|
|
Post by gogoschka1 on Mar 22, 2017 22:29:49 GMT
In the first trailer from a couple of months ago there are some clearly visible blood spurts when the major shoots some bad guys (at 0:28 in clip 1), but in the new 5 minute clip which shows the exact same scene, the blood spurts are gone (at 3:50 in clip 2). Could this be evidence that the film was shot as an R-rated film and was now edited down for a PG-13?
See for yourself:
Clip 1:
Clip 2:
|
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Mar 22, 2017 23:12:32 GMT
idk about shot to be R, but sometimes blood can give you an R rating. for example Wes Craven's first Scream film almost got an NC17 because it had "too much blood" and "moving blood"
|
|
|
|
Post by gogoschka1 on Mar 23, 2017 17:40:54 GMT
idk about shot to be R, but sometimes blood can give you an R rating. for example Wes Craven's first Scream film almost got an NC17 because it had "too much blood" and "moving blood" Could be they wanted a PG-13 from the get go, and the edit was demanded by the MPAA. But there were some comments a couple of months ago by the filmmakers where they said something along the lines they're not thinking of the rating and just make the film the way the story demands it (which of course is hardly possible with such an expensive film: you already have to know at script stage if you're allowed the freedom to ignore the rating). The fact remains: the first trailer has blood spurts, the new clip doesn't. Something has been altered - for some reason or other - along the way. |
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Mar 23, 2017 17:54:10 GMT
idk about shot to be R, but sometimes blood can give you an R rating. for example Wes Craven's first Scream film almost got an NC17 because it had "too much blood" and "moving blood" Could be they wanted a PG-13 from the get go, and the edit was demanded by the MPAA. But there were some comments a couple of months ago by the filmmakers where they said something along the lines they're not thinking of the rating and just make the film the way the story demands it (which of course is hardly possible with such an expensive film: you already have to know at script stage if you're allowed the freedom to ignore the rating). The fact remains: the first trailer has blood spurts, the new clip doesn't. Something has been altered - for some reason or other - along the way. that's definitely probable. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Mar 23, 2017 21:20:58 GMT
I'm sure the director will tweet about what happened to his vision opening day.
|
|
|
|
Post by gogoschka1 on Mar 23, 2017 21:55:40 GMT
I'm sure the director will tweet about what happened to his vision opening day. LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Mar 23, 2017 22:00:22 GMT
I'm sure the director will tweet about what happened to his vision opening day. |
|
|
|
Post by gogoschka1 on Mar 23, 2017 22:25:41 GMT
I'm sure the director will tweet about what happened to his vision opening day. Well, I wouldn't be so sure about that: 'Fonzo' |
|
|
|
Post by brownstones on Mar 23, 2017 22:26:59 GMT
and then he was never hired again Well, I wouldn't be so sure about that: 'Fonzo'looks super indie. |
|
|
|
Post by gogoschka1 on Mar 23, 2017 22:35:17 GMT
Well, I wouldn't be so sure about that: 'Fonzo'looks super indie. Most def, but it has a star attached. If the film's a success, Hollywood will be quick on its knees to fellate Trank like they did after 'Chronicle'. If the film is a failure, he'll probably never work again  |
|
|
|
Post by itsthatguyme on Mar 26, 2017 10:30:22 GMT
I can't believe they are doing this movie. Given how terrible Lucy was , the nerve to pick SJ as the lead also. Smh. Lap it up fanboys. Any excuse to see SJ in a tight spandex jumper.
|
|
