Member makone Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 i was just watching some on youtube , and i was wondering if warners were so excited about bruce lee ,why did they cut out almost all his dialogue scenes. once on the island its more about john saxon than bruce lee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member AlbertV Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 One of the most well known deleted scenes is Bruce talking to the Abbot of Shaolin after his fight against Sammo Hung in the opening. Bruce gives a philosophical take on martial arts and when it was first released, Warner Bros. felt it may have been too much for the fans to understand Lee's philosophy of martial arts. However, it was restored in the 25th Anniversary edition of the film, where after the fight, it goes to the dialogue between Lee and the abbot followed by the introduction of Braithwaite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Son Of A Gun Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 Many reasons. They knew people would love his fight scenes but they weren't too sure how people would take to him just talking, and in a strong cantonese accent. He was basically unknown in the west at this point so they couldn't take the risk. Plus his character was more mysterious if you didn't hear him say too much. And obviously the monk scene would have just slowed down the pace of the movie and wouldn't have made much sense to audiences who at that time didn't really know much about Kung Fu, let alone Bruce Lee and his Jeet Kune Do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member makone Posted January 26, 2011 Author Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 your right but that scene was always available in the hong kong print , i`m talking about the scene with the old man , the scenes with betty chung , these scenes would have given more depth to the characters imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Son Of A Gun Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 Maybe they didn't want it to have more depth. They wanted to make a profit. They wanted the film the way they wanted it. It's useless trying to speculate on why they did or didn't do something. For one thing it would have made the film too long. 'lol Plus, we don't know what the dialogue was like in those deleted parts. It could have been rubbish. You can't say that they would have given more depth to the characters when you haven't heard the dialogue. Agreed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member shukocarl Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 Maybe they didn't want it to have more depth. They wanted to make a profit. They wanted the film the way they wanted it. It's useless trying to speculate on why they did or didn't do something. For one thing it would have made the film too long. 'lol Plus, we don't know what the dialogue was like in those deleted parts. It could have been rubbish. You can't say that they would have given more depth to the characters when you haven't heard the dialogue. Agreed? Actually it is known what was going to be said in those scenes...just read the novelisation by Mike Roote. If those words weren't the actual lines then they were something close to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Son Of A Gun Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 I didn't know about that. So the bits of those dialogue scenes that weren't used eventually, did they run for very long? I thought they just cut out some little parts of the dialogue that weren't necessary. They didn't cut out sub plots or anything like that, did they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member makone Posted January 26, 2011 Author Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 i agree that running time was probably an issue and obviously they made the movie they wanted. to me bruce and betty discussing what he is going to do or what info she can give him is more important to the story than seeing a glimpse of ahna capri s breast and hearing how much john saxon really belongs there.just my oppinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member sdog2006 Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 I didn't know about that. So the bits of those dialogue scenes that weren't used eventually, did they run for very long? I thought they just cut out some little parts of the dialogue that weren't necessary. They didn't cut out sub plots or anything like that, did they? The scene used in Game of Death II where Bruce is speaking to Betty Chung should have been left in. She tells him about Roper "joining" Han because she saw them walking through his museum and the opium den. Lee looks very angy at the end of that scene and this is also the reason he stares daggers at Roper on the tournament field before everything kicks off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Son Of A Gun Posted January 26, 2011 Member Share Posted January 26, 2011 "I didn't know that" I would include a sound byte from ETD here, but I wont. I wonder if Bruce and Betty ever looped(ADR) that scene or if it was never in the cut or atall. Would be good to see on a future dvd release. Like that's gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Omni Dragon Posted January 28, 2011 Member Share Posted January 28, 2011 i was just watching some on youtube , and i was wondering if warners were so excited about bruce lee ,why did they cut out almost all his dialogue scenes. once on the island its more about john saxon than bruce lee. Just look at the trailers "Roper, Williams & Lee" is than an order? Making sure their white actor is first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Son Of A Gun Posted January 28, 2011 Member Share Posted January 28, 2011 Or....because John Saxon was the better known of the three. The trailer plus the suspected audience's reaction in 1973. Starring - Bruce Lee!!! "Who?" and Jim Kelly! "huh?" with John Saxon! "Ahhhhhh, I know him!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member The Dragon Posted January 28, 2011 Member Share Posted January 28, 2011 Or....because John Saxon was the better known of the three. The trailer plus the suspected audience's reaction in 1973. Starring - Bruce Lee!!! "Who?" and Jim Kelly! "huh?" with John Saxon! "Ahhhhhh, I know him!" Lmao!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.