| Author | Topic: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut (Read 4,353 times) |
Psyclops Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 53
|  | ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Thread Started on Mar 4, 2006, 3:06am » | |
Hey, everyone. 
I'm sure most of you will be going to see ULTRAVIOLET this weekend. I just got back from a showing here in Los Angeles and I figured I'd start a thread discussing the various differences between the cut that was screened last February, which I had the opportunity to see, and the finished product. Some of the changes are pretty insignificant while other scenes changed the way the film was structured. I'll list as many as I can remember either way. The rough cut of the movie ran about two hours in length while this new version clocks in at 88 minutes. There will be spoilers contained within so please tread carefully.
The Beginning
The opening narration is a bit different in the finished version. In the rough cut, Violet explains that "Hemophagia" was an aberration that spread like wildfire, turning humans into vampires but not the kind you've come to expect. The Hemophages would become stronger and faster than normal humans but they wouldn't feed on blood. They did grow fangs and constant blood transfusions were required to keep themselves alive, but their lifespan would also be significantly shortened once they became infected. Death would come ten years from the point of infection for anyone who contracted HPV.
Various Bits
When we were first introduced to Violet it was mentioned that she was living in the last few days of her life. I believe she had a little over 24 hours before she was supposed to expire.
The scene where the detectives are investigating the attack on the blood lab had a bit more dialogue, mostly a few lines where a seasoned cop berates a younger officer for using the term "vampires" to describe the Hemophages.
I don't recall there being an electrical discharge when the swords or various items are pulled out of the dimensional pockets (flat space). The shot where the cop pulls out a sword from the chest of a dead Hemophage and then slides it back in looked and sounded nastier in the rough cut without all the sound and visual effects.
There was also a few more snippets of dialogue in the scene where Violet, posing as the courier, is trying to gain access to the weapon developed by the humans. We see her clothes change into the color of whatever room she's in and when asked by one of the lab technicians if she has any more questions, she replies, "What color is the next room?"
The fight that takes place after Violet's cover is blown was originally extended. The sound effects of bones breaking and people screaming in pain are missing. Also missing is a scene where Violet punches a guard who is wearing the translucent body armor. Her first hit does nothing so he taps his chest and says, "Shatterproof armor, bitch."
Violet responds by hitting him harder and knocking him backwards, shattering his chestplate.
There's also some dialogue missing from the guards who slide into the room with the stun batons. Something along the lines of "Wait! She's armed!", followed by Violet pulling the trigger but having no ammo left, then the guards get all confident and rush her. That's when she disassembles the rifle and beats them with the pieces. Also, this fight was the most heavily edited. It didn't flow as well without the dialogue and the bits that were missing.
Several characters including the lab tech/government guy who speaks to Violet as she's exiting the facility with the weapon as well as the blonde motorcycle courier had their voices dubbed.
The motorcycle chase up the building included a scene where we see a room full of office employees inside get shot up by the stray fire of the helicopter guns.
When Violet opens the package to reveal Six, he is originally seen lying in a pool of bubbling water, not the bright blue animated static that you see now.
Daxus had a longer introduction with more dialogue. We learned that he's got a serious problem with germs. He wears a pin striped suit that goes beyond the sleeves to cover his shoes and hands. You see an entourage of people sanitizing everything for him while he is being briefed about the theft of his weapon by one of his underlings.
When Violet snatches Six and tries to make it out of the building, she is chased up the stairwell by a few vampires. One of them yells out, "I'm gonna kill you with my bare hands!", so Violet leans over the railing with her gun and shoots his hand off right at the wrist. I loved this scene. That same Hemophage is seen later in the mausoleum fight with Nerva and his men, cradling his bloody stump and looking mighty pissed at Violet.
There is a small scene missing where Nerva makes a quick deal on the phone with the Blood Chinois, the Asian gangsters from the rooftop scene, to corner Violet before she can escape with Six. That's why they suddenly appear out of nowhere when she reaches the top of the building.
The scene where Daxus and his soldiers storm the level where the Hemophages are shooting out the lights was longer. When it goes dark, we see the entire room lit only by the flashes of gunfire (very similar to the opening of EQ) as Nerva and his goons surround each soldier and pump them full of bullets. This goes on for a minute, getting all dark and quiet between kills, before Daxus quietly calls out to his troops and the emergency lights go up to reveal them all scattered and shot to death.
The scene where Daxus picks up the coffee showed a bit more of his hands shaking, making him seem less confident and the precision of his kills all the more surprising.
In one scene, Six asks Violet if she has teeth like a vampire. She opens her mouth to reveal fangs and says that she has to grind them down or they grow back.
When Six "dies" in the park, his body was sprayed with foam and taken away by the guys in the funky hazmat suits.
The Flashback
Here's the big one. There were several flashbacks towards the end of the movie. It happens right after Garth brings her back from the dead if I'm not mistaken, and it mostly shows Violet as a young nurse and her husband, the doctor (Ricardo Mamood). Violet is played by another actress, one who looks similar to Milla Jovovich. During the opening montage at the start of the film we see glimpses of this woman in a lab being poked and prodded by scientists, looking very miserable and stripped of her dignity. This is when we discover that the woman is actually Violet from ten years ago and we see how she contracted the virus.
A disheveled looking Hemophage enters the hospital room where a very pregnant Violet and her husband are having a quiet moment. The vampire is trying to steal some blood and gets into a scuffle with the husband before being shot and killed by security. The blood splatters and hits Violet in the face, getting in her eye and pretty much altering the course of her life forever. I do recall a scene where the husband is arguing with some government guys and asking to see his wife, then discovering that their baby was either terminated or lost to the disease. I'm pretty sure I didn't dream that last part up but I swear it's the only scene not stored in my memory banks.
We then cut back to the present. After she leaves Garth on the night of her resurrection, she goes to see her husband. She doesn't actually meet him, just watches him quietly from a balcony outside a fancy restaurant or concert hall, my memory is bit fuzzy on the details... anyway, she sees that he now has a lovely new wife and some children. He smiles at his young daughter and touches her face when a tear drop hits his hand. He looks up but Violet is already gone.
The Ending
The guard on the rooftop that is seen at the very end of the trailer actually gets decapitated in the original cut.
Violet storming enemy HQ was also extended a bit. In the scene where Violet starts attacking that second wave of soldiers during the library fight, she stabs one of them in the balls with her gun-blade and flips him backwards (that one got a great crowd reaction).
The "white room" fight also had a little injection of humor with that last guard going all crazy and doing the flip in the air, which was hilarious, and Violet looking up at him confused and mouthing the words, "What the fuck?", before killing him off.
The fight with the flaming swords had a much better build up. As soon as the room gets dark, Daxus begins taunting Violet. We hear the sound of a sword slicing and Violet screams out in pain.
Daxus: "Oh, come on. That wasn't so bad."
We hear another attack followed by a scream.
Daxus: "Okay. That was pretty bad."
That's when she starts creating the sparks to ignite the sword.
That was pretty much it. Many of the problems that I had with the original cut were actually fixed with the removal of certain scenes while the action suffered a bit with the toned down violence. The film didn't have very much blood other than a hand being shot off or Violet's fingers getting sliced, but I'm sure this was shooting for an R-rating.
Also, the soft lens effect that makes everything in the film appear slightly blurred was not used in the version that was screened last year. The CGI was incomplete but the finished effects make the film look dark and muddy.
| |
|
Wraith Grammaton Cleric
    member is offline
![[avatar] [avatar]](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/clericwraith/ULTRA053.jpg)
Resident Cartoon Nut
Joined: Apr 2005 Gender: Male  Posts: 558
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #1 on Mar 4, 2006, 2:00pm » | |
My gosh, that sounds so much better than I saw last night. F***in studio, I can see why Wimmer's so mad.
|
|
|
kalaong Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Sept 2005 Posts: 23
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #2 on Mar 4, 2006, 11:24pm » | |
Yeah, that sounds a lot more like the novelization. Half an hour of footage gone-and it seems some great stuff was lost.
|
Love is chemistry, sex is physics, but kinkiness requires engineering. -- Washu Hakubi |
|
Wraith Grammaton Cleric
    member is offline
![[avatar] [avatar]](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/clericwraith/ULTRA053.jpg)
Resident Cartoon Nut
Joined: Apr 2005 Gender: Male  Posts: 558
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #3 on Mar 4, 2006, 11:28pm » | |
I like how she asks what color the next room is. It not only gives reason to the whole color-changing thing, it's also funny.
|
|
|
Noko27 Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #4 on Mar 5, 2006, 7:48pm » | |
I wonder if they'll have the original version put back together for the DVD release or if the keep the theatre version. Obviously things were toned down to give the movie a PG-13 rating, which was purely a money grab to get all the younger teens intot he movie. Sorry, but i think they should have kept the original version and gave it an R rating, then maybe more people would enjoy it and recomend the film.
| |
|
etuy Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #5 on Mar 5, 2006, 9:10pm » | |
Man I'm begging to see a director's cut of ultraviolet. I just watched it and kept thinking - "man why does it feel like this movie is missing 30 mintues?" Honestly I was a bit disappointed because of that. but if they added in even just half of what Psyclops wrote, i think it would be a far better film. Critics are saying what a crap director wimmer is - but i don't think it's his fault. Just comes to show studios can kill they own movies...
| |
|
Cleric Dogbert Grammaton Cleric
    member is offline
![[avatar] [avatar]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/avatars/linux.gif)
![[aim] [aim]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/aim.gif)
Joined: Jun 2004 Gender: Male  Posts: 320 Location: The Underground
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #6 on Mar 6, 2006, 1:51am » | |
Fucking suits...they need to give the audience a chance to see the movie as the director wanted it...
but then these are the same people who think that all of the audience members are going to steal the movie and put it on BitTorrent..
I hope there is a director's cut.
|
"A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth having."
|
|
CGenro Resistance Member
  member is offline
![[msn] [msn]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/msn.gif)
Joined: Mar 2006 Gender: Male  Posts: 53 Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #7 on Mar 6, 2006, 2:17am » | |
I was hugely disappointed with this film but I saw so much potential. I was disappointed with the confusing storyline which made little sense and the over edited fight scenes. But by reading about the original cut both of my problems with the film would never have been there.
I really hope that this original cut is released as I find it very hard to support a film that was taken from the director/writer and edited into a huge mess.
I really don`t understand why Wimmer would leave his name of this film unless by doing so he`s given free reign to release his version on DVD.
| |
|
jackmode Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #8 on Mar 6, 2006, 2:44am » | |
i understood the plot points before even walking into the movie....so everything made sense to me.......
......so cgenro....are you saying......had those elements of the story been left in you would have enjoyed the film much more?
| |
|
CGenro Resistance Member
  member is offline
![[msn] [msn]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/msn.gif)
Joined: Mar 2006 Gender: Male  Posts: 53 Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #9 on Mar 6, 2006, 3:15am » | |
Quote: ......so cgenro....are you saying......had those elements of the story been left in you would have enjoyed the film much more? |
|
Yes very much so. In the version we are given we have no time to make any connection with Violet as we are basically given a very basic backstory which is confusing and then it`s on with the action. It seems as though the studio decided to cut any scenes that had any real story elements and just have a movie with action scenes.
The problem with this is a movie needs a plot and we really were never given one of any merit. It would have been cool to know about the lifespan of someone affected with the virus and that Violet`s time was running out. It makes the quest to cure herself much more suspenseful. Also the flashback scene that was cut with her husband and the baby to me is so important.
Basically what I`m saying is we the audience need to care about Violet and what she is doing or the whole point of the film is lost.
| |
|
jackmode Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #10 on Mar 6, 2006, 3:34am » | |
i agree with you 100 percent......
.......imma ask you one more question.......do you understand how someone who DOES KNOW....that violets time is running out....could get the same suspense.....
EVEN THO....its been cut from the film.....
.....and can you understand....how someone who knows about those flashback scenes COULD feel for violet......
i sure hope so...because i fall in this catagory......the film the studio released.....is not kurts story......
......im adding the stuff that studio cut and the stuff the studio left in......
......and when i do that.....im getting the whole story.....sure...the studio cut the story up.....
BUT I HAVE ALL OF IT.......unfortunatly.....it wasent all on the screen......people wont get whats going on because of it......
but those who do get and fully understand the whole story.......and can live with having to get half-the story from somewhere else.....
.....might just love the movie......
.....i guess im not judging the movie by what i saw on the screen.....
.....im judging the movie by what i saw on the screen....AND some things that WERNT on the screen.....
......and...i guess my ability to do that.......makes me LOVE this film .....
.....because if you take the movie....and plug-in the parts that were missing.....you basicly have kurts film......
.......kurts film exsists in my mind....because i added the things taken from the film...to the film i saw on the screen.........the film that shows up on the big screen is the studios film.....
.....i dont know if you can understand what im saying.....or what i mean.....i MAY not be able to get my point across.....
......and im sad if im the only person that can feel this way....before a hopefully directors cut dvd comes out....
the film that we see on the big screen is good.......the film we see on the big screen....plus the things we dont see....makes this film truly great in my mind........
.....and its a damn shame that most people wont get the full story untill a like i said...hopefully directors cut dvd is released.....
| |
|
jackmode Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #11 on Mar 6, 2006, 3:51am » | |
psyclops...if your still around....was the "suicide contemplating: scene any longer?....
. ....because it would be a lil more "down" feeling if she actually put it too her head
| |
|
Psyclops Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 53
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #12 on Mar 6, 2006, 4:14am » | |
That scene wasn't extended but it does come after she sees her husband with his new family.
I'd like to mention a few things about the deleted flashback sequences. First, I don't have a problem with a movie developing a strong emotional connection to it's characters, especially in an action film. I actually welcome a little heart and melodrama in these kinds of movies because it gives the characters and situations a little more depth, raising the stakes and giving you a personal investment in these people on screen. The problem with those deleted moments in UV is that they didn't work the way they were supposed to.
This wasn't just my opinion, but opinions shared by a few of the audience members who I chatted up after that test screening (not including the group of friends who were with me). I know that doesn't count for an entire theater full of 400 people, but when more than one person starts to identify a similar problem then it tells you something about how those scenes will play to an audience. Those scenes just did not fit with the overall style and structure of this movie, it's a live action cartoon up until those moments and they honestly felt forced and silly in context. Plus, Kurt decided to cast different actors for the lead roles in the flashbacks. That was just too odd to overlook and I couldn't understand why this was done at the time.
He told me later that it used to be a Hollywood tradition to cast different actors in flashback, like "Raging Bull", and that's why he decided on doing this. I can understand his point of view but I honestly feel that it just didn't work for this movie.
I hope you do get to see those moments on DVD so that you can judge for yourself.
| |
|
jackmode Guest
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #13 on Mar 6, 2006, 4:32am » | |
"That scene wasn't extended but it does come after she sees her husband with his new family."
it came right after that scene.......than yeai liked the scene a lot at first......but i think i like it much more now
| |
|
Wraith Grammaton Cleric
    member is offline
![[avatar] [avatar]](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y10/clericwraith/ULTRA053.jpg)
Resident Cartoon Nut
Joined: Apr 2005 Gender: Male  Posts: 558
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #14 on Mar 7, 2006, 4:55pm » | |
Since there was a rough cut shown, i think it wouldn't be too hard to just update the CGI for it and release. I just hope they do it.
|
|
|
kalaong Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Sept 2005 Posts: 23
| |
eqextremist Sense Offender
 member is offline
Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 9
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #16 on Mar 8, 2006, 1:59am » | |
By your post Psyclops: "I'm pretty sure I didn't dream that last part up but I swear it's the only scene not stored in my memory banks."
Well, allow me refresh it in detail 'cause I read the script and saw these scenes in one of the two test screenings. There are 3 flashbacks: 1) in the hospital where she gets infected, 2) In the health or government-run quarantine facility, where husband makes an awful discovery and 3) 10 years with new wife (this one was shot in Shanghai where the other two in Hong Kong):
This is from my other posts in the IMDb but specifically, and in detail, talks about these flashbacks:
"... Since you brought up Violet's backstory and scenes cut out, here is some info or description of a crucial series of scenes that were cut out and that could have helped (along all the other cut-out scenes) tell a better story and develop sympathy for its characters. Not only, I read the script but also saw these scenes at test screenings.
The tattoos in her fingers (which her husband had as well) represent "Woman, Comrade, lover, Mother. (I think I got that right)
At the on-set of the outbreak we learn that she is a nurse working at a hospital (played by Ida Martin who looks uncannily similar to a younger Milla). Although not explicit, we assume that at this job is how she met and ultimately married her husband. He is a doctor working at a hospital. In their first scene she reveals to him that she's pregnant. As this happens, and they have a happy and intimate moment, a hemophage (played by Mike Smith - also stunt director) traspasses into hospital property, gets into SJS office and bumps into Violet Song jat Shariff and her husband, Song jat Shariff (played by Ricardo Mamood). The hemophage goes to a cabinet where there is safe-blood for transplants. V's husband tries to stop him and that where the hemophage - much stronger than V's husband - body-slams him and at a point is choking him with his hands. As this happens V is in shock and cannot even move although SJS tries to speak and asks her for the tray with tranquilizers in order to give the hemophage a shot. In that moment, and as SJS is losing conscience and security guard (played by Mark Hicks) enters SJS office and shoots the hemophage dead. The blood from hemophage gets splattered onto V's eyes, nose, mouths (all mucose points of entry) and the rest of her face. No blood gets to SJS because of the angle in which the hemophage got shot. That's how she gets infected.
In the version cut for release that everyone saw we only see about 2 seconds of this, where SJS is shown being choked and we see a woman dressed in a nurse white inform with her hands full of blood, and a narration where Milla says something along the lines of they killed my husband and took my baby..." As you see, very different than what was actually shot or written.
In another ulterior scene, we see very distraught SJS, a few months later, at a goverment-run health facility arguing with high ranking woman officer because they have not allowed him to see her in a few months. There are bodies in beds across a huge bullet-proof glass. Violet is laying there and she looks dead - although she is in a induced coma. Through this hot-headed and ultimately emotional argument were SJS breaks down in tears we learn that V is in a coma and that the authorities euthanized the baby with a drug named Fentanil. SJS desperately and uselessly tries to break the glass and a horde of guards takes him away.
On another scene later on (10 years have passed) and we see an older and gray-haired SJS waiting a lobby where he meets his new wife and has one or two kids. Violet (already the Violet we know) is looking at him from a balcony upstairs. As she cries a tear, this drops and falls on SJS hand, which stills has those tattoos. SJS looks up to see where the drop comes from but V is gone before he sees anything.
Now, I hope this is in the book by Navarro. The above scenes with Violet past story (which is only about 4 or 5 minutes of screentime) sheds some light and helps develop character and sympathy for what V's going through, but also, the reason why she is so conflicted about abandoning and taking care of Six, all at the same time. Also why she wants revenge and why is so afraid of true love or commitment like the one offered or declared by Garth (Fichtner). Can you imagine how much more about V and other characters (like Daxus when he is young) and story and plot could have been told better and how much better this movie could have been if all the other stuff (maybe 30 more minutes apart from the flashbacks) would've remained?
What were they thinking at SG? It beats me. They should chop someone's fingers..."
| |
|
eqextremist Sense Offender
 member is offline
Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 9
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #17 on Mar 8, 2006, 2:08am » | |
By your post Psyclops: "Plus, Kurt decided to cast different actors for the lead roles in the flashbacks. That was just too odd to overlook and I couldn't understand why this was done at the time."
NO. Only Violet had a different actress in the flashbacks (Ida Martin). The husband was the same actor (Ricardo Mamood) in the flashbacks and later in the present, looking older.
When I saw the scenes they look a bit too realistic to me (the guy facing those dire news, losing his family and crying over his baby's death looked and felt very real and very heartbreaking. So much that it looked from a different genre movie. There was also good, visceral acting there, which is absent in the rest of the film due to style. That's why it maybe looked foreign to the entire style of the film.
| |
|
Psyclops Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 53
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #18 on Mar 8, 2006, 2:15am » | |
I don't remember the part with the guards taking the husband away but it does sound about right. What did you think of those scenes? Personally, I felt that they didn't work the way they were supposed to. The footage was still rough but the way those scenes played out didn't seem nearly as dramatic as the way you described them, specifically the one where V gets infected.
Also, the casting of different actors really threw me off. I understood it was Violet but I just didn't get the reasoning behind it (I originally thought it was done to demonstrate how the virus physically changes a person in the span of a decade). I did like the scene where Violet is watching her husband from the balcony and the way the little girl looks up when the tear drop falls on her father's hand was beautifully shot. Again, it was one of those moments that worked very well but just didn't fit with the rest of the movie, which was really just a live action cartoon up until that point.
| |
|
Psyclops Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 53
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #19 on Mar 8, 2006, 2:17am » | |
The second actor I was referring to was the younger Daxus.
ADDED:
I guess you posted again while I was making out my reply. You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned that it felt foreign compared to the rest of the movie.
| |
|
JenGe Evidentiary Storage Officer
     member is offline
![[avatar] [avatar]](http://www.equilibriumfans.com/TetragrammatonAni.gif)
"Its just a vestigial word for a feeling you've never felt."
![[homepage] [homepage]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif) Joined: Mar 2003 Posts: 8,505 Location: Surfing the Net
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #20 on Mar 8, 2006, 2:21am » | |
================SPOILER!!!================
Quote:The second actor I was referring to was the younger Daxus.
|
|
Since the younger Daxus is in the film I think he works just fine. He is in the opening explination of this world and at the time we are not to know that it is him.
|
"We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented." - Truman Show ![[image] [image]](http://equilibriumfans.com/sig3-green.JPG) |
|
CGenro Resistance Member
  member is offline
![[msn] [msn]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/msn.gif)
Joined: Mar 2006 Gender: Male  Posts: 53 Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #21 on Mar 8, 2006, 8:59pm » | |
all these scenes really needed to stay in the film. If these were included all my problems with the film would have been resolved.
It doesn`t matter to me if they felt foreign or not. They are needed to show why Violet is who she is. Also Wimmer may have wanted the scenes to feel different because they occured in the past.
| |
|
billykid Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Mar 2006 Posts: 42
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #22 on Mar 8, 2006, 9:34pm » | |
"Again, it was one of those moments that worked very well but just didn't fit with the rest of the movie, which was really just a live action cartoon up until that point. "
No offense, but I strongly disagree.
I saw the cut version and unlike what I al ot of people are saying here, it seems to me that Kurt was aiming for a tone similar to Equilibrium. I didn't see any traces of purposely making things "cheesy" like people are describing.
The scenes NEEDED to be in the film regardless of opinion if they worked or not for you. The current version of the film does not fully work story-wise. And I am even disagreeing this "live action cartoon" comment. It sounds as if you wanted a happy, wink at the audience, kind of movie and when it had these serious scenes, you don't want those in that type of a film which the film wasn't.
If this was a test screening you went to, I wouldn't put it past the fact that your thoughts were unfortunately shared by others which ended up making the suits want to cut those scenes. I don't find it a coincidence that you are complaining about them and those scenes got removed.
If that is the case, this gives me more reason why I hate the idea of test screenings. I know you are expressing your opinion, but it isn't a fact and I wouldn't be surprised if I totally disagree with you when I, or if I, ever get to see them myself.
We NEED this cut of the film or whatever Kurt's final cut of the film is on DVD. The current version shows promise, especially in Kurt's unique visual voice, but obviously the film has been butchered and the result is something that can easily be considered cheesy since so much of the back story and character development is gone.
| |
|
Psyclops Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Feb 2005 Posts: 53
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #23 on Mar 8, 2006, 11:31pm » | |
Quote:| The current version of the film does not fully work story-wise. And I am even disagreeing this "live action cartoon" comment. It sounds as if you wanted a happy, wink at the audience, kind of movie and when it had these serious scenes, you don't want those in that type of a film which the film wasn't. |
|
That's not how I felt at all. I would have preferred it if the movie went in a more serious minded direction and was closer to what Wimmer did in EQUILIBRIUM. I know you can't know this for a fact since you weren't there but it seemed pretty obvious that Wimmer intended to make the film more of a pulpy comic book, a tone that is kept intact even in the studio cut. There was even more humor in it that was removed that would have just pushed it a little further over-the-top.
The above mentioned scenes did flesh out Violet's character a bit more but they did feel out of place with the style and tone that Wimmer had already created from the beginning. If the movie had a little more drama in between the visual punches then it would make sense to expand on those elements if they already existed, but they didn't. The movie really did play out like a live-action cartoon up until that point with the exception of the "fireworks" scene, which had the only true bit of drama that actually worked very well on screen. Even in it's rough form, it seemed that the entire plot was simply designed to connect the wildest action sequences Wimmer could dream up.
It was that imagination and ambition that kept me from completely hating the movie. I even mention in my original test screening review that the things that work are almost too good and feel like they belong to a better movie. I was talking about the movie you were hoping to see, something darker and more dramatic in tone than what we ended up with.
| |
|
CGenro Resistance Member
  member is offline
![[msn] [msn]](http://s2.images.proboards.com/msn.gif)
Joined: Mar 2006 Gender: Male  Posts: 53 Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #24 on Mar 9, 2006, 1:13am » | |
yeah I agree that Winner was going for more of an over the top comic film. Ultraviolet is the polar opposite of Equilibrium in terms of tone.
Where Equilibrium focused more on plot, dark atmosphere, and keeping the action to a minnimum. Ultraviolet is bright, in your face and more about the flashy action scenes.
I love both styles and enjoyed both films immensly even though UV is butchered.
| |
|
jackmode211 Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 33
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #25 on Mar 9, 2006, 3:01am » | |
i like the bright comic book feel more than EQ's dark cold future.....
.....mostly because its not done often...hardly ever in futuristic films i see...
.....the future is alsways dark...its nice to see a change.....
.....its also nice to see a movie so unapologetilcy over the top....
theres no way...anybody could ever kill 700 soldiers on thier own turf......does that stop violet....
....HAH......its obvious violet is her own worst enemy....only when she gives up can she be taken down....
....and i think its about damn time someone gave me this charecter.....it turned out to be kurt wimmer......and for that i have to thank him....
| |
|
Coolhand Grammaton Cleric
    member is offline
If you can read this, the Avatar fell off...
Joined: May 2003 Gender: Male  Posts: 306 Location: UK
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #26 on Mar 9, 2006, 3:47am » | |
What confuses me about the "PG-13" edits, (as opposed to the charactor/plot edits which I can't comment on coz I havent seen the movie), is that ScreenGems also put out the gore-fest Underworld:Evolution only a few months before UV. SO they've obviously got no problem with R rated vampire action movies, yet they cut the living soul out of the one that almost certainly (I have not yet SEEN UV, only the trailers, and clips) has BETTER action and would suffer MORE from the edits, and yet was aimed at the SAME market demographic.
How do these fools get employed in the first place?
|
"What's really gonna bake your noodle later on is, would you still have broken it if I hadn't said anything?"
|
|
jackmode211 Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Jan 2006 Posts: 33
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #27 on Mar 9, 2006, 4:00am » | |
it seems like screen gems saw something that may not have been marketable......
.....which in my eyes means they saw something DIFFRENT.....
....then took the film away from kurt......made screen gems's ultraviolet strictly to make the most money possible....
.....but thats just my theory.....
| |
|
billykid Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Mar 2006 Posts: 42
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #28 on Mar 9, 2006, 9:15am » | |
"The movie really did play out like a live-action cartoon up until that point with the exception of the "fireworks" scene, which had the only true bit of drama that actually worked very well on screen."
You see, right there I don't agree that was the only dramatic scene that worked. The scene where Violet lets Six go and walks away and starts regretting on letting go was effective. That was serious, it was not played for laughs. It would have had a far greater effect had the full cut been shown because obviously a lot of development was gone.
I am holding judgment until I see those scenes for myself because even in it's official current state, I disagree with your assessment on the film that it was entirely played for camp.
"Even in it's rough form, it seemed that the entire plot was simply designed to connect the wildest action sequences Wimmer could dream up."
It was obvious to me, on the cut version, when I was watching the film that Ultraviolet was mostly a chase film.
The impression that I got however from watching the cut version was that a lot of it comes across cheesy since so much of the development is gone. For example, the, "Why don't you let anyone in?" scene. Plus the plot is virtually glided almost entirely over thanks to all the cuts. From what you wrote on your notes, none of this would have been a problem had that cut been shown. It makes total sense when I read that and see what it was trying to do.
In any case, that cut showed be shown because the current version is butchered and it sure feels like it. It really displays why test screenings are probably the worst thing that could happen to cinematic artist.
| |
|
kalaong Resistance Member
  member is offline
Joined: Sept 2005 Posts: 23
|  | Re: ULTRAVIOLET: Rough Cut vs. Studio Cut « Reply #29 on Mar 12, 2006, 2:05pm » | |
Remember! We might just be able to do something about it!
|
Love is chemistry, sex is physics, but kinkiness requires engineering. -- Washu Hakubi |
| |
|