In a recent interview with MTV, Tom Rothman, CEO of Fox has stated that "Not one frame of Prometheus will be cut". He goes further and says "If that means it's an R rating, so be it".
http://www.mtv.com/videos/movies/763559/not-one-frame-of-prometheus-will-be-cut-says-tim-rothman.jhtml (http://www.mtv.com/videos/movies/763559/not-one-frame-of-prometheus-will-be-cut-says-tim-rothman.jhtml)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW7QTB2meTE#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW7QTB2meTE#ws)
Jesus, iKarop!
How many more articles should I stay up for? Fantastic work :D
Though it says I can't watch the video because I'm not a US resident. Is there a link anywhere else?
I really hope he means it. I really do.
Quote from: Virgil_uk on Apr 26, 2012, 09:52:14 PM
Jesus, iKarop!
How many more articles should I stay up for? Fantastic work :D
Though it says I can't watch the video because I'm not a US resident. Is there a link anywhere else?
Working on it.
Good. Let's hope it doesn't change.
if this is true:
suddenly the world seems such a perfect place :)
Quote from: ikarop on Apr 26, 2012, 09:59:46 PM
Quote from: Virgil_uk on Apr 26, 2012, 09:52:14 PM
Jesus, iKarop!
How many more articles should I stay up for? Fantastic work :D
Though it says I can't watch the video because I'm not a US resident. Is there a link anywhere else?
Working on it.
Cheers mate.
FU€KIN YEAH!!!!!!
That's more like it Rothman!!
Beautiful.
I hate to play the pessimist, or cynic...however, Tom Rothman's statement remains absolutely true if a studio can submit two or more "cuts" of a film for the MPAA to review. If the MPAA gives one a PG-13 rating, and another an "R" rating, then Rothman can choose to release the PG-13 version without "making any cuts".
I am not sure if this is a possibility...for all I know the MPAA may only allow submission of a single "cut", which they will review and make recommendations/judgements. Does anyone know if multiple cuts of a film can be jointly submitted to the MPAA for review?
Quote from: Virgil_uk on Apr 26, 2012, 10:02:33 PM
Quote from: ikarop on Apr 26, 2012, 09:59:46 PM
Quote from: Virgil_uk on Apr 26, 2012, 09:52:14 PM
Jesus, iKarop!
How many more articles should I stay up for? Fantastic work :D
Though it says I can't watch the video because I'm not a US resident. Is there a link anywhere else?
Working on it.
Cheers mate.
Done! You can find a Youtube link in the OP.
Doing my best over here to film it for you guys ::) But i'm already to late :-[ But this interview definitly made my day.
Says for me the video is unavailable.
Anyways, awesome news! I personally don't care whether its PG-13 or R, but its great to know that it will be whatever its intended to be!
At least you guys have the interesting part already ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0cSg2Jyi9s# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0cSg2Jyi9s#)
Yes!
Off-Topic, but, I wonder if we're actually gonna get any more posters! We've had one poster, and there's only just over a month until release.
Quote from: Deuterium on Apr 26, 2012, 10:13:35 PM
I hate to play the pessimist, or cynic...however, Tom Rothman's statement remains absolutely true if a studio can submit two or more "cuts" of a film for the MPAA to review. If the MPAA gives one a PG-13 rating, and another an "R" rating, then Rothman can choose to release the PG-13 version without "making any cuts".
I am not sure if this is a possibility...for all I know the MPAA may only allow submission of a single "cut", which they will review and make recommendations/judgements. Does anyone know if multiple cuts of a film can be jointly submitted to the MPAA for review?
"Not one frame of Prometheus will be cut. If that means it's an R rating,
so be it."
I believe they can submit something, and if they don't get the rating they want they can change it up and submit it again.
Thanks to both ikarop and Snowdog for the videos. :)
Very interesting watch. Rothman seems passionate about the Movie (quite obviously). Lets just hope that he sticks to what he says.
But please Tom, don't keep emphasising this isn't an Alien film. Your Movies website just stuck up a big picture of a frickin' Power Loader.
Quote from: Virgil_uk on Apr 26, 2012, 10:43:55 PM
Thanks to both ikarop and Snowdog for the videos. :)
Very interesting watch. Rothman seems passionate about the Movie (quite obviously). Lets just hope that he sticks to what he says.
But please Tom, don't keep emphasising this isn't an Alien film. Your Movies website just stuck up a big picture of a frickin' Power Loader.
...and a pulse rifle with a barrel long enough to perform a colonoscopy.
Wow so Prometheus will be Rated-R thats great news :).
Quote from: mastermoon on Apr 26, 2012, 11:13:15 PM
Wow so Prometheus will be Rated-R thats great news :).
No confirmation yet but a big chance indeed. At least we know that the movie will be untouched.
Wow untouched is good news, AVP never had that coming.
avp didn't have big names either. And Prometheus is a great chance for Fox for getting a "new" succesfull franchise.
This is interesting
Quote from: Harvey Weinstein on Apr 26, 2012, 11:23:16 PM
Though this will sound cynical, he's probably only saying that because he's already seen it and knows that nothing will need to be cut to get a PG-13.
The thought had crossed my mind.
Interesting that he chose to drop ALIEN from the title - which as suspected suggests that a disassociation from the drivel of AVP and AVP:R (and probably A:R for that matter) was seen as a necessity for the film to be treated on it's own merits and not tarnished by (recent) association.
Quote from: Harvey Weinstein on Apr 26, 2012, 11:23:16 PM
Though this will sound cynical, he's probably only saying that because he's already seen it and knows that nothing will need to be cut to get a PG-13.
If that is true and it is indeed the intended cut i can live with that. Judging from the trailer it will be adult. And if Ridley ended up with a PG13 movie without cutting the whole movie up i'm perfectly fine with that. But i don't want a terminator salvation or a messed up cut movie.
No way this will come out "R" rated.
I believe Ridley filmed a very intense PG-13 film with Rothman making it well known they'd prefer a PG-13 cut all the while.
I don't have a problem with this. I'm of the firm opinion that "Alien" today would probably get a PG-13. The only possible issue being the chestburster scene. Not sure how much blood is allowed via PG-13.
Quote from: LiquidMonster on Apr 26, 2012, 11:48:01 PM
I don't have a problem with this. I'm of the firm opinion that "Alien" today would probably get a PG-13. The only possible issue being the chestburster scene.
you're forgetting the headbites. Alien would still be rated R i'm afraid.
Quote from: LiquidMonster on Apr 26, 2012, 11:48:01 PM
No way this will come out "R" rated.
I believe Ridley filmed a very intense PG-13 film with Rothman making it well known they'd prefer a PG-13 cut all the while.
I don't have a problem with this. I'm of the firm opinion that "Alien" today would probably get a PG-13. The only possible issue being the chestburster scene. Not sure how much blood is allowed via PG-13.
The AVP movies had huge problems with there ratings, AVP was too watered down then when they made AVPR that movie had pointless gore scenes just to give an R-Rating.
BTW i thought about this a couple of times last week. Sony has 2 major franchises who are both rated R all the way and they make a lot of profit from this movies. Talking about Underworld and Resident Evil ofcourse. So in my opinion it isn't a huge risk to make an R rated movie tbh.
Making this movie rated "R" isn't a risk. It's a requirement. ;)
Rated R, Requi..... OMFG NOT AGAIN !!! .....rement PFEW... thought you said requiem ::)
(https://www.avpgalaxy.net/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs.ecrater.com%2Fstores%2F148130%2F4b69e5efea2f0_148130n.jpg&hash=55b0244522721a9ffd3259d8809f00fba3a56152)
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Apr 27, 2012, 12:04:34 AMhttp://s.ecrater.com/stores/148130/4b69e5efea2f0_148130n.jpg
If only we knew...
Just a little sobering up.....just for the sake of balance as we all blow our loads collectively. :)
This means we are getting a R rating right? Which means no annoying kids in the theater =D!
The Matrix movies were rated R as well.. And they made some decent coin.
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Apr 27, 2012, 12:22:29 AM
This means we are getting a R rating right? Which means no annoying kids in the theater =D!
That hasn't stopped kids from seeing (sneaking into) an R rated movie before. :P
Quote from: King Rathalos on Apr 27, 2012, 01:06:51 AM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Apr 27, 2012, 12:22:29 AM
This means we are getting a R rating right? Which means no annoying kids in the theater =D!
That hasn't stopped kids from seeing (sneaking into) an R rated movie before. :P
Yea but the sneaky ones won't be annoying, lest they blow their cover. :D
Quote from: King Rathalos on Apr 27, 2012, 01:06:51 AM
Quote from: Hellspawn28 on Apr 27, 2012, 12:22:29 AM
This means we are getting a R rating right? Which means no annoying kids in the theater =D!
That hasn't stopped kids from seeing (sneaking into) an R rated movie before. :P
I work at a theater, I always make sure that never happens since it's my job. Besides I doubt kids want to see this movie.
Then you don't know a thing about kids ;)
I wouldn't trust this slimy suit for crap. Sounds like he's just saying what we want to hear. I hope against everything it's an R, but it still doesn't seem likely. :(
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Apr 27, 2012, 12:04:34 AM
http://s.ecrater.com/stores/148130/4b69e5efea2f0_148130n.jpg
Resurrection is good (not great by
any means, but definitely good), Bethesda. Divorce it from the OT and it stands well on its own. :P
if a kid wants to watch this movie then i doubt he is the kind of kid that misbehaves like that.
Resurrection was dog shit!!! FACT. ;)
OMGGGGGGGG never thought I'd hear that come from TOM ROTHMAN, the man who's ruined so many Fox movies (most notably X3/X-men The Last Stand). Is he personal friends with Ridley Scott or something, cause this is so uncharacteristic of The Tom Rothman every X-men fan is familiar with.
He says that they won't compromise a frame a Prometheus for the rating board but if the orders to Ridley were to shoot the film with a PG-13 rating in mind, then it will probably be PG-13 in all likelihood. Or if the MPAA does brand it with an R rating at all, it would still be a very "weak" R-rating imo.
They may not cut scenes but they sure as hell can tone down the movie in post-production via CG and digital manipulation. Just look at how the trailers have changed over time. Things have been added or redone. I am not going to take his word for it just yet.
Quote from: First Blood on Apr 27, 2012, 03:01:52 AM
They may not cut scenes but they sure as hell can tone down the movie in post-production via CG and digital manipulation. Just look at how the trailers have changed over time. Things have been added or redone. I am not going to take his word for it just yet.
Indeed. This smells more like wordplay than anything.
"Not one frame was CUT... We just took the CGI blood out! HAW HAW."
I have a bad feeling about making it an R rating. I personally don't care, but I know that it won't benefit the film makers if they're worried about making money. They'll loose some of their audience. The film is still guaranteed as a success, but they'll make more money if it's PG-13.
There are two reasons to make films, however. There's the common reason, and that is to make lots of money. The other reason it because they see it as an art form, and they just want to make their masterpiece. Whenever a painter wants to make his masterpiece, he tries to make the painting as close to his envisions as possible, regardless if everyone else likes it. Scott should be able to do the same thing. If he wants his film to have certain scenes, it should have those scenes. It's his film. Unfortunately, the film industry doesn't work that way.
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 27, 2012, 01:51:23 AM
I wouldn't trust this slimy suit for crap. Sounds like he's just saying what we want to hear. I hope against everything it's an R, but it still doesn't seem likely. :(
I don't trust him either. Besides we've all heard about the R-rated blu-ray version, even Scott himself has mentioned it, so why change things so late in the day. Rothman is just trying it on for me!
I can imagine what's happened is that Rothman told Scott 'make a PG-13 cut' and if that cut is given an R rating by the MPAA, then so be it.
Its being advertised as 15 (TBC) at BFI Imax London
PG 13 all the way imo,i'll be very surprised if its R,hope i'm wrong.
I don't demand gore etc but i think with an R film your covered to do want you want with very few restrictions,less hard choices to make etc,anything lower and you are always stunted in your options.
PG 13 can work with a scary movie though,numerous examples through the years BUT this is in the Alien universe so i think it should be R/18
I don't trust Rothman. He's a snakeoil salesman that would sell his own mother. Definatly the type that would f**k one over a goddamned percentage. ;)
That being said. I hope it's not the language/gore factor that push it into R territory. I don't want to see Dr. Manhattan Jockeys 'exploding humans' in a burst of bloody viscera. What will make this film scary will be how Ridley portrays that sicking feeling of suddenly being outmatched by a God. The possibilities are mind-bending for how this will play out. It will be down to the performances of the actors.
Has a film ever been rated for mature audience based solely on an unsettling, ultra disturbing performance and or theme?
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on Apr 27, 2012, 05:11:46 PM
Has a film ever been rated for mature audience based solely on an unsettling, ultra disturbing performance and or theme?
Arguably 'The Exorsist'. But even that has one very infamous sequence.
All I know is, if Prometheus is PG-13, it's going to affect my anticipation greatly. R isn't just about blood and guts and sex. The fact is, with a PG-13 rating, filmmakers are far more restricted and won't be able to achieve the same atmosphere as they could with an R rating.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 05:34:57 AM
All I know is, if Prometheus is PG-13, it's going to affect my anticipation greatly. R isn't just about blood and guts and sex. The fact is, with a PG-13 rating, filmmakers are far more restricted and won't be able to achieve the same atmosphere as they could with an R rating.
Please explain how.
Quote from: OpenMaw on Apr 28, 2012, 05:43:30 AM
Please explain how.
The MPAA has no set standards. They can give a film a rating for whatever they feel like. A film can be free of gore, onscreen sex and a certain amount of cursing and still get an R if its tone is sufficiently dark or intense.
Edit: or if it features gayness. That
really riles up the MPAA.
Quote from: OpenMaw on Apr 28, 2012, 05:43:30 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 05:34:57 AM
All I know is, if Prometheus is PG-13, it's going to affect my anticipation greatly. R isn't just about blood and guts and sex. The fact is, with a PG-13 rating, filmmakers are far more restricted and won't be able to achieve the same atmosphere as they could with an R rating.
Please explain how.
Gladly. Take any scene in an R-rated film where the situation is intense and stressful. A character might do something or say something or express something as a natural reaction an adult would have in that situation. The scene is a collection of moments with a frightening tone to it. But along comes the MPAA:
:'( :'( :'( :'( :'( "OMG! Let's remove all the bad words. There was a glimpse of nudity in that scene and it wasn't pornographic but everybody knows that nudity is worse than violence right? I don't like how scary that scene was, it would probably be too scary for kids and give them nightmares. Let's tone that scene down and make it less intense. Oh, and that scream went on for a little too long, so maybe cut it down to about 5 seconds. Hmmm, what else can we mess with because we feel like it?"
That's the MPAA for you. Watch a documentary called "This Film is Not Yet Rated." It's from 2006 but still extremely relevant to how the MPAA operates. 1 or 2 insignificant cuts might not affect a film but a collection of cuts can greatly affect the tone of a film. And it doesn't even have to be curse words or nudity. If they feel a scene is too intense, they can mess it up.
^^ this is some what true. They can cut anything just for tone, it has happened to a lot of low budget movies from a while back. I think this film is more than safe. Christ Hunger Games got PG13.
I don't know if I agree with that honestly. I've seen several pretty intense films that never hit the R rating.
Some will probably laugh, but I felt Cloverfield did a very good job of creating high levels of tension, and it came in very smoothly at PG-13.
I'm certainly not denying that the rating system is buggered. As Geroge Romero pointed out with Land of the Dead, it was a matter of cutting just a few frames in some spots to achieve an R rating vs NC-17.
Quote from: bleau on Apr 28, 2012, 06:04:24 AM
^^ this is some what true. They can cut anything just for tone, it has happened to a lot of low budget movies from a while back. I think this film is more than safe. Christ Hunger Games got PG13.
You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam. That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:07:02 AM
You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam. That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.
You don't have to see for it to be considered intense. That was part of Ridley's entire creative idea with Alien. It was what you didn't see, or what you thought you saw, that made it scary back in 1979.
and there is nothing outside of the chestburster scene that wouldn't work in a PG13 movie. Hell, they used to air the film on TV all the time without editing much of any of the violence. I still have my old VHS of Alien from the mid 90's. "Brought you by Tylenol" for all thoes head-bite induced migraines.
Quote from: OpenMaw on Apr 28, 2012, 06:10:31 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:07:02 AM
You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam. That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.
You don't have to see for it to be considered intense. That was part of Ridley's entire creative idea with Alien. It was what you didn't see, or what you thought you saw, that made it scary back in 1979.
and there is nothing outside of the chestburster scene that wouldn't work in a PG13 movie. Hell, they used to air the film on TV all the time without editing much of any of the violence. I still have my old VHS of Alien from the mid 90's. "Brought you by Tylenol" for all thoes head-bite induced migraines.
Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.
It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.
As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.
Quote from: SiL on Apr 28, 2012, 06:14:16 AM
As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.
PG back then didn't mean what it means now in the slightest. Body Snatchers '78 is rated PG, and features full frontal nudity
and gore, for example.
Ratings today are f**ked.
Quote from: SiL on Apr 28, 2012, 06:14:16 AM
It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.
As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.
See my previous post, and the following, SiL. :)
Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:11:49 AM
Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.
I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.
Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3 got cut and edited 11 times for an R.
I believe Army Of Darkness got cut for an R. There are many other films. The point is bigger budget movies have less chance of being cut for violence or tone.
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 28, 2012, 06:17:03 AM
PG back then didn't mean what it means now in the slightest. Body Snatchers '78 is rated PG, and features full frontal nudity and gore, for example.
Jaws was going to be rated R, but the producers argued -- insanely -- that it was okay because it was a shark killing people, not humans. The second they throw in Brody's uncensored "Smile, you son of a bitch" line into making-of features and the home release rating goes up (From PG to M15+ in Australia, 12 to 15 I think in the UK).
Even back then
Jaws wasn't supposed to be PG.
Tolerance to nudity seems to have gone way down since the 70s (
Logan's Run and the original
Clash of the Titans are PG despite bare breasts), but there's always been a lot of leeway with tone and violence.
Shit, look at any kid movie by Don Bluth and tell me you can't have an adult feel at lower ratings. :P
Quote from: OpenMaw on Apr 28, 2012, 06:18:24 AM
Quote from: SiL on Apr 28, 2012, 06:14:16 AM
It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.
As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.
See my previous post, and the following, SiL. :)
Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:11:49 AM
Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.
I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.
Alien would have made PG-13 in
1979 with little
changes, yes.
But in 2012, the MPAA (consisting of a random group of conservative so-called parents, half of whom may not actually be parents) can decide which films to slap an R rating on or not.
I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film. Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios. Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film. 25 minutes! The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences. That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex. There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with... So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.
The MPAA is a corrupt ratings system. It's extremely subjective and there's no actual strict system they stick to when rating films.
Goes with any censorship body. It depends on the people who are in charge at the time of the film's release. Some people are more lenient than others -- Australia's had a wondrous history of swinging between people who want to be looser with the ratings and people who want everything ever banned.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:28:58 AM
I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film. Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios. Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film. 25 minutes! The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences. That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex. There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with... So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.
Aeon Flux got cut for it's "implied" sexuality--especially Aeon's bisexuality, of which only one line remains in the film: "This kind of thing used to be fun." While I don't think the original cut of the film is probably great by any means, I still remember how pissed I was back in 2005 as a huge fan of the series and hearing about all the rumored shit that was being done in post. >:(
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:28:58 AM
Quote from: OpenMaw on Apr 28, 2012, 06:18:24 AM
Quote from: SiL on Apr 28, 2012, 06:14:16 AM
It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.
As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.
See my previous post, and the following, SiL. :)
Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 06:11:49 AM
Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.
I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.
Alien would have made PG-13 in 1979 with little changes, yes.
But in 2012, the MPAA (consisting of a random group of conservative so-called parents, half of whom may not actually be parents) can decide which films to slap an R rating on or not.
I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film. Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios. Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film. 25 minutes! The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences. That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex. There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with... So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.
The MPAA is a corrupt ratings system. It's extremely subjective and there's no actual strict system they stick to when rating films.
I know this movie and own it. The director was fired and there were a lot of reshoots. The original director was a lesbian. MTV fired her and made the changes.
Quote from: bleau on Apr 28, 2012, 06:36:04 AM
I know this movie and own it. The director was fired and there were a lot of reshoots. The original director was a lesbian. MTV fired her and made the changes.
Yup, Karyn Kusama. Like
The Invasion with Nicole Kidman,
Aeon Flux underwent so much shit behind the scenes in post production it's ridiculous.
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 28, 2012, 06:39:28 AM
Quote from: bleau on Apr 28, 2012, 06:36:04 AM
I know this movie and own it. The director was fired and there were a lot of reshoots. The original director was a lesbian. MTV fired her and made the changes.
Yup, Karyn Kusama. Like The Invasion with Nicole Kidman, Aeon Flux underwent so much shit behind the scenes in post production it's ridiculous.
Yeah thats her. I guess the Studio execs hated the original cut of aeon flux, and made her make changes. Would of liked to of have it on dvd
The Invasion was an unwatchable piece of shit. I understand Aeon Flux was much the same. Talented directors on both films, studio troubles, but in both cases I questioned the overall production in addition to the interference.
PG-13 is both restrictive and fluid today, IMO. Yes, a lot of what was R back in the day might get 13 now. Or, a lot of what was 13 then might get R now depending on the whims of the MPAA that month. I think a PG-13 cut could still be quite fierce, and I could take it - they still let a lot of big studio shit slide with violence and intensity here, IMO it's often the smaller films getting f**ked. But I'd just as soon an R.
Unfortunately, Kusama apparently said there will likely never be a director's cut on DVD due to the studio not caring enough and DVD sales being mediocre. Shame.
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Apr 28, 2012, 06:47:19 AM
The Invasion was an unwatchable piece of shit. I understand Aeon Flux was much the same. Talented directors on both films, studio troubles, but in both cases I questioned the overall production in addition to the interference.
The Invasion is damn near unwatchable because what ended up in theaters was a studio hatchet job of epic proportions. Original director turned in his cut, which was apparently too subtle and suspenseful and cerebral, and was immediately fired. The film was then shelved for a year. Then the Wachowski's and that hack who directed
V for Vendetta and
Ninja Assassin were brought aboard to reshoot a third of the film, completely rewrite and reshoot the entire last act, add explosions and car chases, and brutally edit what was left of the original. One of the most egregious studio f**kups in history. Would love to see Oliver Hirschbiegel's original cut that so horrified them with its "artiness" and restraint.
I'm always curious to see what these films are like prior to the studio interference, but I thought virtually all of that film was terrible. I remember the team vomiting scene being particularly hilarious, and the chubby Asian kid ordering Nicole Kidman around. "Come, sleep!"
I did like Downfall, mind, which I believe was Hirschbiegel, correct me if I'm wrong.
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Apr 28, 2012, 06:56:39 AM
I did like Downfall, mind, which I believe was Hirschbiegel, correct me if I'm wrong.
Yeah, it was him. Safe to say, his original cut has to be
lightyears better than what ended up in cinemas.
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 28, 2012, 06:53:10 AM
Unfortunately, Kusama apparently said there will likely never be a director's cut on DVD due to the studio not caring enough and DVD sales being mediocre. Shame.
Quote from: SpeedyMaxx on Apr 28, 2012, 06:47:19 AM
The Invasion was an unwatchable piece of shit. I understand Aeon Flux was much the same. Talented directors on both films, studio troubles, but in both cases I questioned the overall production in addition to the interference.
The Invasion is damn near unwatchable because what ended up in theaters was a studio hatchet job of epic proportions. Original director turned in his cut, which was apparently too subtle and suspenseful and cerebral, and was immediately fired. The film was then shelved for a year. Then the Wachowski's and that hack who directed V for Vendetta and Ninja Assassin were brought aboard to reshoot a third of the film, completely rewrite and reshoot the entire last act, add explosions and car chases, and brutally edit what was left of the original. One of the most egregious studio f**kups in history. Would love to see Oliver Hirschbiegel's original cut that so horrified them with its "artiness" and restraint.
Strangely enough, Aeon Flux did really well on DVD as opposed to how it performed in the box office. It actually made its production and marketing budget back but this wasn't enough to convince the studios to release the original cut which, in my opinion, would have been far superior.
Just
some of the changes in Aeon Flux:
Spoiler
- Implied sexuality. As Cvalda said, Aeon's sexuality wasn't black and white. Her relationship with Sithandra was intriguing.
- Scenes with Aeon's sister were cut and dialogue and reactions between the 2 were cut. When her sister gets murdered in the film, we don't feel anything because in the theatrical release, there's not much implied history between the 2 of them for us to care.
- In the original cut, when Aeon discovers her sister has been murdered there's a shot of her digging her nails into her skin and drawing blood while in shock.
- Sexual imagery. There were more shots in the original cut which acted as metaphors to creation and reproduction.
- A darker opening sequence with a moody tone. In this sequence we see a series of dark traditional paintings setting up the world with a voice-over explaining the events leading to what we see in the film.
- Certain scenes in the film (especially in the first half) are re-ordered in the theatrical release and were quite heavily cut.
- A lot of the action was cut down. In the original cut there were wider takes and longer takes of the action - you could actually see everything happening. You could see all the hits and kicks and stunts. In the theatrical release, everything was so hyper that you often couldn't tell what was going on.
- The original cut overall was more elegant, had more of a "samurai-epic" feel to it, it was darker in tone and relationships between all the characters were more complex.
- Aeon has a moment towards the end of the film where she has a vision that she may be pregnant which adds far more depth to the choices she makes at the end.
- The entire sequence with the Relical crashing to the ground doesn't exist in the original cut. After leaving the Relical, the film ends with more emotional weight. The big finale action piece was always meant to be the shootout in the courtyard, which was quite heavily cut down and where it was difficult to tell what was going on half the time. After that scene, the ending was to explore the revelations and what this could possibly mean for all the characters. It was intended to leave the audience with questions and it wasn't going to be a happily-ever-after ending either.
- Characters that suffered the most with all the cuts (aside from Aeon obviously) were Oren Goodchild, Giroux (who was in a homosexual relationship with a Monican and this caused a lot of conflict in the group of leaders) and Freya (Trevor's bodyguard).
- The original cut explored more of the world and the environments. There were a few moments of quiet inbetween as we see shots of the world with just sounds from the city which created a beautiful pace.
I've also been lucky enough to read the original shooting draft for Aeon Flux (and no, it's not fan fiction - it's the real deal) and I can safely say the original cut would have been a far superior cut. It just goes to show how much studio interference and the MPAA can affect what can be a potentially great film.
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 07:17:43 AM
I've also been lucky enough to read the original shooting draft for Aeon Flux (and no, it's not fan fiction - it's the real deal) and I can safely say the original cut would have been a far superior cut. It just goes to show how much studio interference and the MPAA can affect what can be a potentially great film.
Where? If you have it, send me a copy!
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 28, 2012, 07:21:36 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 07:17:43 AM
I've also been lucky enough to read the original shooting draft for Aeon Flux (and no, it's not fan fiction - it's the real deal) and I can safely say the original cut would have been a far superior cut. It just goes to show how much studio interference and the MPAA can affect what can be a potentially great film.
Where? If you have it, send me a copy!
Also interested. :)
Quote from: Cvalda on Apr 28, 2012, 07:21:36 AM
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 28, 2012, 07:17:43 AM
I've also been lucky enough to read the original shooting draft for Aeon Flux (and no, it's not fan fiction - it's the real deal) and I can safely say the original cut would have been a far superior cut. It just goes to show how much studio interference and the MPAA can affect what can be a potentially great film.
Where? If you have it, send me a copy!
It's a hard copy but I'll see what I can do. :)
Quote from: Vickers on Apr 29, 2012, 06:06:00 AM
It's a hard copy but I'll see what I can do. :)
Poop :( There's gotta be a PDF out there somewhere... Hmm--to Google!!!
Don't want to seem cynical either, but.....
Rothman really comes across like a lying politician when addressing the ratings thing. I hope it's an 18s anyway. But if he's unsure then who knows what the hell they are submitting.
Rothman and Scott have both said that they don't know which way the film will go, r or pg13 (yeah as if i believe that anyway) and that says to me that regardless of whether it ends up R rated, we are not going to see tons of gore and peoples heads getting smashed or tons of bad (realistic) language etc because if all that was in the film then there would be no 'confusion' over what rating this would get, it would be a hard R full stop!.
The movie should be rated-R, I really hope it is.
What's more mysterious is that the film hasn't been submitted yet. There's no reason that the film hasn't been submitted and rated yet.
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Apr 29, 2012, 05:34:20 PM
What's more mysterious is that the film hasn't been submitted yet. There's no reason that the film hasn't been submitted and rated yet.
Because the film is going to be PG13 and Scott and Rothman know there will be a lot of negativity over the internet on forums etc so we won't hear about the rating until the film is almost on top of us.
Or the rating could premiere tonight. Just about one month out.....There must be a rating by now?
Quote from: ThisBethesdaSea on Apr 29, 2012, 07:03:06 PM
Or the rating could premiere tonight. Just about one month out.....There must be a rating by now?
Ratings are released by the MPAA mid-week, I believe. Tuesday or Wednesday, usually.
More comments from Tom Rothman: http://collider.com/prometheus-rating-tom-rothman/162253/#more-162253 (http://collider.com/prometheus-rating-tom-rothman/162253/#more-162253)
Quote"[For] Prometheus, it would have been very easy—in fact probably in Chapter One of the Executive Handbook, if I ever read such a thing, it would say, 'Go ahead, make a straightforward prequel to Alien.' That would have been the easy thing to do. Prometheus is the more challenging thing to do. It's bolder, it's original, it's in the universe, but it's not a literal story-based prequel to [Alien], it's a wholly new science-fiction entry from Ridley Scott, who hasn't made a science-fiction film in 30 years."
"I can assure the fans—I'm very aware of their concern—absolutely they can take it that the film will not be compromised either way. So if that means that the film is R, then it'll be an R. If it's PG-13, then it'll be a PG-13, but it will not be compromised.
3 weeks and a bit out from release and no rating yet???????
I don't think he is doing a favor to the fans. I just think that the movie will be more profitable this way.
Quote from: Qwertify on May 04, 2012, 02:13:39 PM
I don't think he is doing a favor to the fans. I just think that the movie will be more profitable this way.
How do you mean?
Whats taking them so long to confirm an R-Rating?.
how isnt it a story based link to Alien? Derelict? space jockey? Weyland? i mean come on... that "same universe" stuff is BS... its gotta be a real prequel to Alien..
Quote from: Alien1 on May 04, 2012, 07:40:54 PM
how isnt it a story based link to Alien? Derelict? space jockey? Weyland? i mean come on... that "same universe" stuff is BS... its gotta be a real prequel to Alien..
It's like star trek in my mind. the original series leads into Next Generation, and they have some crossover but it is not the same thing. Not a direct pequel.
A direct prequel would suck. After 30 years of people building up anticipation there is no way it could meet the fan base expectations. "Chinese Democracy" anyone?
I listen to Rothman's comments, and feel it is obvious the film will be PG-13, and he is trying to run damage-control until the last possible second. If the film will be R, there is no reason not to announce that now. If the film were R, the "hard R" would be a BIG selling point. If they are aiming to make an R film, I find it hard to believe that Ridley's film would be so close PG-13 that Rothman would feel the need to leave it in the hands of the MPAA to decide.
The only thing that has made me even slightly think it might be an R film is the de-scrambled audio puzzle. But when you think about the way the visuals could be shot/edited, it would be easy to keep that scene PG-13, even if the audio alone sounds disturbing.
I think it will be a 15. Alien was reclassified a 15 (well here in the UK!) And I do feel this has the same tone as Alien (obviously) A 15 i do feel.
Quote from: mastermoon on May 04, 2012, 03:29:40 PM
Whats taking them so long to confirm an R-Rating?.
Because they don't want it to be an R-rating....
Anyone who believes in a man who described AVP2 as "a great movie", needs therapy.
There'll be 2 edits hopefully. It's the school holidays in a month (less in Scotland). Fox want a piece of that pie the Avengers is currently gobbling up.
Quote from: Alien1 on May 04, 2012, 07:40:54 PM
how isnt it a story based link to Alien? Derelict? space jockey? Weyland? i mean come on... that "same universe" stuff is BS... its gotta be a real prequel to Alien..
Who cares... it's just semantics... :)
No question it will be rated 15/16 in Europe.
In preparation for the possible oncoming outrage, does Tom Rothman have an official Twitter account or email address?
I'm living in Hungary. The film rating in Hungary is: 12, 16, 18 (year above)
The four Alien films was rated 18 what is equal R, all the Prometheus trailer was rated 16, what is equal to PG-13.
I know, the trailer is not show too brutal violence (just the melting head, and other small things), and don't contain harsh language, but these things may in the eventual movie.
I think, Ridley Scott's name is enough, that we get an awsome movie, he is a very precise director, he is making his movies quite attention, so i think, the Prometheus will be R or will be PG-13, but it will be a huge success.
This has to be Rated-R well not hard over the top like AVPR.
I hope next week they confirm the rating.
Quote from: mastermoon on May 04, 2012, 10:33:56 PM
This has to be Rated-R well not hard over the top like AVPR.
I hope next week they confirm the rating.
It won't be at all like AvP:R. Mostly because nothing can be as bad, film wise, as AvP:R. Worst movie ever made IMO.
Quote from: fiveways on May 05, 2012, 12:28:59 AMIt won't be at all like AvP:R. Mostly because nothing can be as bad, film wise, as AvP:R. Worst movie ever made IMO.
In my opinion, AvP is much worse than AvP:R.
"I can assure the fans—I'm very aware of their concern—absolutely they can take it that the film will not be compromised either way. So if that means that the film is R, then it'll be an R. If it's PG-13, then it'll be a PG-13, but it will not be compromised."
.....man, by showing us potentially R rated material then talking about the film possibly being a PG-13, you're compromising it already. What a w***er this guy really is!!!
How can we know if anything was cut when nobody saw anything..
Quote from: Zenzucht on May 07, 2012, 07:34:39 AM
How can we know if anything was cut when nobody saw anything..
We can't but I bet he does, and that's the gag isn't it. We won't know til the Blu Ray version comes out, so for him there's no need to really answer the question, because he knows the answer is which ever version he decides, thereby staying true to his word.
Quote from: RoaryUK on May 07, 2012, 04:53:46 AM
"I can assure the fans—I'm very aware of their concern—absolutely they can take it that the film will not be compromised either way. So if that means that the film is R, then it'll be an R. If it's PG-13, then it'll be a PG-13, but it will not be compromised."
.....man, by showing us potentially R rated material then talking about the film possibly being a PG-13, you're compromising it already. What a w***er this guy really is!!!
Typical weasel; using a lot of words to say a lot of f**k all.
Yes, but we've seen a non-bloody (just muddy) version of the trailer, and the latest trailer in which the claret has been re-instated, so I'd hope that's an indicator that the original vision is the one they're going with.
No doubt, even if it is R/18, they'll be a stronger edit down the line just to cash in. It's happened before. 'Too strong for cinema' etc. In the era of DVD and Blu-Ray it's almost a given that an alternate take will appear, probably overseen by Ridley but not necessarily endorsed by him (if he gets the edit he wants now).
Quote from: Magegg on May 05, 2012, 12:53:56 AM
Quote from: fiveways on May 05, 2012, 12:28:59 AMIt won't be at all like AvP:R. Mostly because nothing can be as bad, film wise, as AvP:R. Worst movie ever made IMO.
In my opinion, AvP is much worse than AvP:R.
What ??!!
Youre kidding right ?
Quote from: Magegg on May 05, 2012, 12:53:56 AM
Quote from: fiveways on May 05, 2012, 12:28:59 AMIt won't be at all like AvP:R. Mostly because nothing can be as bad, film wise, as AvP:R. Worst movie ever made IMO.
In my opinion, AvP is much worse than AvP:R.
Yep i agree, both films are pretty bad imo but AVPR was more like the orig films with gore, bad language, Predator acting like a Predator, music lifted right from the films etc, it wasn't watered down shit like the first film.
...There is infinitely more craftsmanship in the first AvP film. There's at least an attempt at something resembling an overarching plot and story. An attempt at being competent. An attempt at balancing the creatures.
AvPR ... Oh forget it. This stuff doesn't belong here.
R does not equal good and the mass reaction to AvPR is proof of that.
Quote from: OpenMaw on May 08, 2012, 03:26:13 AM
...There is infinitely more craftsmanship in the first AvP film. There's at least an attempt at something resembling an overarching plot and story. An attempt at being competent. An attempt at balancing the creatures.
AvPR ... Oh forget it. This stuff doesn't belong here.
R does not equal good and the mass reaction to AvPR is proof of that.
And let's not forget, as far as the first AvP film, an attempt at actual lighting...so we can at least see what the f**k is going on. ;D
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:06:10 AM
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
Well, see, it's word games. Not one frame was cut... Whole scenes were. :)
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:06:10 AM
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
Have I missed something? You wouldn't happen to have a link with this information?
https://twitter.com/#!/dvdenfrancais/status/199301701893767168 (https://twitter.com/#!/dvdenfrancais/status/199301701893767168)
And this is for France, which means it doesnt even include what the MPAA wanted changed(if anything)
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:28:19 AM
https://twitter.com/#!/dvdenfrancais/status/199301701893767168 (https://twitter.com/#!/dvdenfrancais/status/199301701893767168)
And this is for France, which means it doesnt even matter what the MPAA wanted changed(if anything)
Thanks very much for the link, Greatknower.
No offence but it's a tad too early to be releasing information on Blu-Ray and DVD features for a film that hasn't even seen its theatrical release yet.
It also strikes me as a little odd that a random DVD company from France is the only one releasing this information.
It's highly likely that somebody that works for 'DVD en français' is a Prometheus fan absorbing false information OR a Prometheus fan contacted them with this "exclusive" information.
A lot of people are under the impression Ridley Scott mentioned 20 minutes being cut from Prometheus. He was referring to 17 minutes from another film.
To me, this is a case of broken telephone.
Sorry Vickers, I dont think so. This guy has always been right in past with his release info.
UK will get it in October and US will get it in November. US version....who knows.
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:06:10 AM
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
Every movie has deleted scenes. And some scene's are just better left out so it doesn't really worry me tbh.
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:06:10 AM
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
There is a difference between scenes deleted by the director due to various reasons (e.g. pacing) and scenes deleted by the studios to achieve a certain rating (for which the director does not come into the equation).
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 09, 2012, 05:10:58 PM
Quote from: GreatKnower on May 09, 2012, 01:06:10 AM
If not one frame will be cut, what is the 20 mins of deleted scenes being advertised for the Blu Ray? ???
There is a difference between scenes deleted by the director due to various reasons (e.g. pacing) and scenes deleted by the studios to achieve a certain rating (for which the director does not come into the equation).
Yup, there can be great scene, which destroys the pacing of the movie.. But after you saw the movie million times, it can be "icing on the cake" for you.
Like the chip switch scene in the Terminator 2 :)