Watching DAY of the DEAD (original DVD release)

[DjfunkmasterG]

I decided I wanted to pop in DAY so I grabbed the original 1998 DVD release because it contains the original Mono Audio track with the original dialogue, not the enhanced track found on the 2-disc set which has newer looped dialogue.

It is so hard to watch this film because the transfer is so poor and the color is way off, not to mention the forced Matte aspect ratio. However, this is how I remember DAY of the DEAD when watching it on VHS for 10+ years. I am curious as to how many people have the first DVD release and which do they prefer.


I admit I still like this one better because it is darker, grainier and has an all around more creepy feel to it than the 2003 release.

[MinionZombie]

I love the Divimax release, however my true memories of Day of the Dead will be from the (I think it was 4-Front Video) VHS release I bought for £6 in Woolworths back in erm...when I was 15 (technically my Dad bought it for me). I still have it, I ain't throwing out my VHS tapes! It has the original audio and muddy transfer, which is all part of the experience I loved about it - original aspect ratio too, which is nice. Pan & Scan has given away to fake widescreen transfers, arrrrgggghhh! (Matting right? There's so many it's confusing.)

*sigh*

That's the thing, watching a film in your home - I'm talking about classic horror films and video nasties - will never be the same with DVD. That experience should always be first had on VHS. There's just something so ... so ... videodrome ... about that experience, something gritty, dirty and illicit about popping in a VHS from the back of your local video store that's dirty and neglected and smells of smoke slightly...ahhh VHS...those were the days, I'm a DVD whore like everyone else.

[Hawkboy]

Well I saw "Day" in the theaters so I was much happier with the divimax release as it looks like what I saw back in the day.

[Doc Foster]

I have both the Divimax DVD and an earlier DVD release from a label called "Dutch Filmworks" which features some bonus material (behind-the-scenes make-up footage by Tom Savini and casting stuff) that is different to Anchor Bay's version. I like both, but even though AB messed around with the audio a bit, the Divimax is pretty hard to beat. I saw "Day" in a theater here in Vienna more than two decades ago, but the German print had virtually cut the guts out of the film; every single drop of blood had been removed to the point where some scenes didn't even make sense anymore! :mad: The first time I saw "Day" uncut was on a British VHS tape, many years later - that certainly was an eye-opening experience, I tell ya!

[MinionZombie]

I find it strange that a lot of horror flicks get cut to ribbons in Germany, I thought you guys had a more liberal attitude to such things, or is it that the ones in charge are a bit more hard line on horror movies rather than the public in general?

[jscott]

I always hated the transfer on the 1st AB disc (which I still own), so prior to the Divimax, I would watch the Elite Special Edition Laserdisc. However, my fuzziest memories are from viewing the original Media VHS released in 86. The transfer on the Divimax is far superior to any other releases, that I don't mind the 2 or 3 words that were looped.

[EvilNed]

In Sweden, sex, nudity and harsh language is often disregarded completly. A **** or two (or our equivalent) is definetly not enough to earn an R-rating, or even a PG-13. Nudity and sex is featured even in out television commercials (altough not excessively) and is considered alright.

Violence however, doesn't get the easy treatment. I remember when I watched LXG, they had cut half a second of a guy getting impaled on a rhinosaurus horn. They did this to get a lower rating on the film (11 years, instead of 15 which is our max). The DVD was unchanged, however, but I think it's rated 15. Nobody gives a damn on the DVDs, tho.

[Doc Foster]

I find it strange that a lot of horror flicks get cut to ribbons in Germany, I thought you guys had a more liberal attitude to such things, or is it that the ones in charge are a bit more hard line on horror movies rather than the public in general?

First of all, I'm NOT German - I'm Austrian. That's the little country NEXT to Germany! ;) But of course, the same versions of movies are shown over here as well.

Generally speaking, Germany probably had the toughest censorship for many years; only rivalled by the UK. I believe I've read somewhere that the German version of "Day" had a total of 66 cuts before being released to theaters! It was particularly bad with video releases in the mid-80s or so - even films like "Police Academy" (!) or Prince's "Purple Rain" fell victim to the censors' scissors! More violent movies - in particular horror, obviously - either were heavily cut or banned completely, and "Dawn of the Dead" (Romero's original) always was THE prime example for the German censorship craze...almost every single video release of that film - even if there were no gore scenes included at all! - was virtually hunted down and banned immediately. To this day, you can't sell an original VHS copy of "Dawn" (on "Marketing Film") on eBay Germany, as their security will cancel the auction almost as soon as you've put it up due to the fact that this version is still banned. In the last few years, however, German censors seem to have lightened up; at least with theatrical releases.

[Danny]

I find it strange that a lot of horror flicks get cut to ribbons in Germany, I thought you guys had a more liberal attitude to such things, or is it that the ones in charge are a bit more hard line on horror movies rather than the public in general?


RAMMSTEIN RULES.:D

[DjfunkmasterG]

Isn't DAY of the DEAD still banned in Germany?

[MaximusIncredulous]

In some ways I still prefer the 98 version because of the darker transfer which also reminds of the way I saw it on the old Image LD version back in the day. Also the look of the dead seems more nightmarish because the faces are harder to make out in those creepy caves. What disappointed me about the Divimax version was that brighter scenes actually made some of the dead look bluish, like Dawn zombies. Also the new dialogue was silly.

[Danny]

we can all agree frankenstein rocks no matter what version.

[MinionZombie]

Actually the UK censors are much more relaxed these days. The only thing that gets their panties in a bunch of sexual violence, that's where the scissors come out. But with gore - the more the merrier, they've gotten over their fear of horror movies and some quite violent flicks now get released at the 15 label instead of 18 and many films that were once rated "X" or 18 have been downgraded to 15.

Sorry, it was just that you mentioned Germany so I thought that was that, didn't look to the left ... that would have been too much effort. :D

[Danny]

dont get him started on video nasties:D

[DjfunkmasterG]

Actually the UK censors are much more relaxed these days. The only thing that gets their panties in a bunch of sexual violence, that's where the scissors come out. But with gore - the more the merrier, they've gotten over their fear of horror movies and some quite violent flicks now get released at the 15 label instead of 18 and many films that were once rated "X" or 18 have been downgraded to 15.

Sorry, it was just that you mentioned Germany so I thought that was that, didn't look to the left ... that would have been too much effort. :D

For me, any film that physically needs to show intercourse during a rape scene should be highly censored. It is bad enough you're implying rape with tearing of clothes, beatings etc etc. Then to show the physical sex happening is just digging the wound deeper and really isn't helping tell your story.

The perfect example of this is DEATH WISH II. There is a film with probably one of the most violent gang rapes I have ever seen (next to I spit on your grave) and it really does nothing for the film. Not only was one rape committed, oh no, in DW2 they had 3, 2 of which were explicitly shown, and for what, it didn't help the story DW2 to me is just shy of being an X.

MGM re-cut DW2 during the 80's and removed a majority of the rape scenes and left it as implied rather than shown, but on cable it is the un-cut version. I can't speak for everyone, but I have to agree with UK censors on Sexual Violence.

[bassman]

For me, any film that physically needs to show intercourse during a rape scene should be highly censored. It is bad enough you're implying rape with tearing of clothes, beatings etc etc. Then to show the physical sex happening is just digging the wound deeper and really isn't helping tell your story.

The perfect example of this is DEATH WISH II. There is a film with probably one of the most violent gang rapes I have ever seen (next to I spit on your grave) and it really does nothing for the film. Not only was one rape committed, oh no, in DW2 they had 3, 2 of which were explicitly shown, and for what, it didn't help the story DW2 to me is just shy of being an X.

MGM re-cut DW2 during the 80's and removed a majority of the rape scenes and left it as implied rather than shown, but on cable it is the un-cut version. I can't speak for everyone, but I have to agree with UK censors on Sexual Violence.

Although I do agree with you, rape scenes can also help with the plot. Think about the shower scene in "American History X". It's actually the turning point of the entire plot when the main character realizes how bad he's screwed up and how it's screwing up the lives of the people he cares about.

I imagine that would straighten anyone out:barf: ....

I've never seen this "Death Wish 2" and I'm sure you're right about it. Some movies do take it too far....but there are some that handle it the right way.


But back to the topic...I never had the original DVD release, just a VHS. The Anchor Bay DVD is too great to me, I wouldn't trade it for anything...

[MinionZombie]

The thing with sexual violence is just that, if it adds to the story, or it needs to be there to justify the consequences etc, then it needs to be there. ISOYG is a strange case, it's clearly an exploitation movie, but interestingly enough when 7 minutes and 2 seconds were torn out of it here in the UK originally, many people said it weakened the movie - it made the retribution feel less justified - which is quite a strange thing. It's both an exploitation flick, but justification was affected as a result...strange. I've never seen the cut version, I only have the uncut version from America.

A film like "Baise Moi" was cut, not by much, but by a little. It's a weird flick, it's pretty much just porn (porn actresses act in the flick), there's just nothing but guns waving around and dicks getting sucked all on screen. It's all pretty pointless, the movie was trying to make a point, but it totally got lost in all the moist shaft.

A film like Irreversible though, that went uncut because the rape scene was pertinent to the plot and wasn't all about boobs getting flashed, you actually don't 'see' anything so to speak, although it is a long rape scene. It feels cold and detached really, and the conclusion is justified by seeing that whole scene.

I see where you're coming from, but sometimes as you say it's passable if there's a point to it. DW2 certainly sounds like it's all about the exploitation of it.

[FleshMask]

For me, any film that physically needs to show intercourse during a rape scene should be highly censored. It is bad enough you're implying rape with tearing of clothes, beatings etc etc. Then to show the physical sex happening is just digging the wound deeper and really isn't helping tell your story.

The perfect example of this is DEATH WISH II. There is a film with probably one of the most violent gang rapes I have ever seen (next to I spit on your grave) and it really does nothing for the film. Not only was one rape committed, oh no, in DW2 they had 3, 2 of which were explicitly shown, and for what, it didn't help the story DW2 to me is just shy of being an X.

MGM re-cut DW2 during the 80's and removed a majority of the rape scenes and left it as implied rather than shown, but on cable it is the un-cut version. I can't speak for everyone, but I have to agree with UK censors on Sexual Violence.

I agree.

The UK allows a lot to happen in horror film (even more than the US does at times), sexual violence can scar people with the images (without being raped themselves).

[MinionZombie]

Hence why such films should only be viewed by adults - none of that R rated "kids get in with an adult" crap, I mean what's all that about? No I know what it's about - MONEY. Sick really, the UK's got it right with an adult rating for adults only. Of course, that doesn't stop kids at home, but that's down to the parents, not the government and it shouldn't f*ck up adult's choice of viewing.

[ipotts85]

That's the thing, watching a film in your home - I'm talking about classic horror films and video nasties - will never be the same with DVD. That experience should always be first had on VHS. There's just something so ... so ... videodrome ... about that experience, something gritty, dirty and illicit about popping in a VHS from the back of your local video store that's dirty and neglected and smells of smoke slightly...ahhh VHS...those were the days, I'm a DVD whore like everyone else.

dude - you're 21. you weren't exactly active during the heyday of 'video nasties.' :dead:


Hence why such films should only be viewed by adults - none of that R rated "kids get in with an adult" crap, I mean what's all that about? No I know what it's about - MONEY. Sick really, the UK's got it right with an adult rating for adults only. Of course, that doesn't stop kids at home, but that's down to the parents, not the government and it shouldn't f*ck up adult's choice of viewing.

film ratings are just another way to appease whiny parents and politicians.

[MinionZombie]

I was born in 'the' year for video nasties - 1984, the birth of me and the birth of the video recordings act, we're tied by blood my good man :D

I'm talking about 1999, when the BBFC came under new control and the rules were finally relaxed after 15 years of the harsh VRA. It was then, when I was a teenager, that all these great horror films came flooding out when VHS was the dominant format, not DVD. DVD didn't really kick off big style until about 2001/2002.

My memories of these video nasties all revolves around renting the VHS out, dubbing it, or borrowing someone's dubbed copy and making a dub of a dub. The videos smelled smokey, they were kinda grubby, the quality was far from great, but there's that fantastic VHS texture.

These days I'm a DVD whore ... but I've grown up my whole life with VHS, I probably learnt how to use the VCR before learning to speak, I don't know of many toddlers trusted to work a VCR without putting jam on toast through the slot. :D

And in two weeks I'll be 22, so nurrrr :p

[ipotts85]

I'm talking about 1999, when the BBFC came under new control and the rules were finally relaxed after 15 years of the harsh VRA. It was then, when I was a teenager, that all these great horror films came flooding out when VHS was the dominant format, not DVD. DVD didn't really kick off big style until about 2001/2002.


ah the uk, with all of your strange BBFC's and VRA's...

[MinionZombie]

Likewise, the USA with your RIAA's and MPAA's and fear of NC17's lest the FBI take you down on the command of GWB :p