Which of the "Video Nasties" have you yet to see? - Page 6

vincenzo · #51 9th March 2010, 04:03 PM

Afraid so. I agree, even the artwork is abysmal.

42ndStreetFreak · #52 9th March 2010, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vincenzo

The version I have just has the one full frontal shot near the beginning of the scene. Sounds like the same print.

My Pube meter must be overloading then.

I thought there were more full frontal shots as she was being set on fire and burning too?

I know the new anamorphic DVD chops off the full frontal nudity. Supposedly okay with the DP...Not okay with me.

bizarre_eye@Cult Labs · #53 9th March 2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loops

In case anyone doesn't know, Synapse are going to release Pranks:

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php?op...ews&Itemid=167

Didn't know this, so cheers for the info loops!

alex s · #54 9th March 2010, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reaper72

You don't want to waste eighty minutes of your life with BOOGEY MAN 2 mate.
Don't Go Near the Park isn't much better.

i have no interest in seeing the redux version so need to get my hands on the vts pre-cert

Angel · #55 9th March 2010, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 42ndStreetFreak

I thought there were more full frontal shots as she was being set on fire and burning too?

No not a single one. Just a frontal shot of the dummy being hit by those flames. They couldn't have used a real person in these shots.

42ndStreetFreak · #56 9th March 2010, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel

No not a single one. Just a frontal shot of the dummy being hit by those flames. They couldn't have used a real person in these shots.

Hmmm....But as far as I remember the flames were very cleverly superimposed over her body to show the full body burn. I have the DVL (DIGITAL VERSATILE DISC Ltd) release.

I shall have a sneaky peaky....
.....
.....
.....
.....
I have had a sneaky peaky.....

You see a full frontal shot when you first see her hanging for a few seconds.

You then only have shots that go just below her belly button.

You then have another full frontal shot of her for a good 4 seconds in length as the flames hit her for the first time.

I don't think this is a dummy either, it looks like an optical effect on the real actress who is covered in a shiny gel type stuff.
If that's a dummy it's the most life-like dummy I've ever seen. You clearly see the actress' screaming face as well as the flames hit..
It even moves and struggles and the head shakes and goes back and forth.

The next shots after this initial burst of flame are full body but by then she is completely covered in flames so you can only make out the body shape, no real details.

Pete · #57 9th March 2010, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 42ndStreetFreak

Hmmm....But as far as I remember the flames were very cleverly superimposed over her body to show the full body burn. I have the DVL (DIGITAL VERSATILE DISC Ltd) release.

I shall have a sneaky peaky....
.....
.....
.....
.....
I have had a sneaky peaky.....

You see a full frontal shot when you first see her hanging for a few seconds.

You then only have shots that go just below her belly button.

You then have another full frontal shot of her for a good 4 seconds in length as the flames hit her for the first time.

I don't think this is a dummy either, it looks like an optical effect on the real actress who is covered in a shiny gel type stuff.
If that's a dummy it's the most life-like dummy I've ever seen. It even moves and struggles and the head shakes and goes back and forth.

The next shots after this initial burst of flame are full body but by then she is completely covered in flames so you can only make out the body shape, no real details.

It is definitelly an optical effect.

42ndStreetFreak · #58 9th March 2010, 07:48 PM

Yeah...so you see two full frontal shots of about 5 or 6 seconds each.

Angel · #59 9th March 2010, 07:55 PM

Yes I think you're probably right about it being an optical effect.

So 2 full frontals then, I suspect it might be cause for concern over at the BBFC. Guess though we will just have to wait and see. Certainly though I have never seen a scene like this in any other film, I don't know if anyone here has?

42ndStreetFreak · #60 9th March 2010, 08:06 PM

It is still disturbing.
To a non-horror fan, certainly a non-exploitation fan, it would be really strong I think even today.

It seems to be the actress was coated in a protective gel (her body is literally shiny and oily looking) and I think they may have fired the flamethrower in the same shot as her (thus the heat protective gel) right on the edges of the frame...then extended the flames optically to reach and then cover her.

Not only is it a (pre computer anything) wonderful effect to find in such a film, but it has even more of an impact because there is nothing remotely like it in the rest of the film so it screams out at you.