Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: systemcr4sh on April 22, 2002, 08:35:34 PM

Title: Another Re-Animator thread :)
Post by: systemcr4sh on April 22, 2002, 08:35:34 PM
I said this in another post but didn't get much replys.

The store I rent from has the "R" rated version. Is this worth renting? Just how much gore is cut out? I'm interested in seeing this film, but I don't want to ruin it by seeing a bum version of it thats going to make me hate it or something.

-Dan
Title: Re: Another Re-Animator thread :)
Post by: Nathan on April 23, 2002, 10:10:59 AM
It's not going to ruin it.  In fact, the R-rated version contains a scene not in the un-rated version which helps the plot make sense.  (A bit.)

Remember, this movie isn't a classic because of sheer gore, but because of wit.  Wit is present in both versions.

Nathan
Title: Both versions are acceptable...
Post by: Chris K. on April 23, 2002, 01:09:31 PM
Both the R and Unrated cut of RE-ANIMATOR are acceptable. From what I heard, the original cut of RE-ANIMATOR almost ran 2 hours long! Charles Band's Empire Pictures was supplying additional assistance to the film's production and when the film was complete, Stuart Gordon and Charle's father Albert Band both watched the finished cut of RE-ANIMATOR. After the screening was over, Albert went to Stuart and said to him that the film is good
but the film has so much going for it with the hypnotism angle of Dr. Carl Hill, Herbert West using the green-glowing serum as a drug to keep him from sleeping, and the additional character development that did not focus on the key element of the plot then the audience would not accept the film. So Stuart cut out these subplot's that I mentioned to a breif 85 minutes.

However, the R rated cut eliminates all the explicit gore (and the notorious "giving head" sex scene) and placed the cut subplots back in so to pad the running time. I might add the R rated cut was not supervised by Stuart Gordon or his producer Brian Yuzna, but was handled by Empire Pictures and Vestron Video.

In any case, I liked the subplots and I do wish Stuart Gordon would issue a "Director's Cut" containing all the footage together. But, te theatrical cut and the R rated video cut are just as good.
Title: Re: Another Re-Animator thread :)
Post by: chris on April 23, 2002, 08:12:41 PM
I don't think the R-rated version has the same level of insanity as the un-rated one.  Granted, I like the gore layed on pretty thick, but I found with the R-rated version, it just didn't seem as crazy and off-beat.  I'd recommend for a first viewing DEFINITLY see the unrated one.  First impressions mean a lot.