The Official 88 Films Thread

[junyab]

Any 88 Films insiders on?

I'm curious to know why some 88 Films titles are available for sale on Amazon.ca (Canada) for preorder (at amazing prices), and some aren't.

Will 88 Films continue to offer their releases on Amazon.ca? Or was the handful of titles offered now just a fluke?

[Lucy Ashton]

Originally Posted by Markgway

Get your priorities straight, mate.

His prioriteres are his business. Mate.

[stephenwilson04]

Watched Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers last night. Never seen the film look so good. Some print damage in the first few minute (which Olen Ray addresses), but other than that, it looks great. Also listened to the 2 commentaries (1 more than the US disc). Looking forward to watching Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout later today as well.

[charnier]

Per Facebook, free worldwide shipping until midnight for orders over £20 - just enter the discount code, I LOVE MY MUM, at checkout.

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by stuartalex

Sorry I thought I had.
Maybe I should have said "animal cruelty in films".
Does that satisfy you

No. The life of an animal is more important than a piece of celluloid.

Originally Posted by Lucy Ashton

His prioriteres are his business. Mate.

I'm not going to take stick from someone who can't even spell priorities.

[Lucy Ashton]

Originally Posted by Markgway

I'm not going to take stick from someone who can't even spell priorities.

Touché. The fact that you are willing to lose yourself in assumed issues of spelling (ignoring the possibility of a typo) rather than addressing the contents of the message is very much in keeping with the smug self-righteousness of your former post. You attack the person rather than the argument - an obvious and petty tactic that tempts the addressee to respond in kind.

...And as tempting as it is to do so, I will simply say that I enjoy discussing releases of favourite movies, and I appreciate any information about the censorship and technical aspects of those releases. But I do not need some random person of no importance to me telling me whether or not I should buy said release. I am quite capable of making up my own mind on that matter, as I suspect any other member here - including stuartalex - is.

[stuartalex]

Originally Posted by MichaelB

The BBFC is just as irritated by the fact that they are legally obliged to cut illegal material out of video releases (I can confirm this first hand, as I've talked to them about it on more than one occasion), which is why in recent years they've been trying to interpret the Animals Act as generously as they possibly can. They're not "hiding behind some wordplay", they're scouring a notoriously draconian piece of legislation to see if there's any wiggle room at all - hence their interpretation of clean kills as not constituting "infliction of pain or the cruel goading of an animal to fury".

But there is absolutely no point berating them for cutting out genuine animal cruelty, or indulging in abstract philosophical arguments about things that happened decades ago: they have absolutely no choice. The only way you'll see a change is if either the Animals Act is abolished, or the Video Recordings Act is modified so that BBFC classification becomes optional and the distributor takes on the risk of prosecution.

The first is pretty much inconceivable, as most people seem perfectly happy with legislation that cracks down on recordings of genuine animal cruelty, and any MP who sought to overturn it would immediately be dubbed "the animal torturer's best friend". The second is at least imaginable, although I suspect it's only likely to happen under a far more genuinely liberal government than any that we've had in my lifetime. I did briefly think in 2010 that the current coalition might turn out to be that government (David Cameron being a much more socially and culturally "liberal" PM than any of his immediate predecessors), but the recent crackdown on VOD porn has very much suggested otherwise.

It's not really a philosophical argument - it's a logical one asking for common sense.
The Act bans cruelty to animals - that's fine and it doesn't happen.
It only needs a slight adjustment to allow for things that happened decades ago elsewhere in the world.
It's a UK law that applies to UK material so there is no logic in cutting 40 year old footage . They wouldn't if it was a documentary.

I saw a piece on the R18 rules today and it seems the BBFC are aware of some of the "obscene" content that has been cleared by courts but it's the CPS who are actually ignoring the rulings so the BBFC's hands are tied.

[stuartalex]

Originally Posted by Markgway

No. The life of an animal is more important than a piece of celluloid.

In your opinion.

To be honest - if I saw a bus about to fall off a cliff and I only had a chance to either grab the cute dog chained to a seat or a film can containing the long sought after original cut of The Wicker Man guess which one I would save ( and that includes if all the other seats had people in them I didn't know)

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by Lucy Ashton

Touché. The fact that you are willing to lose yourself in assumed issues of spelling (ignoring the possibility of a typo) rather than addressing the contents of the message is very much in keeping with the smug self-righteousness of your former post.

Only because your post was a mind-yer-own-business jab at me rather than any kind of reasoned argument. Why should I waste my time debating an argument that YOU couldn't be bothered to make. If you have something to say about animal cruelty versus censorship then say it. Don't just piggyback on Stuart's POV and take swipe at me when I criticise HIM.

But I do not need some random person of no importance to me telling me whether or not I should buy said release.

Now who's being petty and insulting...?

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by stuartalex

In your opinion.

Seriously? If that's your honest viewpoint and not just a sly attempt to get a rise out of me then we really have nothing further to discuss.

To be honest - if I saw a bus about to fall off a cliff and I only had a chance to either grab the cute dog chained to a seat or a film can containing the long sought after original cut of The Wicker Man guess which one I would save

I'm hoping that you're joking... but even with the wink I'm frankly not too sure.

[88 Films Official]

Originally Posted by stuartalex

In your opinion.

To be honest - if I saw a bus about to fall off a cliff and I only had a chance to either grab the cute dog chained to a seat or a film can containing the long sought after original cut of The Wicker Man guess which one I would save ( and that includes if all the other seats had people in them I didn't know)

We are hoping you would choose the dog? Poor little guy... why was he chained in the first place?

[cooey]

Originally Posted by mattyl149

I pre-ordered the next set of 88 Films releases in HMV a couple of days ago. I asked about The Bogey Man, but they couldn't find it. Is it down as The Boogey Man on the system? If so, I'll pop in on Monday and pre-order it

It's on there, I got them to find it by searching 'Slasher Classics' and it came up on their system that way. £8.99

[LordCrumb]

Any update on the Indiegogo pledges?

[Lucy Ashton]

Originally Posted by Markgway

Now who's being petty and insulting...?

I didn't mean to be insulting, but I did feel it was necessary to state the obvious. You feel passionately about animal rights. Religiously, even. And that's fine. What I reacted to was the condescending, lecturing tone of your post. Whether or not someone choses to buy a certain edition because it is edited for content you find objectionable is indeed none of your business. Or rather: Your point of view will have zero impact on my buying decision.

We may disagree on the finer points, but I am all for animal rights as well. But I don't believe the absoluteness of one's convictions gives one the right to be downright rude to others. I made the regretful mistake of reacting to what I perceived as a rude comment directed towards another member. A member who indeed expresses ambivalent feelings towards movies with, shall we say, uncomfortable content.

Obviously, this discussion has already taken place once in this thread - and it was fruitless for both sides of the argument. I was wise enough to stay out of it then. Some people obviously need a soapbox, and there's probably a place for that. For my own part, I just need that facts about a given release - i.e. technical aspects, whether or not the movie is cut - and I will make up my own mind. I suspect most Blu-ray collectors are the same.

[Markgway]

Let's just forget the subject and move on.

We're here to talk about 88 Films...

[Marv Inc.]

Originally Posted by LordCrumb

Any update on the Indiegogo pledges?

I received a couple of dvds last saterday and some art cards

[stephenwilson04]

I've heard that Arrow are going to release The Mutilator. I wonder if the success of 88's Slasher collection has prompted them into the slasher game.

[Ill_Be_Back]

Originally Posted by stephenwilson04

I've heard that Arrow are going to release The Mutilator. I wonder if the success of 88's Slasher collection has prompted them into the slasher game.

Please tell me you are not joking! It has been long said that no 35mm exists, was that not true then?

[Lucy Ashton]

Originally Posted by stephenwilson04

I've heard that Arrow are going to release The Mutilator. I wonder if the success of 88's Slasher collection has prompted them into the slasher game.

It's not like Arrow is new to the slasher game, but you are right that they haven't focused heavily on that particular genre. If your source is correct, it's a surprising acquisition, though. Hasn't this been held back by either legal or source issues for quite some time?

[stephenwilson04]

Originally Posted by Ill_Be_Back

Please tell me you are not joking! It has been long said that no 35mm exists, was that not true then?

I have no idea but Buddy Cooper himself has claimed that he might have the materials needed. I believe 88 were interested and enquired about it, but looks like he's decided to give it to Arrow.