View Full Version : What Movies Were Better Edited Because....


Jack1000
12-29-2003, 04:03 PM
there was so much offense language in the original film that it was almost too ofensive to watch the original version?

Normally, in response to this statement, I like to have my films uncut. Often times, bad language is ludicrously dubbed. However, there are two examples off of the top of my head, where I liked the EDITED version of a film better than the uncut version. By that I mean, removing the bad language was an improvment because there was too much of it in the original dialogue and it did not affect the story in any way:

My Picks:

RAGING BULL: TCM ran a very skilled edited version of Raging Bull during one of its "31 Days of Oscar" presentations. All of the F-Words were removed, but done skillfully enough that if you hadn't seen the original version, you wouldn't have known that anything was cut. (As a side note, The Jerk was once shown on TCM with the uncut name of Navin's dog left intact and nothing cut) But Raging Bull has tons of profanity. Seeing the cut version on TCM did nothing to detract from the quality of the film


GOOD WILL HUNTING: Great story! (In fact I have the taped version uncut) However, the F-Word is WAY overkilled in this film. When ABC aquired the film the F-word's were all skillfully taken out and it did not detract from the quality of the story. It was just as enjoyable if not more so.

Jack

*MIBabe03*
12-29-2003, 04:24 PM
Just my opinion but Judicial Consent should have been edited.

I am Him
12-29-2003, 05:38 PM
They need to edit an hour and a half out of each of the Lord of the Rings movies.

AKA
12-31-2003, 02:48 AM
Originally posted by I am Him
They need to edit an hour and a half out of each of the Lord of the Rings movies.

Yeah. Lots of filthy language in those.

HuntingtonM15
01-03-2004, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by I am Him
They need to edit an hour and a half out of each of the Lord of the Rings movies.

:nod: