Wiseman has enough clout to contest additions or cuts to his finished film. Once he turned the film over to Fox they could have pretty much done whatever they wanted with it.



That is AMAZINGLY cynical if it's true. Jeeeezus.


I don't doubt it for a second. Look what they did with Taken 2.

It was a 12A in the cinemas, and now the DVD and Blu-Ray boxes are touting the film as a more violent edition.

_____________________________

C*** and mocker of board members since March, 2011

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Osric)
Post #: 139
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:38:13 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Osric

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

More likely Fox tinkering with it to tempt the die hard... er, Die Hard fans into buying what's supposed to be a more violent, swearier cut of of a PG-13 film. Pretty fucking cynical, but there you go. I don't know if Wiseman has enough clout to contest additions or cuts to his finished film. Once he turned the film over to Fox they could have pretty much done whatever they wanted with it.



That is AMAZINGLY cynical if it's true. Jeeeezus.


I think it is true, just look at what Fox has done lately to get extra money- cut Taken 2, Die Hard 5 and Chronicle to retrieve 12A ratings and they even cut The Three Stooges to get a PG over here. Also, speaking of Taken 2, they could have got an R rating for it but even the US version is cut to get PG-13. They're getting quite the reputation these days regarding this sort of thing.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to Osric)
Post #: 140
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:42:38 AM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
 I think all the major studios are pushing for 12A/PG13 ratings of their big movies nowadays, not only Fox.
Only directors of recent years that I think have released a large scale movie with anything higher than that are Quentin Tarantino and Zack Snyder. And I'd be surprised if Warner Bros. let Snyder get away with an 18 certificate film again after the disappointing box office for Watchmen (because they didn't realise that a Watchmen movie was always going to be hard to sell to people).

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 141
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:48:44 AM   
paulyboy


Posts: 2111
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

And in answer to another question from earlier, they re-dubbed the film to release it on home video in two separate versions to get more money. Fox loves its money as evidenced with what they did to DH5.



To be fair the "harder" cut does include some completely different takes, featuring McClane swearing in full, undubbed view of the camera, when they're leaving Warlock's house for example.

Possibly just Willis ad-libs that were left on the cutting room floor mind you, but if they're not it would seem to indicate that on some level they were covering all bases whilst filming, even if the primary aim was PG-13.

_____________________________

"Pain heals, chicks dig scars, glory lasts forever!"

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 142
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 11:52:58 AM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: paulyboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

And in answer to another question from earlier, they re-dubbed the film to release it on home video in two separate versions to get more money. Fox loves its money as evidenced with what they did to DH5.



To be fair the "harder" cut does include some completely different takes, featuring McClane swearing in full, undubbed view of the camera, when they're leaving Warlock's house for example.

Possibly just Willis ad-libs that were left on the cutting room floor mind you, but if they're not it would seem to indicate that on some level they were covering all bases whilst filming, even if the primary aim was PG-13.


Yeah, I think that too. A lot of the swearing is dubbed, though and one change that has always annoyed me is the different line after he kills the helicopter with the car

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to paulyboy)
Post #: 143
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 11:59:04 AM   
Normal Control


Posts: 72
Joined: 11/11/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

I think all the major studios are pushing for 12A/PG13 ratings of their big movies nowadays, not only Fox.
Only directors of recent years that I think have released a large scale movie with anything higher than that are Quentin Tarantino and Zack Snyder. And I'd be surprised if Warner Bros. let Snyder get away with an 18 certificate film again after the disappointing box office for Watchmen (because they didn't realise that a Watchmen movie was always going to be hard to sell to people).


I think Watchmen did pretty well at the box office considering the material and 18 rating. Dredd was 18 in the UK and hit the number 1 spot for a week despite zero backing from media outlets like Empire (it was word of mouth that helped it here). Dredd tanked in the US, but I think that was for reasons other than the R rating. Tarantino's doing pretty well in the 18 bracket.

The problem is that the studios are desperate for franchises rather than one-off movies (Die Hard was never intended to have a sequel when it was made), so they want to hook tweenies and families into buying their shit on repeat as it's a bigger long term money farm. It also allows Hollywood to take less risk by making unoriginal movies. That's why anyone who recognises this should avoid like the plague.

_____________________________

"you would need three promotions to get to be an asshole!"

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 144
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 12:05:22 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
 Watchmen only just managed to scrape a profit... it cost $130 million and made $185 million, so it wasn't a flop, but I'm pretty sure Warners would have been pretty disappointed with only making $55 million out of it.

I guess I don't really care about these kinds of things as long as the films are good, though. They can keep pumping out as many sequels as they want if they manage to come up with good films. It's only when a film was crap and they still make sequels that I get annoyed... Transformers: Dark Of The Moon, I'm looking at you!

I'm just happy that in a world saturated with those kind of things, films like Inception and Cloud Atlas are still able to be made. There's still hope when things like that are possible. Even if I end up hating Cloud Atlas, I'll always admire it.

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Normal Control)
Post #: 145
RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 12:13:50 PM   
jcthefirst


Posts: 4074
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: Bangor
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Yeah, I think that too. A lot of the swearing is dubbed, though and one change that has always annoyed me is the different line after he kills the helicopter with the car


Yes, the 'I was out of bullets' is a great line; very McClane. The longer 'road deaths' one is too long to be a pithy quip.

_____________________________

@Jonny_C85

My Movie Blog | My Other Various Rantings Blog

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 146
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 12:17:12 PM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

I think all the major studios are pushing for 12A/PG13 ratings of their big movies nowadays, not only Fox.


Indeed but only Fox are doing it this way. No other studio has cut an R rated film down to get a 12A in the UK. Remember, the film is still being shown in its full uncut R rated version in the US. What Fox has done here is quite ridiculous.


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 147
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:19:27 PM   
Drooch

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Slap a certificate on the film and go home, job done, stop fucking around with our films.



They are not your films, they are the studios films and they can do whatever they want with them.



Sure, the studios own them but, as a cinephile, I want to see what the filmmaker made, unmolested. You might be comfortable to accept the studio version of Brazil, but people who enjoy cinema wanted to see want to see Gilliam's original vision and we were right to demand it. So while you might be comfortable to bend over for studios and accept whatever compromised versions they would rather dish out, have some respect for people who care about artistic integrity and are passionate about films.




(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 148
RE: Die Hard: Dead and Resting in Peace - 12/2/2013 12:22:37 PM   
FoximusPrime

 

Posts: 214
Joined: 11/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

Watchmen only just managed to scrape a profit... it cost $130 million and made $185 million, so it wasn't a flop, but I'm pretty sure Warners would have been pretty disappointed with only making $55 million out of it.

I guess I don't really care about these kinds of things as long as the films are good, though. They can keep pumping out as many sequels as they want if they manage to come up with good films. It's only when a film was crap and they still make sequels that I get annoyed... Transformers: Dark Of The Moon, I'm looking at you!

I'm just happy that in a world saturated with those kind of things, films like Inception and Cloud Atlas are still able to be made. There's still hope when things like that are possible. Even if I end up hating Cloud Atlas, I'll always admire it.


It's telling that Warner are responsible for releasing / distributing both Inception and Cloud Atlas. It could be really good PR on their part, but they seem to be the braver of the big studios at the moment. Conversely, in recent years Fox seem to be treating the industry like a factory to churn out cheap sequels based purely on brand recognition, with little to no thought of quality e.g. X-men: Origins: Wolverine [shudder]

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 149
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:24:07 PM   
Shifty Bench


Posts: 14553
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Sure, the studios own them but, as a cinephile, I want to see what the filmmaker made, unmolested.


As do I which is why I am annoyed at Fox for this.


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.


quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper
Shifty said it best


(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: RE: Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078