Cult Labs

Go Back   Cult Labs > Film Discussions > VHS & Exploitation > Censorship
All AlbumsBlogs FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Like Tree74Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #281  
Old 9th July 2009, 10:23 AM
Angel's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Well if it's risible then perhaps they will reconsider next time.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 9th July 2009, 10:30 AM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Of the two Shameless 'cuts' which do you think is likely to be waived first, Angel? New York Ripper or Venus In Furs?

I'm more inclined to think the latter though it's a close one.
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 9th July 2009, 11:44 AM
Cult Acolyte
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Belfast
Default

Sorry for jumping in.

If Shameless were told that the 2 cut films would pass now uncut, would the have to resubmitt the films and pay the same fee as before.?

I think Venus would be waived first, mainly because its appeal is limited to a certain audience .
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 9th July 2009, 11:46 AM
Pete's Avatar
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Liverpool
Blog Entries: 13
Default

Yeah, Venus cuts would be the first to be waived.

I wonder how the titles in ABUK's first Jess Franco Collection would fare with the bbfc today? I know Love Letters of a Portuguese Nun would still be cut but it would be intersting to see what they make of the others.
__________________


Letterboxd | Youtube | Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 9th July 2009, 11:50 AM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vipco View Post
If Shameless were told that the 2 cut films would pass now uncut, would the have to resubmitt the films and pay the same fee as before.?
If they resubmitted the uncut prints they would have to pay the same fee as before, even if the cuts ended up waived or not. Shameless wouldn't know if the BBFC would waive them until the film is submitted and viewed.

This is why most companies simply re-release the same cut print. No BBFC submission would be required unless the print is different in any way from the previous one (ie uncut, extended, widescreen etc).
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 9th July 2009, 11:53 AM
Pete's Avatar
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Liverpool
Blog Entries: 13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vincenzo View Post
If they resubmitted the uncut prints they would have to pay the same fee as before, even if the cuts ended up waived or not. This is why most companies simply re-release the same cut print.
Most companies? You just mean Vipco dont you?

Eaten Alive
Night of the Demon
Bloody Moon
Pranks
__________________


Letterboxd | Youtube | Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 9th July 2009, 12:02 PM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loops View Post
Most companies? You just mean Vipco dont you?
They certainly spring to mind.

Of the 4 mentioned above Pranks and Night Of The Demon would definitely have passed intact in 2002 if resubmitted uncut. Bloody Moon may have had a problem over the breast stabbing back then. Eaten Alive would have had far less cuts than before but would still have received them.

Anchor Bay's Don't Answer The Phone was also a heavily pre-cut print. Would pass today. Even films such as Face/Off and Pulp Fiction are still cut on UK DVD, due to the same prints being re-released. Neither would be cut today.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 9th July 2009, 12:04 PM
Pete's Avatar
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Liverpool
Blog Entries: 13
Default

Even the dvd of Ruggero Deodatos Bodycount is the same cut version as the vhs and that was submitted to the bbfc.
__________________


Letterboxd | Youtube | Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 9th July 2009, 12:06 PM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Bodycount had to be resubmitted due to the change of distributor.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 9th July 2009, 12:08 PM
Pete's Avatar
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Liverpool
Blog Entries: 13
Default

Vipco were a differnet distributor of Pranks and they never re-submitted it.
__________________


Letterboxd | Youtube | Twitter
Reply With Quote
Reply  

Like this? Share it using the links below!


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Our goal is to keep Cult Labs friendly. If you feel discouraged from posting by certain members' behaviour then you can e-mail us in complete confidence.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
All forum posts are contributed by members of the site; Cult Labs cannot take responsibility for all content posted on the site. If you have an issue with content posted on the site please click the 'report post' button.
Copyright © 2014 Cult Laboratories Ltd. All rights reserved.