The 88 Films Thread

[Calum]

Originally Posted by Zann

It is hypervigilant and yes the questions about whether or not 88 releases are uncut are self-perpetuating now but like Boo Radley said people have been burned in the past and now rely on bbfc, melonfarmers, dvdcompare, dvdbeaver and other reliable sources for further confirmation.

As the above poster mentioned, Melonfarmers is far from reliable. And people are not relying on the BBFC at all - otherwise inane and repeated questions about the legal status of films which have been uncensored for years would not be asked. Usually over and over again.

[Zann]

Melonfarmers might not be infallible but overall I've found it a useful resource.

[keirarts]

I take anything other than BBFC with a big pinch of salt. Certainly if something's posted well before the disc is out.

[JAMIOUSE]

The main problem with FaceBook is that people seem to be unable to actually read the initial announcement posts and do any basic research. The amount of times I've replied to someones post saying 'it's uncut' is bloody ridiculous.

Sadly social media is mostly full of retards not a term I use lightly but sadly alot of people on FaceBook in particular seem to be. What I do find even more annoying are people posting in a direct announcement thread asking if company x are releasing film x, no of course their not they've just announced their releasing film x for fun. This is of course then followed by the 'is it uncut' questions to which the answer is 99.9% of the time YES IT FLIPPING UNCUT! You always at some point get some really stoopid person commenting ' I don't like these kind of films' or 'I don't like horror films there too violent and nasty' to which most people reply 'why are you following a company on FaceBook that specialise in releasing horror films?'

Social media, it's a great tool but it's also an idiots best friend.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by keirarts

I take anything other than BBFC with a big pinch of salt. Certainly if something's posted well before the disc is out.

I've found the BBFC to be more predictable than ever, with the odd surprise of a film given a lower certificate than I expected.

[keirarts]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

I've found the BBFC to be more predictable than ever, with the odd surprise of a film given a lower certificate than I expected.

predictable but accurate. Most other places online tend to deal in speculation.

[Graeme73]

Originally Posted by Stephen@Cult Labs

To be fair, they didn't lie about Bloodsucking Pharoahs. As far as they're concerned, and most people (except the rabid few crying foul on Facebook), it is "uncut". Apart from a dodgy Japanese vhs, the film has always been R-rated. Paramount picked it up for release, and demanded the R, so the gore scenes were removed before the intial release. It's like complaining about the F13 films snd their R -rated versions. You'll never see unrated versions of these, just as you'll never see Pharoahs in HD with the scenes restored.

Excuse my ignorance, but why won't we ever see unrated versions of these? Is it a technical issue, rights issue?

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Graeme73

Excuse my ignorance, but why won't we ever see unrated versions of these? Is it a technical issue, rights issue?

It's more like the case with The Wicker Man, in that the material no longer exists or is in a state where reinserting it into the film would be so jarring that the viewing experience would be far from enhanced.

Others which should be restored to the versions the directors wants, but will probably never happen, include Alien3 and The Exorcist III.

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

Looks like 88 are sorting the SS discs.

[JAMIOUSE]

How does the image quality look on the SS discs besides the early ending? Is it a decent transfer or a little magentary like Anthro and Blade?