![]() ![]() |
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 28 March 2006 |
Post
#2
|
|
Nice to have the uncutversion released but for the new material it seems pretty tame for a 15 certificate. I saw this version on TV and the average person would'nt notice the difference
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
Post
#3
|
|
True, it doesn't sound like much for UK Bond fans, but I am glad to see them making some changes for these upcoming DVD releases.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 4 January 2002 |
Post
#4
|
|
True, it doesn't sound like much for UK Bond fans, but I am glad to see them making some changes for these upcoming DVD releases. Well, it's one more reason for people to buy them again. ![]() ![]() Agent T the Lone Wolf |
|
|
|
|
|
Lt. Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 6 April 2005 From: United Kingdom |
Post
#5
|
|
Do we know what and were these extra '6 seconds' occure?
Wonder if we will see the full legnth of the PTS in TWINE were Renard is introduced. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 23 August 2001 From: England |
Post
#6
|
|
I'm not sure I understand the mentality behind giving it a 12 Cert for the cinema, retaining this Cert for DVD with cuts, and then reintroducing the cuts for a higher Cert for a later DVD.
Do these people operate under different criteria and rules for the different media?? ![]() ________________________________________________
"I think he's attempting re-entry sir" |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander RNVR Group: Commanding Officers Enlisted: 26 June 2003 From: New York |
Post
#7
|
|
Do we know what and were these extra '6 seconds' occure? Yes, most likely in the scenes on the stealth ship which featured the throwing stars and Bond kicking a man in the face. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander CMG Group: Veterans Enlisted: 13 May 2002 |
|
|
I'm not sure I understand the mentality behind giving it a 12 Cert for the cinema, retaining this Cert for DVD with cuts, and then reintroducing the cuts for a higher Cert for a later DVD. While this doesn't seem logical, I think a 15 certificate may actually be more "commercial" in a way, at least when it comes to the action movie market and other genres (I remember renting RED EYE a while back, noticing it was a 12, and not, as I'd assumed, a 15 or 18, and thinking, "Oh, this probably won't be very scary then" [and lo and behold....]). And while this doesn't seem logical, either (indeed, I'm making a massive leap), I wonder whether the re-release of two of the most popular and recent Bonds as 15s may be a way of "preparing" the British public for CASINO ROYALE to be a 15. Do these people operate under different criteria and rules for the different media?? I believe the BBFC is stricter with videos and DVDs than with big screen releases, on the grounds that potentially harmful material can be played back time and again in the home, and that underage viewers have easier access to home entertainment than to cinemas showing films they're not permitted to see. One off-the-top-of-my-head example: LETHAL WEAPON 2 was a 15 in cinemas, but the exact same edit (I think) received an 18 certificate for video. Side note: very baffled by some of the BBFC's decisions in recent years. Why is TERMINATOR 3 a 12 and not a 15? Why is LAYER CAKE a 15 and not an 18? Why is MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE II a 15 and not a 12, yet the considerably more brutal MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE III a 12 and not a 15....? |
|
|
|
|
|
Commander Group: Veterans Enlisted: 13 December 2004 From: Buckinghamshire |
Post
#9
|
|
And while this doesn't seem logical, either (indeed, I'm making a massive leap), I wonder whether the re-release of two of the most popular and recent Bonds as 15s may be a way of "preparing" the British public for CASINO ROYALE to be a 15. Hope springs eternal... but I think either Wilson or Campbell stated categorically at some point that it would be a PG or 12... certainly not 15. Pity. I do hope though the we get a decent 'uncut' version on DVD. ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Lieutenant Group: Crew Enlisted: 28 March 2006 |
Post
#10
|
|
And while this doesn't seem logical, either (indeed, I'm making a massive leap), I wonder whether the re-release of two of the most popular and recent Bonds as 15s may be a way of "preparing" the British public for CASINO ROYALE to be a 15. Hope springs eternal... but I think either Wilson or Campbell stated categorically at some point that it would be a PG or 12... certainly not 15. Pity. I do hope though the we get a decent 'uncut' version on DVD. It's not like 12 certificate films are necessercilay family viewing these days though. I think it will be a 12 which I'll be fine with. Can't really see Casino Royale getting a PG certificate. EON know that you can take a kid of any age to see a 12 though so why not keep it violent, sexy and attract as big an audience as possible? |
|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20 Aug 2008 - 10:31 |