Richard Stanley's Dust Devil

[MacBlayne]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

Oooooooo, great news. I have the 5 disc dvd set from Subversive Cinema, but I'd kill for a blu-ray (not literally though).,

I have it too (one of my first imports and perhaps one of my proudest). That said, I find Stanley's commentary on the Optimum to be superior.

[R-T-C Tim]

I do hope the Blu-Ray includes the extra films from the 5 disc release or they get a separate release, I held off picking this up due to the inevitable HD release.

IIRC Stanley actually wrote a piece about South African shape-shifters for the Fortean Times magazine a few years aback.

[The Limey]

An advance notice of MTM's now never released DVD version of Dust Devil which
of course never came about. The Mediabook BD was not announced at this stage but tantalisingly we are told that this would have been HD remastered and was the Final Cut:
Google Translate

[Jani]

Great film, love Hardware too.Who needs story when you can have tense atmosphere and horrific tone? Horror is about creeping under your skin.Been waiting for ages for the next Stanley film, no Vacation coming I guess.Gonna have to buy The Island of Dr. Moreau graphic novel and Lost Souls documentary when they appear.

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

Continue Stanley's accusations debate here.

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

Who is the woman who's actually filed the charges,some long term partner by the looks of it....

[Paul@TheOverlook]

Originally Posted by The Reaper Man@Cult Labs

Who is the woman who's actually filed the charges,some long term partner by the looks of it....

Ex-partner and she was an artistic collaborator too.

Stanley may well be guilty but he's already been hung drawn and quartered without having the chance to address the charges and accusations. Before he even made a statement on social media Arrow had cancelled its releases of Hardware and Dust Devil (one of their employees did an epic bit of virtue-signalling in a crass FB post) and his mates at SpectreVision have distanced themselves from him.

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Paul@TheOverlook

Ex-partner and she was an artistic collaborator too.

Stanley may well be guilty but he's already been hung drawn and quartered without having the chance to address the charges and accusations. Before he even made a statement on social media Arrow had cancelled its releases of Hardware and Dust Devil (one of their employees did an epic bit of virtue-signalling in a crass FB post) and his mates at SpectreVision have distanced themselves from him.

Whilst I agree that the knee-jerk FB post wasn't needed, you have to look at it from Arrow's point of view. They have to look at the situation from a far more strategic view than fans being upset because a couple of tent pole releases got nixed.

All companies now write ethical standards into their contractual agreements and those standards won't be based on them being upheld on the evidential standards of a court of law, just on the possible effect of damage to their reputation, with the emphasis on 'possible'.

And this is not just about Stanley possibly breaching Arrow's ethical standards. Arrow has a relationship with some big companies e.g. Universal and they will have their own ethical standards protecting them from reputational damage. Just for a minute, say that Arrow gave Stanley the benefit of the doubt and went ahead with the deal and it turned out everything alleged was true. How would Arrow's business partners then view Arrow's competence in making decisions that protects them from the fallout? Remember companies that license to Arrow are far bigger fish than Arrow themselves. If Arrow lost those relationships it would be very damaging to the company. I have absolutely no doubt that erring on the side of caution is a business decision and not just an ethical one.

But speaking of ethics, companies now also have to take into account the ethics of their own employees. The tweet that came out can be described as 'virtue signalling' but it was also probably emotional (and no doubt expressing frustration too) and probably reflects the ethical standards of the staff Arrow employ and I suspect the owners too.

It's an easy comeback to say 'but... but, nothing has been proven yet' and then go on to defend it with the 'hindsight' defence when it comes back to bite your ass. That doesn't work in the real world anymore.

[Paul@TheOverlook]

That’s the problem - conclusions are made before someone has a chance to defend themselves. You can talk your way around this as much as you like but it comes back to cancel-culture and it’s wrong. Everyone has the right to a fair hearing before judgment is passed. Companies shouldn’t be pandering to this, they should be united in making a stand - if every company did the same cancel culture would be over and it would be thrown into the dustbin of history where it belongs....

Most of the people baying for Stanley’s blood this week will have forgotten his name next week, as fickle as they are and as desperate for any given week’s target for their vitriol.

If he’s guilty he doesn’t deserve to continue a career as a mainstream artist, for sure, ans an example should be made. But what about his back catalogue? Do we repress it? It’s a very worrying precedent to set, isn’t it? At which point is the line where an artist’s work is cancelled? I always say, if we knew every bit of wrong-doing an artist had done and banned accordingly there’d be little-nothing left to celebrate....

[Rob4]

Originally Posted by Paul@TheOverlook

That’s the problem - conclusions are made before someone has a chance to defend themselves. You can talk your way around this as much as you like but it comes back to cancel-culture and it’s wrong. Everyone has the right to a fair hearing before judgment is passed. Companies shouldn’t be pandering to this, they should be united in making a stand - if every company did the same cancel culture would be over and it would be thrown into the dustbin of history where it belongs....

Most of the people baying for Stanley’s blood this week will have forgotten his name next week, as fickle as they are and as desperate for any given week’s target for their vitriol.

If he’s guilty he doesn’t deserve to continue a career as a mainstream artist, for sure, ans an example should be made. But what about his back catalogue? Do we repress it? It’s a very worrying precedent to set, isn’t it? At which point is the line where an artist’s work is cancelled? I always say, if we knew every bit of wrong-doing an artist had done and banned accordingly there’d be little-nothing left to celebrate....

I wasn't making a judgment as to the rights and wrongs of it or trying to try and talk around it. Just pointing out the reality of the situation for Arrow and that circumstances forced their hand. I didn't even mention that this coinciding with the Sarah Everard and subsequent protest will also be at the forefront of the decision makers mind. All I was saying is that it's a bit weird some are painting Arrow the villain when they as much the victim in this situation.

People talk like 'cancel culture' is a new thing. It's not. It's always been there. It's just in the past it was called public opinion. It doesn't have to be the public opinion of the majority either. Just enough of the opinion of a significant minority will do if the message can be amplified. In the days of social media amplification is not a problem. Let's take an example from the past close to our hearts here - the Video Nasties controversy. A small but vocal minority - the Mary Whitehouse brigade - complain vociferously and are backed by a right wing media that amplifies their message to the point of influencing public opinion to the point where action is taken. The result? The censoring (and voluntary censoring) of violent videos i.e. cancel culture.

In a culture war both sides are engaged in 'cancel culture'. It's why it's called a war.

In terms of suppressing work that is also not a new thing. It's been happening for years so there is no precedent here. Technically, it isn't suppressed, just that one company has withdrawn. Another company - perhaps with less to lose - can always pick these works up.