The 88 Films Thread

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

Every time 88 release a film the most asked question by a mile is. "Is it uncut?" This is asked more than any other question time and time again. Not "What extra's?" not "What's the picture quality?" but how uncut is the version being put out. This is because the British public, who have had to endure many years of censorship, have been burned too many times and to them, it is THE most important factor. Now, I guess that it must get a bit tiresome and an easy way around it is when they announce a title just say, "The full uncut version of..." and voila, 98 questions disappear from their facebook page.



The only problem would be if 88 are releasing a butchered version of a film, and then lie to their fans, like Bloodsucking Pharaohs of Pittsburg, in which to the inevitable question they replied "Yes" on their FB page when they were putting out the slaughtered R rated version instead. That tends to then piss people off if they have been told it is the full uncut version. Funny, that!



I always want an uncut version of a film even if I find the material questionable or repugnant to my moral code, ie, Cannibal Holocaust, Ferox, etc but I also understand that sometimes this is just not possible, like the Friday 13th films. (Although in this case I keep seeing Fan Made copies of uncut F/13 films and one day I might just have to have a look!)



In this particular case I believe the missing footage is sub-standard, dodgy, VHS quality and is in too bad a shape to add to the release. Fair enough, in my opinion but at least let the people who buy the releases and therefore pay their wages, know about this before they spend their hard earned so that they aren't left feeling Vipco-ed and ripped off. Although it is probably very difficult to sell a movie after saying, "Almost half the gore and FX cut out!"



88 should be upfront and honest with their fan base and say from the announcement what version they are putting out. Apparently this won't hurt their sales as horror fans only make up 5% of sales and the other 95% are from casual buyers in shops and Amazon. Also it will stop the legion of "Is it uncut" collectors cluttering up their Facebook page.

To be fair, they didn't lie about Bloodsucking Pharoahs. As far as they're concerned, and most people (except the rabid few crying foul on Facebook), it is "uncut". Apart from a dodgy Japanese vhs, the film has always been R-rated. Paramount picked it up for release, and demanded the R, so the gore scenes were removed before the intial release. It's like complaining about the F13 films snd their R -rated versions. You'll never see unrated versions of these, just as you'll never see Pharoahs in HD with the scenes restored.

[Boo Radley]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

To be fair, they didn't lie about Bloodsucking Pharoahs. As far as they're concerned, and most people (except the rabid few crying foul on Facebook), it is "uncut". Apart from a dodgy Japanese vhs, the film has always been R-rated. Paramount picked it up for release, and demanded the R, so the gore scenes were removed before the intial release. It's like complaining about the F13 films snd their R -rated versions. You'll never see unrated versions of these, just as you'll never see Pharoahs in HD with the scenes restored.

Ahh.... that makes a bit more sense now! Thank you. I'm still tempted to pick up those fan made Friday the !3th uncut versions just to satisfy my own curiosity though.

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

Ahh.... that makes a bit more sense now! Thank you. I'm still tempted to pick up those fan made Friday the !3th uncut versions just to satisfy my own curiosity though.

My pleasure. Yeah it would've been awesome if the footage existed in better quality and could've been re-inserted somehow, but alas it's never to be, unless someone's hiding a copy somewhere (probably the same mythical SOB who's said to own a copy of The Big Boss with the saw in the head scene).

[Boo Radley]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

(probably the same mythical SOB who's said to own a copy of The Big Boss with the saw in the head scene).

I am sure I saw this scene way back in the 70's at a drive in when I was but a nipper. I can see it in my head now. Also a scene where Bruce crouches down and uses his nunchucks outside the barn. But have never seen those bits again and as I'm getting older I question myself if I really saw them or if I saw pictures in a book and my addled old brain is playing tricks on me!

[MacBlayne]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

I am sure I saw this scene way back in the 70's at a drive in when I was but a nipper. I can see it in my head now. Also a scene where Bruce crouches down and uses his nunchucks outside the barn. But have never seen those bits again and as I'm getting older I question myself if I really saw them or if I saw pictures in a book and my addled old brain is playing tricks on me!

I had a similar thing when I saw Mortal Kombat back in cinemas in 1995. My eight year old self was convinced that Goro split a man's head in two, because that's what would happen in the game.

When I got the VHS, I noticed Goro only smacks him on the head but I was so convinced that I had seen Goro split the head, that I assumed the bastards censored the VHS.

[Zann]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

Every time 88 release a film the most asked question by a mile is. "Is it uncut?" This is asked more than any other question time and time again. Not "What extra's?" not "What's the picture quality?" but how uncut is the version being put out. This is because the British public, who have had to endure many years of censorship, have been burned too many times and to them, it is THE most important factor. Now, I guess that it must get a bit tiresome and an easy way around it is when they announce a title just say, "The full uncut version of..." and voila, 98 questions disappear from their facebook page.

The only problem would be if 88 are releasing a butchered version of a film, and then lie to their fans, like Bloodsucking Pharaohs of Pittsburg, in which to the inevitable question they replied "Yes" on their FB page when they were putting out the slaughtered R rated version instead. That tends to then piss people off if they have been told it is the full uncut version. Funny, that!

I always want an uncut version of a film even if I find the material questionable or repugnant to my moral code, ie, Cannibal Holocaust, Ferox, etc but I also understand that sometimes this is just not possible, like the Friday 13th films. (Although in this case I keep seeing Fan Made copies of uncut F/13 films and one day I might just have to have a look!)

In this particular case I believe the missing footage is sub-standard, dodgy, VHS quality and is in too bad a shape to add to the release. Fair enough, in my opinion but at least let the people who buy the releases and therefore pay their wages, know about this before they spend their hard earned so that they aren't left feeling Vipco-ed and ripped off. Although it is probably very difficult to sell a movie after saying, "Almost half the gore and FX cut out!"

88 should be upfront and honest with their fan base and say from the announcement what version they are putting out. Apparently this won't hurt their sales as horror fans only make up 5% of sales and the other 95% are from casual buyers in shops and Amazon. Also it will stop the legion of "Is it uncut" collectors cluttering up their Facebook page.

Absobloodylutely! Not buying their Nightmares until I'm certain it's the real deal. I'm unshakable on uncut! Didn't upgrade my Buio Omega to BD because of missing monkey or whatever it was.

[Calum]

Originally Posted by Zann

Absobloodylutely! Not buying their Nightmares until I'm certain it's the real deal. I'm unshakable on uncut! Didn't upgrade my Buio Omega to BD because of missing monkey or whatever it was.

The problem is that 88 Films announced NIGHTMARE as uncut and uncensored and the same flipping question keeps being asked. So how many times do you want them to say "YES IT IS UNCUT?"

There are some fans who will respond and go, "oh but it isn't through the BBFC yet". You know, for someone (me) who takes stick from troll after troll for apparently not being "a true fan" (i.e. I'm not from the hallowed wonderful video nasty era) it is incredible that I am tuned-in enough to BBFC practice to have known NEKROMANTIK and ISLAND OF DEATH - both titles I recommended, supplied Arrow with contacts for and repeatedly and frustratingly assured them would be fine at the board - were going to pass uncut. It is strange I knew ANTHRO, LIVE LIKE A COP, DIE LIKE A MAN and NAIL GUN MASSACRE were going to be fine (all titles I read, in various forums, might be censored). And whilst I might be wrong - hey, you never ever know - I'm pretty damn certain NIGHTMARE and EMANUELLE AND THE LAST CANNIBALS are going to be okay with the BBFC too.

Simply put: there is nothing in these movies that I can see troubling the lads down at Soho Square. The BBFC is not the draconian organisation some fans apparently still think it is.

Anything 88 announces - perhaps because their titles tend to be a bit edgier than Arrow - gets "is it uncut?" It happened with SS EXPERIMENT CAMP (passed uncut years ago), then with SLEEPAWAY CAMP 2 (passed uncut years ago) and then with BLOODSUCKING PHARAOHS (which is, for all intents and purposes, the uncut release version - because the 'full' version has never, ever existed outwith the dodgy p1sspoor quality Japanese VHS tape Stephen refers to). The PHARAOHS situation is mind-boggling because it is like asking for a copy of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 7 uncut, knowing full well the excised material only exists in workprint form. The same is true of PHARAOHS - and yesterday I found one fan saying the entire film should just be binned if that removed footage cannot be found and put back into the movie. How is that not censorship?

I also understand the fan desire to have everything in its uncut release version - even if (and this is my own opinion) I prefer titles like Man from Deep River to be without the animal material, which I never want to see again - but 88 Films cannot possibly reply to every single question of "is it uncut?' Especially when, as with ANTHRO, they posted on Facebook a title card for THE SAVAGE ISLAND (which it was submitted as) and actually got questions such as "is this an uncut version of a different print that doesn't have all the gore?"

It makes you want to slam your head against the wall!

[Zann]

Originally Posted by Calum

The problem is that 88 Films announced NIGHTMARE as uncut and uncensored and the same flipping question keeps being asked. So how many times do you want them to say "YES IT IS UNCUT?"

There are some fans who will respond and go, "oh but it isn't through the BBFC yet". You know, for someone (me) who takes stick from troll after troll for apparently not being "a true fan" (i.e. I'm not from the hallowed wonderful video nasty era) it is incredible that I am tuned-in enough to BBFC practice to have known NEKROMANTIK and ISLAND OF DEATH - both titles I recommended, supplied Arrow with contacts for and repeatedly and frustratingly assured them would be fine at the board - were going to pass uncut. It is strange I knew ANTHRO, LIVE LIKE A COP, DIE LIKE A MAN and NAIL GUN MASSACRE were going to be fine (all titles I read, in various forums, might be censored). And whilst I might be wrong - hey, you never ever know - I'm pretty damn certain NIGHTMARE and EMANUELLE AND THE LAST CANNIBALS are going to be okay with the BBFC too.

Simply put: there is nothing in these movies that I can see troubling the lads down at Soho Square. The BBFC is not the draconian organisation some fans apparently still think it is.

Anything 88 announces - perhaps because their titles tend to be a bit edgier than Arrow - gets "is it uncut?" It happened with SS EXPERIMENT CAMP (passed uncut years ago), then with SLEEPAWAY CAMP 2 (passed uncut years ago) and then with BLOODSUCKING PHARAOHS (which is, for all intents and purposes, the uncut release version - because the 'full' version has never, ever existed outwith the dodgy p1sspoor quality Japanese VHS tape Stephen refers to). The PHARAOHS situation is mind-boggling because it is like asking for a copy of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 7 uncut, knowing full well the excised material only exists in workprint form. The same is true of PHARAOHS - and yesterday I found one fan saying the entire film should just be binned if that removed footage cannot be found and put back into the movie. How is that not censorship?

I also understand the fan desire to have everything in its uncut release version - even if (and this is my own opinion) I prefer titles like Man from Deep River to be without the animal material, which I never want to see again - but 88 Films cannot possibly reply to every single question of "is it uncut?' Especially when, as with ANTHRO, they posted on Facebook a title card for THE SAVAGE ISLAND (which it was submitted as) and actually got questions such as "is this an uncut version of a different print that doesn't have all the gore?"

It makes you want to slam your head against the wall!

It is hypervigilant and yes the questions about whether or not 88 releases are uncut are self-perpetuating now but like Boo Radley said people have been burned in the past and now rely on bbfc, melonfarmers, dvdcompare, dvdbeaver and other reliable sources for further confirmation.

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

Ah, now I understand your last post! No, it's not. There's been a manufacturing error and the film cuts off before the end.

Shit.
Replacements being sent mate?


And listen people,this is a highly cultural film,so less of the 'it's a blessing' patter!

[keirarts]

melonfarmers isn't reliable. Already established in this thread, they got Nightmare very, very wrong.

uncut is a difficult one, I'd love an uncut event horizon but its never going to happen, that footage is gone.