New Shameless Releases Coming Very Soon!

[marvinnashsear]

[QUOTE=Mat82;570552]I have a dvd rip of this from a uk satellite channel, and all the animal cruelty is intact. The vagaries of censorship, eh?🤨


If I remember right it was on Yvette Fielding's channel. She had a channel for a wee while that showed films at night. This was one of them along with the likes of Demons 1 and 2 and The Driller Killer.

[Mat82]

I think your right. Might have been called the paranormal channel or something similar.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[marvinnashsear]

Yeah that's right. Then it changed to the Unexplained channel.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

incidental to the plot.

I presume you mean plot in it's loosest terms.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

I presume you mean plot in it's loosest terms.

Indeed. It's not the most complicated and intricately designed of narratives!

[Boo Radley]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

Do we need this debate again?

Not a debate, only an observation and as companies are presently releasing these type of films again, relevant to the topic. Kierarts had the most pertinent response along the lines of, "There are plenty of other films they could release." Everyone knows these titles are aimed at a small niche of cult film collectors, and being so, are nit picky bastards that always want the most complete uncut version available. Every time one of these films comes out everyone knows the most asked question will be, "Is it uncut?" before shouting loudly that they will refuse to buy it. So why put out titles they know will never pass the censors when it is as Kierarts said? Guess there is no such thing as bad publicity, eh?

And all this claptrap about stuff that was just happening at the time or slaughter versus torture is bollocks! It's an excuse to excuse the inexcusable. Try saying that fast 5 times... I first saw Deodato back in the early 90's and when he spoke about Cannibal Holocaust he explained that the animal violence was a device to shock the audience so that when the human "deaths" occurred they would appear more shocking due to the state of mind of the viewer who had been primed by the previous. Fast forward 20 years with changed attitudes and suddenly there are a wealth of reasons to justify the footage.

Take Argento, the lizard pinned to the wall, wriggling. Is it Deep Red, I'm just doing this from memory? BBFC had a problem with it anyway, Dario says, "Oh no, that was a prop, not a real lizard, wriggling and gasping, we wouldn't hurt a live lizard." Fine! No problem! Big hairy bollocks is what that is. I refuse to believe they spent how much on an animated lizard for that one brief scene. Hey, maybe I'm wrong.

Thankfully there are very few cult movies with this sort of footage and most of them have had releases somewhere if you have to have an uncut version. Yes, that's me in that group. The next furore will be when Cannibal Apocalypse gets released and they want that 1 second of burning rat, damnit!

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

And all this claptrap about stuff that was just happening at the time or slaughter versus torture is bollocks! It's an excuse to excuse the inexcusable. Try saying that fast 5 times... I first saw Deodato back in the early 90's and when he spoke about Cannibal Holocaust he explained that the animal violence was a device to shock the audience so that when the human "deaths" occurred they would appear more shocking due to the state of mind of the viewer who had been primed by the previous. Fast forward 20 years with changed attitudes and suddenly there are a wealth of reasons to justify the footage.

Take Argento, the lizard pinned to the wall, wriggling. Is it Deep Red, I'm just doing this from memory? BBFC had a problem with it anyway, Dario says, "Oh no, that was a prop, not a real lizard, wriggling and gasping, we wouldn't hurt a live lizard." Fine! No problem! Big hairy bollocks is what that is. I refuse to believe they spent how much on an animated lizard for that one brief scene. Hey, maybe I'm wrong.

It makes me laugh when you hear Deodato now say Holocaust was a social commentary. Was it ****, it was exploitation pure and simple designed to shock audiences. He exploits now knowing the gullible are definitely seduced by this social commentary guff.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Boo Radley

Take Argento, the lizard pinned to the wall, wriggling. Is it Deep Red, I'm just doing this from memory? BBFC had a problem with it anyway, Dario says, "Oh no, that was a prop, not a real lizard, wriggling and gasping, we wouldn't hurt a live lizard." Fine! No problem! Big hairy bollocks is what that is. I refuse to believe they spent how much on an animated lizard for that one brief scene. Hey, maybe I'm wrong.

I'm 99% sure that's a real lizard pinned to the ground in Deep Red. As you say, the Italian films at that time, even those produced by Salvador Argento, didn't a huge budgets and I doubt they had a realistic robotic lizard.

I did alude to the BBFC using flimsy premises to allow animal cruelty, whether it's a director claiming a real lizard is animatronic, an animal's death was quick when the visual evidence suggests otherwise, or something was a hunt/ritual slaughter and they were 'only watching', having no part in its organisation. That said, I'm not aware of any of these applying to the gratuitous suffering in Mountain of the Cannibal God.

[keirarts]

The legislation is there to 'protect animals' and the BBFC are obliged to follow it.

It's a bit late one might argue given its a practice in film making that's nowhere near as prominent as it once was. I do think here the law is something of an ass when it's applied retrospectively to films several decades old. As a way of stamping out the practice today then fair play. But films like Cannibal holocaust are relics of a bygone era and a record of how films were made back then. Excising material like this has always felt somewhat like letting film makers off the hook. Alleged 'directors cuts' where the film makers can remove the stuff they wish they hadn't shot.

[Susan Foreman]

"Naturally, we've been following the recent discussions about MOUNTAIN OF THE CANNIBAL GOD. At Shameless, we are proud of presenting you with all the gore and sex you could possibly want but we do refuse gratuitous animal cruelty. We are determined not only to source the best possible materials for the films we publish, but also the closest possible version to the director’s original or the filmmaker’s preferred vision of the film

In the case of ‘Cannibal’ movies, which mostly arrive with a plate-full of prejudices, we needed to find a compromise to these diametrically opposed notions: maxing the gore, not shying from explicitness whilst minimising the vision of animal cruelty (appalling yet unfortunately already committed to celluloid)

In the case of the most famous Cannibal film of them all, Ruggero Deodato made his first and still only unique re-edit of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST expressly and exclusively for Shameless to tone down the animal cruelty from the film

Similarly, Sergio Martino shares our concern and supports the editing of the work in order not to pander to exploitative and unnecessary violence against animals. Originally, sadly, due to production commercial obligations, it was believed this type of extreme animal cruelty would generate more interest and sales… Martino explains more in the extra on our Blu-ray. We hope you’ll join us in appreciating the wild, weird and gory world of Martino’s MOUNTAIN OF THE CANNIBAL GOD (minus the gratuitous animal cruelty.)…oh and by the way, THAT pig scene is still definitely in there! "