SHAM031/SHAM201 - Cannibal Holocaust: The BBFC Advice & Decision

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

That's what I thought too. Maybe some of the animal violence has to be there otherwise some dialogue won't work or the editing may seem a little clunky. It would be hard to remove the scene of the pig being kicked without completely ruining the flow so it might be left in and be classified as 'animal cruelty'.

[z0mbi3v1ru5]

Originally Posted by trouserpress

But this IS the cut that Ruggero prefers. He never wanted the animal cruelty in there in the first place.

Thats not the case. As others have stated, he regrets having introduced animal cruelty to the film. However, FOR ME, I want his original vision. Not a 2011 regret edit. Im not knocking anyone at all. If I did in any way, I apologize in advance. But I want the original film, completely uncut.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

That's what I thought too. Maybe some of the animal violence has to be there otherwise some dialogue won't work or the editing may seem a little clunky. It would be hard to remove the scene of the pig being kicked without completely ruining the flow so it might be left in and be classified as 'animal cruelty'.

It was cut completely in the old Vipco version; they walk into the village, there is a slight jump and then Gabriel Yorke turns to the camera and say's 'Things like this happen all the time in the jungle'.

[Pete]

I don't think Deodato regrets the animal stuff, and is only saying he does because it's what people want to hear.

[PaulD]

Originally Posted by z0mbi3v1ru5

Thats not the case. As others have stated, he regrets having introduced animal cruelty to the film. However, FOR ME, I want his original vision. Not a 2011 regret edit. Im not knocking anyone at all. If I did in any way, I apologize in advance. But I want the original film, completely uncut.

You get both though, as I said, BBFC permitting. You will get the original film, minus 13 or however many seconds of footage removed due to what the BBFC class as animal cruelty. The rest of the film will be as it originally was. Plus the new edit.

[platostotal]

Originally Posted by Pete

I don't think Deodato regrets the animal stuff, and is only saying he does because it's what people want to hear.

Some truth in that, in 'last Cannibal World' there is some animal scenes. And that was a few years before.(tho those are milder than CH, animals still cop it)

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Pete

It was cut completely in the old Vipco version; they walk into the village, there is a slight jump and then Gabriel Yorke turns to the camera and say's 'Things like this happen all the time in the jungle'.

I have never bought a Vipco disc because of their reputation for ridiculous cuts which ruin the narrative completely -- that sounds like a perfect example.

[platostotal]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

I have never bought a Vipco disc because of their reputation for ridiculous cuts which ruin the narrative completely -- that sounds like a perfect example.

Those were mandatory BBFC cuts to the re-release, surely you mean "Ridiculous poor quality bootleg merchants"

[z0mbi3v1ru5]

Originally Posted by PaulD

You get both though, as I said, BBFC permitting. You will get the original film, minus 13 or however many seconds of footage removed due to what the BBFC class as animal cruelty. The rest of the film will be as it originally was. Plus the new edit.

Thats really cool... and I undestand that already. But refering back to my original post, I want it Uncut. Again, not much shameless can do. Its not them removing 13 seconds.

[trench]

Originally Posted by z0mbi3v1ru5

Damns... I was excited to see this one also. Though the missing animal cruelty won't bother me.. I refuse to buy cut films.

I don't understand this. You state that the missing animal footage won't bother you, but you won't buy the film because it removes one scene of animal cruelty?