anathema
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2002
- Messages
- 1,697
- Reaction score
- 48
Half the time it's because the company concerned doesn't know/doesn't care/doesn't want to spend the extra money.muppet_dk said:I can understand why you are so mad about it. I feel the same about it.
But some times, for legal reasons, theres just no way around it, if there should be a realease. A good example of that are "Muppet family christmas". It's better to get a cut release than no realease at all.
But all the other edits were there don't seem to be any legal reasons for it, the mute in Muppets Take Manhattan, are utterly pointless and it should be a criminal offence to do that
For example, the Indiana Jones trilogy is finally getting its DVD release in the UK this autumn, and I happily pre-ordered my copy. Then something came up on one of the DVD review/news sites I read: at present, it appears that Paramount are proposing to release the same edit of "Temple of Doom" that was previously released on VHS. Problem is, this edit had to be cut in order to get a 'PG' rating. Now, all this happened about a decade ago, and the BBFC rules have relaxed somewhat since then - it's quite possible that the film would now go through uncut at 'PG'. However, so far as I know, Paramount aren't going to submit the uncut film - this despite the fact that they're apparently submitting the cut one, so they're paying for the review no matter what. This suggests that they a) don't care, or b) can't be bothered to get an uncut copy. I, in turn, don't care enough to spend my money on this, and have cancelled my order.
For what it's worth, I think the biggest "mistake" is that the first two Muppet movies aren't available to buy on DVD in the UK ;-) I can't imagine what's causing the hold-up - it's shouldn't be that Columbia don't have the rights, since they regularly re-release them on VHS...