Skip

A History of Disrespect?
August 7, 2013 2:32 PM   Subscribe


 
Yes, Harvey. Those poor idiotic vascular surgeons and physicists and engineers and artists and linguists and philosophers and historians in Iowa and Oklahoma. I can see how you would look down on those poor addled jerks. It's not like just anyone can be a businessman.
posted by middleclasstool at 2:46 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'll just have to torrent the original and find fan subs instead, won't I? AKA That was my plan all along.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 2:48 PM on August 7, 2013 [5 favorites]


This is probably about saving or making money in some way. Like releasing a Director's Cut DVD with 20 more minutes...
posted by Foci for Analysis at 3:01 PM on August 7, 2013


Ever since "Philosopher's Sorcerer's Stone" I've been wondering if there is actual precedent for this sort of thing helping books and movies, or if it's just based on a feeling that media executives have.
posted by vanar sena at 3:04 PM on August 7, 2013 [3 favorites]


You know what, Harvey? I'm American and I have probably watched more Asian film than you.

You can fuck right off now.
posted by Samizdata at 3:06 PM on August 7, 2013 [5 favorites]


Really surprised that second link doesn't include this story:
Miramax Films, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, purchased [Princess Mononoke's] distribution rights for North America. Miyazaki met with Harvey Weinstein, Miramax's chairman; Weinstein demanded that edits should be made to Princess Mononoke. In response, Toshio Suzuki sent Weinstein a katana with a message stating "No cuts."
posted by theodolite at 3:07 PM on August 7, 2013 [43 favorites]


Harvey Scissorhands once again living up to his nickname.

This is probably about saving or making money in some way.

A two hour film can only screen so many times in a day when compared to a 100 minute film.
posted by cazoo at 3:12 PM on August 7, 2013


Yeah, after Miyazaki got boned with Warriors of the Wind, it's been Miyazaki/Studio Ghibli's totally, totally, totally reasonable policy. If you've ever seen Warriors of the Wind. It's just.

NOPE.
posted by joyceanmachine at 3:12 PM on August 7, 2013 [5 favorites]


Wow that op-ed has a ton of butt hurt and pseudo-conspiracy theorizing going on. My take on it is that those movies were acquired partially as a vanity project and that DVD sales weren't good enough to justify continued releases. The Dragon Dynasty series has presented some really classic king-fu movies in a very professional manner compared to other DVD releases. Maybe go and badger the folks at Criterion if you want a flawless-in-every-way $40 DVD experience.
posted by Dmenet at 3:15 PM on August 7, 2013


After the stupidly entertaining (Arnold! Luis Guzman! Peter Stormare!) but forgettable The Last Stand and the atmosphere and beauty but ultimate let-down of Stoker I was looking forward to this year's third big Hollywood debut by a celebrated South Korean director, but it looks like I'll be waiting for a director's cut.
posted by edeezy at 3:16 PM on August 7, 2013 [2 favorites]


"TWC people have told Bong that their aim is to make sure the film will be understood by audiences in Iowa... and Oklahoma."

Understood covers a lot of ground. I'm pretty darn smart and I don't understand a lot of what I see in foreign films because I don't have the background. Particularly things like character depth where the way a person coughs can reveal a entire life story.

In short, leaping from "he doesn't think it will be understood" to "he thinks the people in question are dumb" is a bit of a stretch.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 3:16 PM on August 7, 2013


A two hour film can only screen so many times in a day when compared to a 100 minute film.

I thought I had read recently that movie companies were now actually trying to make movies longer in order to make sure the competition couldn't get screen time, and the theatres hated it. Did I imagine this?
posted by Hoopo at 3:20 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


A two hour film can only screen so many times in a day when compared to a 100 minute film.

Thing is, though: It doesn't really matter how many times it plays per day, just how many people pay to see it. More showtimes does not necessarily mean more tickets sold. If anything, more showtimes just translates into more labour costs (ticket ripping, popcorn sweeping) for theatre owners.
posted by Sys Rq at 3:22 PM on August 7, 2013


I thought they were always making movies so damn long because otherwise they couldn't justify the high ticket prices, the way restaurants serve you more than you should possibly eat because you'd balk at paying $20 for a reasonable portion.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 3:26 PM on August 7, 2013


To be fair, at least from the trailer, Snowpiercer looks kind of dumb.
posted by octothorpe at 3:37 PM on August 7, 2013 [3 favorites]




Bong Joon-ho's snow train movie

I really, really wish this was an actual genre.
posted by threeants at 3:47 PM on August 7, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yeah, they thought we were too stupid for Princess Nausicaa. That went over really well.

Hollywood, take your bowlderized shit and shove it.
posted by smoothvirus at 3:48 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


The article reads to me as "The Weinsteins despise all kung fu movies and want to hurt them", which I can't think is what I'm supposed to take away from this. That is, acquiring movie rights so that others can't have them makes sense to me as good ol' fashioned, vindictive business. Acquiring movie right to deliberately savage them and make them worse doesn't. Does anybody know of some other analyses of these facts?
posted by Going To Maine at 4:23 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


In that entire io9 article, not a single word is a direct quote from Weinstein.

Not one fucking word.

Not only are Weinstein's supposed reasons pure speculation on the part of the writer, but Woerner has not even verified with Weinstein that the company is editing the film.

This is not journalism, but pure linkbait.
posted by Ardiril at 4:26 PM on August 7, 2013 [6 favorites]


GuyZero has it.
posted by Zenabi at 4:29 PM on August 7, 2013




Understood covers a lot of ground. I'm pretty darn smart and I don't understand a lot of what I see in foreign films because I don't have the background. Particularly things like character depth where the way a person coughs can reveal a entire life story.

In short, leaping from "he doesn't think it will be understood" to "he thinks the people in question are dumb" is a bit of a stretch.


How is removing information going to help, though?
posted by Merzbau at 4:43 PM on August 7, 2013 [2 favorites]


The director is the guy who also did The Host. This might be an odd plot, but I imagine that the film will jump across maybe three genres and be generally insane. That is to say: not good, but different and willing to defy audience expectations.
posted by Going To Maine at 4:45 PM on August 7, 2013 [2 favorites]


Adding voiceover to a weird, cool sci fi movie? Might want to double-check so this doesn't go down as the next Blade Runner.
posted by JoeBlubaugh at 4:53 PM on August 7, 2013


Last night I saw Oblivion, which is a terrible movie, but the studio mandated voiceover is extra terrible (and adds nothing) - Bladerunner is a best case.
posted by Artw at 5:14 PM on August 7, 2013


Sorry to ask what I'm sure is a dumb question. But if the only living inhabitants of the earth are on a train that constantly drives around, who maintains the tracks?
posted by The World Famous at 5:35 PM on August 7, 2013 [4 favorites]


Tom Cruise.
posted by Artw at 6:11 PM on August 7, 2013 [2 favorites]


The World Famous: Sequel!!!!!
posted by jscott at 6:19 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


In short, leaping from "he doesn't think it will be understood" to "he thinks the people in question are dumb" is a bit of a stretch.
How is removing information going to help, though?


A common practice in storytelling is that every scene must advance the plot. If you've got a scene that only a tiny percentage of the people watching are going to understand I would say you're better off cutting it entirely and keeping the plot rolling. Even more so if the cultural clues will actually confuse the audience as to who the character is.

For me the question isn't about whether to cut, it's about how much you cut before you say "Okay, this isn't even the same film anymore".
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 6:27 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


"I'll just have to torrent the original and find fan subs instead, won't I? AKA That was my plan all along."

But it's not always that easy. If a film has an English release that's usually the one that gets uploaded to torrent sites. And if you can find the original Korean version, the subtitles are likely the ones that came with the original Chinese or Russian DVD - usually some kind of machine-translated part-English that makes the movie semi-incoherent.

Fans don't always bother subbing a movie when they know an English release is coming.
posted by Kevin Street at 9:54 PM on August 7, 2013


If you've ever seen Warriors of the Wind. It's just.

NOPE.


For the record, i saw that on my parent's satellite dish way back in the day, and fell in love with it. I could tell something was "off" about it, but loved the world, the characters, etc. It only got better when i watched a subbed version of it. While i wish i had seen the original first, it did introduce me to his work.

I'm also glad it made him so adamant about others not changing his work. ;)
posted by usagizero at 10:51 PM on August 7, 2013


No one in this world, so far as I know—and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me—has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.

Well, no. Movies bomb constantly, and very frequently because the movie is so dumb and of such poor quality audiences don't want to watch it, or stay away in droves after the first weekend. I get the urge for cynical posturing but it's a false, cheap way out: the fact is, people go to the movies. If you put stupid shit in theaters, people will see stupid shit. If you put brilliant stuff in theaters, people will see that too, and in fact they'll often prefer it. The entire history of movies proves it.
posted by drjimmy11 at 11:53 PM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


What, no Harvey Firestein? BO-RING. This had so much potential. I need to go to sleep.
posted by Hennimore at 12:51 AM on August 8, 2013 [2 favorites]


I really, really wish [snow train movie] was an actual genre.

Well I guess there's this, at least
posted by doiheartwentyone at 1:59 AM on August 8, 2013


...and this.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 4:31 AM on August 8, 2013


Sorry to ask what I'm sure is a dumb question. But if the only living inhabitants of the earth are on a train that constantly drives around, who maintains the tracks?

My thought was, where do they get their food? Or maybe I don't want to know.
posted by Gelatin at 6:03 AM on August 8, 2013


I think it's a dumb move. The audience he's trying to reach with the edits won't buy a ticket because the film is a limited-release import. The people who do buy tickets for limited-release imports (in the narrow window of opportunity when the movie is available outside of major urban markets) don't want to see a gutted film.
posted by CBrachyrhynchos at 6:47 AM on August 8, 2013 [2 favorites]


Will it play in Peoria?
posted by bukvich at 8:19 AM on August 8, 2013




« Older Just Another Ikea Catalogue [NSFW]   |   A win for boobie bracelets in middle school Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post