Bier de Stone (slavezombie) wrote,
Bier de Stone
slavezombie

  • Mood:
  • Music:

censorship

What is it about the blemishes in the film Passion of the Christ? I wondered what their significance was when they flash on the screen over and over again in a time when the local news was cracking down on pirate DVDs and collaboration of studios with legislation on making it illegal to record a movie in a theatre. Apparently, it's against the law to dub a film in a theatre with a digital movie camera. I can only guess because it was being done with the objective of distributing DVD copies for sale on the black (underground) market.

The following year, during Easter, the film (Passion) was once again released. This time the director made changes and called the re-release "The director's cut" with footage previously unseen during the debut version.

I thought to myself, after having seen the original version three times, that I will definitely go again. But the reviews I saw were unfavorable. I think I even heard that the film was less violent. I decided not to waste time and money again because the idea of an edited version less violent didn't appeal to me. More violent, maybe, but less violent, nil. Then it dawned on me. Obviously if an edited version of the film was to be re-released, the red blemish spots I remember seeing in the original version (about at the part where the tear jerking scenes take place) must have been edited out, for they had no real significance in the film.

The blemishes actually looked like red projector specks, but I assure you that the various different theaters I went to to see the film all had the same blemishes at exactly the same scenes everytime I saw the film. So what? Taking out the specks of red dot blemishes in the film certainly doesn't make it less violent. It makes it the Edited Director's Cut. I mean, who would go to the trouble to edit in never before seen footage, edit out violence and forget to remove the specks? That must be how to identify which is which. I can't say for sure, because I didn't see the Director's Cut. If anybody out there who was fortunate enough to see both, and knows what I'm talking about, send me a reply. I find this kind of thing beyond interesting. It's sensayorable.
Tags: films
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 0 comments