The Devils (not yet)

[wllm995]

Uncut has nothing to do with the directors intent. It just means the scene wasn't cut, like so.

OK - so what exactly does HarryLong mean by

Yes, that's a bit of an exaggeration.

, then...
What am I missing?

[knives]

What am I missing?

The joke in my post.

[MichaelB]

Hey Harry, I'm pretty sure that certain scenes were clipped if not missing wholesale from the version I saw and this was definitely NOT in the version we had screened:

Spoiler

A latter scene with Sister Jeanne masturbating with the charred tibia. In the version we saw, the scene ends just after Jeanne receives the tibia.

It's definitely not in any version, as I don't believe it was ever shot. In both the Mark Kermode documentary and the version I saw in London in November 2004 (which I believe was Russell's definitive cut - he was there, and said as much), the scene cuts precisely where you suggest.

On the other hand, the mere fact that that scene is in the film suggests that this really was the restored version, which was a positive sign - there was no charred tibia scene even in the British theatrical cut, which pre-2004 was the longest version released.

[tavernier]

Even though we're supposed to be seeing the U.S. cut tonight at the Walter Reade, Russell himself is going to be present for an intro/Q&A, so THAT should be interesting.

[HarryLong]

If you extract one of the scenes from the film; and simply add it in as an "extra" added after the movie is viewed - is that not then a "cut" version of the film that you just watched?

Unless those hallucinogens I dabbled with back in college are kicking back in, I believe that is precisely what I said.
The Rape of Christ is part of a documentary included as an extra. Ergo the presnetation of THE DEVILS cannot properly be said to be uncut on this DVD.

[MichaelB]

The Rape of Christ is part of a documentary included as an extra. Ergo the presnetation of THE DEVILS cannot properly be said to be uncut on this DVD.

The definitive version of the film is the one screened at the National Film Theatre in London in November 2004 in the presence of Ken Russell and editor Michael Bradsell, which reintegrates the footage into the film where it was originally intended to go.

That said, whether it's "uncut" is a moot point, as Russell and Bradsell were essentially trying to restore the rough-cut version that the BBFC's John Trevelyan took issue with - essentially, Russell reluctantly agreed to sacrifice the "rape of Christ" scene in exchange for Trevelyan fighting the film's corner with the other BBFC examiners (a worthwhile sacrifice, as the alternative might well have been the film getting banned outright - and since the British version was the longest in circulation until 2004, that was a pretty big deal).

But because this never got beyond the rough-cut stage, it was never properly dubbed and scored. Thankfully, there was no dialogue in that particular scene, and Bradsell candidly admitted in the Q&A that he found it relatively straightforward to improvise a soundtrack based on Peter Maxwell Davies' score and scenes of orgiastic frenzy taken from elsewhere. It certainly sounded convincing enough when I saw it.

[HarryLong]

Yes, as I thought about it after I made my post I realized that the DVD could be referred to as "uncut" as it presents the film as it was theatrically released in the UK. What it can't claim to be (and doesn't) is "restored."

[Perkins Cobb]

Even though we're supposed to be seeing the U.S. cut tonight at the Walter Reade, Russell himself is going to be present for an intro/Q&A, so THAT should be interesting.

Sold out before I could get a ticket, and supposedly with Vanessa Redgrave as a surprise guest. And for reasons I'm not clear about, the subsequent screenings in this series are going to be digital.

[J Adams]

Yes, Vanessa was there. As is often the case with celebrity Q&As, nothing of interest was said. Print is in good shape except for a few jarring reel changes.

[tavernier]

Running time of the print (it came from the Harvard Film Archive) was 107 minutes.

Russell was quite frail but he still has a sense of humor, like when he snapped at Gavin Smith for accusing him of being a lapsed Catholic.

[MichaelB]

Running time of the print (it came from the Harvard Film Archive) was 107 minutes.

Cut to ribbons, in other words. The British theatrical cut is about 111 mins, and I'd guess the restored version is 113 plus.

[SSF]

Ken Russell presenting The Devils at Bloor Cinema in Toronto.

August 29th @ 9pm.

[tavernier]

It's being touted as the "uncut" version...we'll see.

[perkizitore]

Has anyone watched the Spanish DVD yet?

[broadwayrock]

From what i've heard it's the US theatrical cut with good transfer but non anamorphic.

[HarryLong]

Even though we're supposed to be seeing the U.S. cut tonight at the Walter Reade, Russell himself is going to be present for an intro/Q&A, so THAT should be interesting.

Sold out before I could get a ticket, and supposedly with Vanessa Redgrave as a surprise guest. And for reasons I'm not clear about, the subsequent screenings in this series are going to be digital.

According to a friend in the industry (exhibition side) and supported by a post somewhere on this board, aside from very high-profile titles (I.e. CASABLANCA), older films are not having new 35mm prints struck. The theaters are being provided with digital versions, ususally sent electronically for download into the projection systems.

[Perkins Cobb]

I should clarify what I wrote: Only the first screening of The Devils was on 35mm. The rest of the Devils showings were digital. I have no idea why Warners only allowed FSLC to show the print once, unless it's part of the "conspiracy."

The remainder of the Ken Russell films were shown on film, although about half of the prints were badly faded or damaged. In general, FSLC is making compromises on digital here and there but still trying to find projectable prints whenever possible.

[Person]

From what i've heard it's the US theatrical cut with good transfer but non anamorphic.

Fuuuuuuuuck. Really? I still haven't recieved my Spainish DVD. I'm sick of still seeing 4:3 letterbox transfers in the age of iPhones.

[HarryLong]

From what i've heard it's the US theatrical cut with good transfer but non anamorphic.

The non-anamorphic part would correspond with the two bootlegs I bought. It seems that no matter the vendor the content/treatment is the same.
(This sort of reminds me of the time, back in the mid- to late-90s when I tried tracking down a decent copy of THE CHEATERS. Every single copy of the four I bought - from four different vendors - came from the same Minneapolis TV broadcast. Same "late show" opening, same commercials...)

[MichaelB]

I should clarify what I wrote: Only the first screening of The Devils was on 35mm. The rest of the Devils showings were digital. I have no idea why Warners only allowed FSLC to show the print once, unless it's part of the "conspiracy."
The remainder of the Ken Russell films were shown on film, although about half of the prints were badly faded or damaged. In general, FSLC is making compromises on digital here and there but still trying to find projectable prints whenever possible.

I doubt very much that the 2004 restoration exists on 35mm - the NFT screening that I attended was definitely from a video source of some kind (albeit probably high-definition).

[SSF]

Did anyone else besides me catch the Toronto screening last night?

I haven't seen any other version to compare the cuts, but this version ran longer than 107 minutes, and my friend who has seen the cut version, mentioned there were many scenes he's never seen before.

The print was beautiful. Completely clean.

[Fierias]

I also went, and while I have never seen any version of the film, I did hear some people on the way out of the cinema complain that it was a cut version.

Also, despite being advertised as 35mm, it was a digital projection; no higher resolution than 1080p for sure (all of the text had jaggies, and I was suffering from DLP rainbows throughout the film).

[MichaelB]

If it had these scenes:

Spoiler

1. the "rape of Christ" scene, in which the nuns pull an effigy of Christ off his cross and do unspeakable things to it, climaxing in repeated zooms into Murray Melvin's horrified face.

2. The final conversation between Dudley Sutton and Vanessa Redgrave that culminates in him handing her Father Grandier's charred thigh-bone, the clear inference being that she's going to use it as a dildo.

...then it's the unexpurgated 2004 version.

The shortest version I've seen is the UK cinema version, so I don't know about precise differences between that and the butchered US cut - Russell claims the latter had no nudity left in it at all.

And I suspect the version I saw in 2004 was also 1080p - it was definitely video, clearly higher resolution than SD, but still with jaggies that I wouldn't have expected from 2K.

[HarryLong]

Saw THE DEVILS during its initial theatrical run, so my memories of seeing the US theatrical cut are a wee bit hazy, but I'm certain there was nudity left in it - Russell may be being cheeky. I do understand from Ken Hanke (who wrote the first book on Russell based on extended interviews with the director) that the US cut is, in some sequences, made up of different takes than the UK version, which is one reason Russell terms it "butchered."

[DanV]

Has anyone watched the Spanish DVD yet?

Courtesy of an acquaintance.
http://www.criterionforum.org/forum/vie ... 77#p306777" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is the CUT version and non anamorphic indeed.
Runtime: 104' (4% PAL speedup)
Region 0