Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob4  iit's really annoying that when filmakers are required to make censor cuts they don't keep the cuts safe and in good nick. its not like they didn't know in 1992 that the movie would have a life after its theatrical release  i hope Bernard Rose doesn't complain that his artistic integrity was compromised when he couldn't be arsed to ensure good elements were retained.  rant over  |
Why would it be his responsibility, since he wasn't the producer or financier of the film?
Unfortunately, not only would this not have been down to him, but filmmakers are often under the deeply mistaken impression that all offcuts are being carefully preserved for posterity - something that Peter Mullan fell foul of when he was putting together the DVD extras for
Orphans (whose commentary opens with a glorious "Welcome to the world of DVD, ya sad anorak bastards"). Like most first-time directors, he shot a fair bit more than he needed, and had to jettison what was apparently some great material for the sake of pacing the final cut - but he reassured himself that he would at least be able to do something with it on the DVD so all that effort wouldn't go to waste.
You can probably guess the punchline.
Put it like this, the most menacing line I've ever heard Mullan utter in any context is "To say I'm unhappy about this is an understatement" - which is on the commentary immediately after he talks about his discovery that all the offcuts had been junked by FilmFour.