Nymphomaniac (2013)

[UncleBuckWild]

NYMPHOMANIAC
VOLUME 1 & 2

Release Date: April 28, 2014

Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 & 2 Blu-ray REVIEW

[jwerk]

Glad they're releasing Parts 1&2 together. Hopefully the US does too. Thanks for the heads up OP

edit: Amazon's listing shows runtime of 242 minutes. IMDB shows a combined runtime of 247 minutes. Neither one is very reliable. Does Artificial Eye usually release uncut versions?

[UncleBuckWild]

Originally Posted by jwerk

Glad they're releasing Parts 1&2 together. Hopefully the US does too. Thanks for the heads up OP

edit: Amazon's listing shows runtime of 242 minutes. IMDB shows a combined runtime of 247 minutes. Neither one is very reliable. Does Artificial Eye usually release uncut versions?

It could be something to do with PAL/NTSC speeds.

[88thCrazy]

Really looking forward to getting this, but I understand there's a truly uncut directors cut coming soon, I'm guessing these are just the volumes released in the cinemas, in a set.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by UncleBuckWild

It could be something to do with PAL/NTSC speeds.

It would be about nine-ten minutes shorter running at 50hz. I think only the trailer has been passed by the BBFC.

[FilmFanSam]

has this had a cinema release in the UK and Ireland yet? didn't see it in any cinemas over here.. Must watch Antichrist and Melancholia again soon, but will be picking this up for sure.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by FilmFanSam

has this had a cinema release in the UK and Ireland yet? didn't see it in any cinemas over here.. Must watch Antichrist and Melancholia again soon, but will be picking this up for sure.

The trailer has a release date for the 22nd of February so I'd imagine we'll see the film as a March or April limited release.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by FilmFanSam

has this had a cinema release in the UK and Ireland yet? didn't see it in any cinemas over here.. Must watch Antichrist and Melancholia again soon, but will be picking this up for sure.

There's a screening of both volumes together with a Q&A coming up soon at my local cinema, hopefully I'll be able to find the time to check it out.

[UncleBuckWild]

Originally Posted by chip75

[Show spoiler]It would be about nine-ten minutes shorter running at 50hz. I think only the trailer has been passed by the BBFC.

Originally Posted by MichaelB

[Show spoiler]Very unlikely, given that we're not talking about standard-definition video.

In any case, the numbers don't add up - a 242-minute PAL video would run 252 minutes at theatrical speed, while a 247-minute cinema release would run 237 minutes, so it's not even likely to be an Antichrist situation (i.e. where the film seems to have been shot at 25fps, but released at 24fps in some territories).

You guys are probably right... usually the PAL/NTSC speed is the most common issue when some may misinterpret UK video releases as cut or edited.

I now understand that's not the issue here, hopefully AE releases the actual uncut version on Blu-ray.

Judging by the trailer ... this seems like quite an interesting film.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by UncleBuckWild

I now understand that's not the issue here, hopefully AE releases the actual uncut version on Blu-ray.

I wouldn't be surprised if this gets out uncut and unscathed at '18'. Ten years ago, I would have said there was no chance in hell, but nowadays, with Antichrist and Baise-moi getting uncut releases, the BBFC seem to be taking the tack that explicit sexual content is fine at '18' as long as the film serves a purpose beyond sexual stimulation. This makes sense, because there is no difference between an 'R18' and an '18', in terms of age restriction.

[thechicken]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

I wouldn't be surprised if this gets out uncut and unscathed at '18'. Ten years ago, I would have said there was no chance in hell, but nowadays, with Antichrist and Baise-moi getting uncut releases, the BBFC seem to be taking the tack that explicit sexual content is fine at '18' as long as the film serves a purpose beyond sexual stimulation. This makes sense, because there is no difference between an 'R18' and an '18', in terms of age restriction.

I emailed AE earlier today and they said they won't be releasing the full uncut version. So even if it would maybe pass with an 18, it won't be getting a UK Blu release for the foreseeable.

[Buzz201]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

In that case, can you explain why Score was cut only a year or so ago? The BBFC claims that it's a "sex work", which is baffling to me - it's primarily a comedy of manners (based on a dialogue-driven stage play) that just happens to have a brief if very explicit sex scene. If it's masturbation material you're after, there are far more obvious choices out there!

By contrast, The Erotic Films of Peter de Rome, which the BBFC passed uncut at 18, are unambiguously "sex works" - as cheerfully acknowledged by their creator in the delightful interview on the same disc!

But the real problem is that the BBFC pretends that there's no real difference between 18 and R18, but to a distributor this is the very real difference between being able to make back their money and pissing it down the drain. And until these inconsistencies are cleared up, distributors aren't going to want to risk even acquiring borderline titles, because if the BBFC requests cuts for an 18, this automatically gets publicised and the resulting disc gets boycotted.

I wouldn't mind if the system was similar to the distinction between R and NC-17 in the US - i.e. you sacrifice some venues and advertising platforms that you probably wouldn't be able to access on your budget anyway - but the present situation is ridiculously draconian. Get an 18, and you can sell it where you like. Get an R18 and you can only sell it over the counter in a licensed sex shop. The inevitable result: there are next to no R18 titles of any real artistic merit or adventurous DVD/BD curatorship.

You are wrong on so many levels. There's a reason why the NC-17 is known as the kiss of death in American cinema...

No mainstream distributor will touch an NC-17 for a theatrical release. Most newspapers won't allow advertising of an NC-17. Most supermarkets won't stock NC-17 rated films. Most cinema chains won't carry NC-17 rated films (and you need multiplexes on side). They just won't do it, so every film gets cut for an R anyway or it doesn't receive a big release.

AFAIK only only distributor regularly handles NC-17 films, IFC Films (with LD Entertainment and Fox Searchlight doing the odd 1 or 2 every now and then), and they're always very limited theatrical + VOD releases.

And the reason there are few R18 titles of artistic merit, is because it's a category specific for pornographic material. And nobody watching porn expects Scorsese style direction...

The BBFC define sex work in it's new guidelines (introduced soon) as:

Sex works at 18
Sex works are works whose primary purpose is sexual arousal or stimulation. Sex works containing only material which may be simulated are generally passed 18. Sex works containing clear images of real sex, strong fetish material, sexually explicit animated images, or other very strong sexual images will be confined to the R18 category. Material which is unacceptable in a sex work at R18 is also unacceptable in a sex work at 18.

So anything with a lot of detailed real sex is unlikely to get an 18, regardless of whether it's purpose is to arouse or not. And theoretically a work whose purpose is to arouse could get an 18 if it's not detailed or all simulated. This might explain discrepancies in the way the policy has been applied.

Also, the MPAA don't publish guidelines. So there is no distinction between an R and an NC-17. You're literally at the whimsy of the faceless panel (who don't necessarily even explain why a film got the rating it did - unless you're a major studios that pays their wages...)

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

In that case, can you explain why Score was cut only a year or so ago? The BBFC claims that it's a "sex work", which is baffling to me - it's primarily a comedy of manners (based on a dialogue-driven stage play) that just happens to have a brief if very explicit sex scene. If it's masturbation material you're after, there are far more obvious choices out there!

By contrast, The Erotic Films of Peter de Rome, which the BBFC passed uncut at 18, are unambiguously "sex works" - as cheerfully acknowledged by their creator in the delightful interview on the same disc!

But the real problem is that the BBFC pretends that there's no real difference between 18 and R18, but to a distributor this is the very real difference between being able to make back their money and pissing it down the drain. And until these inconsistencies are cleared up, distributors aren't going to want to risk even acquiring borderline titles, because if the BBFC requests cuts for an 18, this automatically gets publicised and the resulting disc gets boycotted.

I wouldn't mind if the system was similar to the distinction between R and NC-17 in the US - i.e. you sacrifice some venues and advertising platforms that you probably wouldn't be able to access on your budget anyway - but the present situation is ridiculously draconian. Get an 18, and you can sell it where you like. Get an R18 and you can only sell it over the counter in a licensed sex shop. The inevitable result: there are next to no R18 titles of any real artistic merit or adventurous DVD/BD curatorship.

Yes, the whole way R18 films are handled in one of the last vestiges of stupidity in the way the UK treats its films. They really should enact some legislation that allows sex shops (or various other web sites) to deliver by courier and have an over 18 sign for the package. Of course, then they would also have to do this for 18 cert films, and I'm sure that, as it stands right now, they don't, in practice.

And when it comes to the video market, the United States certainly wins out easily over the UK. I've always felt terrible for UK consumers, and the way that not only each film, but each Blu-ray or DVD extra feature (including every audio commentary) has to be vetted and certified by the BBFC. And of course, they don't work for free. I often think that BBFC classification is one of the huge stumbling blocks involved in why the UK is so routinely passed over for catalogue Blu-ray releases.

As to Score and The Erotic Films of Peter de Rome, you could of course argue that the BBFC is simply a flawed body with flawed decisions.

Who at the MPAA decides, for example, why a film like Titanic can show sexualized nudity at PG-13, or The Abyss or The Impossible can show brief natural nudity at PG-13, but Terminator: Salvation and 98% of other PG-13 rated films cannot?

Who decides that The Social Network and any number of certain PG-13 films can say the word "f**k" twice, yet Philomena is slapped with an R-rating and has to appeal for this exact reason?

All I know is, I'll be dammed if I'm not going to see the most uncut version of Nymphomaniac I can find. I'll import from Scandinavia if I must.

[nuttyhotspurs]

14.99 on zavvi
http://www.zavvi.com/blu-ray/nymphomaniac/10918504.html

Ive let amazon know:-)

[Blu Lemmy]

I'll order that and then wait for the Amazon match

[rapta]

BTW forgot to say the HMV exclusive version is £16.99 I think. Again not yet sure what comes with it to make it exclusive yet (but my guess is artcards/different packaging).

[Mavrick]

Originally Posted by rapta

BTW forgot to say the HMV exclusive version is £16.99 I think. Again not yet sure what comes with it to make it exclusive yet (but my guess is artcards/different packaging).

Thanks for posting, looking forward to seeing what it is.

[nuttyhotspurs]

Originally Posted by Blu Lemmy

I'll order that and then wait for the Amazon match

Thats my plan:-)

[nuttyhotspurs]

Mine arrived from Zavvi today! Will watch part1 tomorrow and part 2 later in the week :-)

[melonhed]

Could you post any pics?