Did Celestial ever restore CHINATOWN KID?

[Killer Meteor]

They offer an HD transfer in their catalogue, but don't specify the length. The SD transfer of the shorter version must be 10 years old now. Is there a version in their Itunes range?

[Lady Jin Szu-Yi]

Re: iTunes. Not yet.  (U.S.A. anyway) cannot find the link to the titles Celestial has on their site. 

 

Sorry, I don't know about the rest. 

 

[reason108]

I am just assuming here...

But, if the official release is the different edit (HK version?) instead of the international version then odds are that the HK version will be what we see in the future. Not for sure that Celestial would have a copy of the international version as there is some confusion about when/why it was made. Was Chang Cheh told to "tone it down" due to new censorship laws; thus, a re-shoot of the film`s ending was done? Or, was this an edited version for either certain territories with stricter censorship or is this an "television" version cause Shaws were winding down from film and entering the world of television? It is know that some of their films did appear on television in HK during either the early to mid 1980`s but were soon pulled due to piracy concerns. But, the question is: were the television copies made from the actual film negatives, meaning the originals were butchered or a copy (from the original negative) then edits made on that? If you thought that you would not be going back to theatrical and the future was television....what would you do? Home video was not then what it is now, either. It would be worth it if Celestial bothered to look for some of these uncut Shaws if they have them. But, did Sir RunRun already do the damage before Celestial even bought them? It seemed that Celestial was surprised about the international version when they received some backlash when the Chinatown Kid was officially released by them. That would imply that they only knew of the censored(?) version. And, after watching that recent horrible footage of the run-down Shaws studio on youtube with cans of film just sitting on the ground, exposed to the elements, it might make you stop and wonder. 

[Tex Killer]

Bit off-topic but how is quality of red sun/pan media bootleg? Desert island classics look sth like 3rd-4th generation vhs copy which is a real shame as violent version is ace.

 

[reason108]

I originally had this one:

 

 

Then bought this one:

 

 

Here is how the "Special Uncut Edition" looks:

 

 

 

[Killer Meteor]

I am just assuming here...

But, if the official release is the different edit (HK version?) instead of the international version then odds are that the HK version will be what we see in the future. Not for sure that Celestial would have a copy of the international version as there is some confusion about when/why it was made. Was Chang Cheh told to "tone it down" due to new censorship laws; thus, a re-shoot of the film`s ending was done? Or, was this an edited version for either certain territories with stricter censorship or is this an "television" version cause Shaws were winding down from film and entering the world of television? It is know that some of their films did appear on television in HK during either the early to mid 1980`s but were soon pulled due to piracy concerns. But, the question is: were the television copies made from the actual film negatives, meaning the originals were butchered or a copy (from the original negative) then edits made on that? If you thought that you would not be going back to theatrical and the future was television....what would you do? Home video was not then what it is now, either. It would be worth it if Celestial bothered to look for some of these uncut Shaws if they have them. But, did Sir RunRun already do the damage before Celestial even bought them? It seemed that Celestial was surprised about the international version when they received some backlash when the Chinatown Kid was officially released by them. That would imply that they only knew of the censored(?) version. And, after watching that recent horrible footage of the run-down Shaws studio on youtube with cans of film just sitting on the ground, exposed to the elements, it might make you stop and wonder. 

My suspicion is that it's a version for Taiwan or Singapore, a'la the version of Game of Death released by Megastar, which had a "arrested by police" finale, but I could be wrong. It could even be a reissue. 

 

Yes, survival of HK films is a bit of a game of chance. Fortune Star only released to DVD shorter reissues of The Big Boss, Man Called Tiger and New Fist Of Fury for example. It could well be theatrical prints survive but the companies don't want to use these because of the burnt in subs.

 

Human Lanterns is an interesting one. The initial Celestial restoration was heavily cut, but two years later they restored a different, longer print.

[reason108]

 

My suspicion is that it's a version for Taiwan or Singapore, a'la the version of Game of Death released by Megastar, which had a "arrested by police" finale, but I could be wrong. It could even be a reissue. 

 

Yes, survival of HK films is a bit of a game of chance. Fortune Star only released to DVD shorter reissues of The Big Boss, Man Called Tiger and New Fist Of Fury for example. It could well be theatrical prints survive but the companies don't want to use these because of the burnt in subs.

 

Human Lanterns is an interesting one. The initial Celestial restoration was heavily cut, but two years later they restored a different, longer print.

 

 

Regarding that, someone posted before that Image Entertainment got that extended print from another source than Celestial. I have no idea if that is true or not. Or maybe they took what Celestial gave them and just added in the missing scenes. But, this does bring up the issue that we are still getting edited prints of some of these films with no intention of providing uncut material. Avenging Eagle is still missing that minute. 

 

Why does Asian cinema have to be so difficult? If there is an uncut version then release it. It would be that easy. Don't remix the soundtrack and add bird sounds, etc. Just give us the damn movie the way it was intended. Also, where are all the directors standing up for their past works? I know some of them are either really old now or dead, but no one complained when they were alive about how their films had been treated by shitty remastering or censorship. Of course, the irony is that Celestial offer beautiful looking prints with missing/censored scenes and Fortune Star offer (mostly) uncut/extended films with horrible looking upscales. 

[KUNG FU BOB]

I am just assuming here...

But, if the official release is the different edit (HK version?) instead of the international version then odds are that the HK version will be what we see in the future. Not for sure that Celestial would have a copy of the international version as there is some confusion about when/why it was made. Was Chang Cheh told to "tone it down" due to new censorship laws; thus, a re-shoot of the film`s ending was done? Or, was this an edited version for either certain territories with stricter censorship or is this an "television" version cause Shaws were winding down from film and entering the world of television? It is know that some of their films did appear on television in HK during either the early to mid 1980`s but were soon pulled due to piracy concerns. But, the question is: were the television copies made from the actual film negatives, meaning the originals were butchered or a copy (from the original negative) then edits made on that? If you thought that you would not be going back to theatrical and the future was television....what would you do? Home video was not then what it is now, either. It would be worth it if Celestial bothered to look for some of these uncut Shaws if they have them. But, did Sir RunRun already do the damage before Celestial even bought them? It seemed that Celestial was surprised about the international version when they received some backlash when the Chinatown Kid was officially released by them. That would imply that they only knew of the censored(?) version.

 

Good questions and interesting theories.

 

And, after watching that recent horrible footage of the run-down Shaws studio on youtube with cans of film just sitting on the ground, exposed to the elements, it might make you stop and wonder. 

 

For those of you interested in seeing these photos, I did an interview with the team that took them. You can check out the article/interview/photos here: http://www.shaolinchamber36.com/buddhist-blog/sc36-interview-hk-urbex/

I originally had this one:

 

 

Then bought this one:

 

 

Here is how the "Special Uncut Edition" looks:

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's misleading for them to simply call it an 'Uncut Edition' as that's not really the case. To explain further I'm posting what I wrote about it at the time of the IVL/Celestial DVD release (which was originally published in the 'Review Section for CHINATOWN KID on the HKFLIX website)...

 

Comments: Just want to share a bit of technical info for viewers of this
very enjoyable Shaw classic. The release of this film by IVL / Celestial is
not the 'ultimate edition' you might expect from them, but it has some
interesting differences from the version that many of us are accustomed

to seeing.

I have watched the film in it's dubbed version many times. In fact,

lucky fans may have discovered the version that Steeplechase

released on VHS, many years back, in a dubbed widescreen version.

The picture was a little dark, but with a running time
of approx. 1:54, and with all the carnage intact, it was certainly a great
representation of the film. Not only is the new Celestial DVD shorter by
nearly a half hour, but it features some completely different footage and an
alternate ending! The print they restored looks stunning, but some of the
edits are down-right jarring. There are three main gangsters (played by Lo Meng,

Kuo Choi, and Wang Lung-Wei) in this version, completely omitting an entire
subplot following a fourth gangster. Several great fights are missing, and
Fu Sheng's more violent and blatantly criminal acts are edited out,
downplaying his immersion into the underworld. But most curious, are the
scenes between Fu Sheng and Kuo Choi's characters at the gangster's hideout.
The VHS version shows a super groovy, psychedelic place where Kuo's character

acts like the violent scum he is. The DVD version features some of the same

dialogue, but in completely different takes on a much less elaborate set. It also
presents a more sympathetic version of Kuo's character. In fact, in the DVD
version he seems like he could be a misunderstood hero for most of the film.
The dubbed version ends much more dramatically than the digital one.

***SPOILER ALERT***

In the dubbed one, Fu Sheng kills Kuo Choi and dies from a knife in the gut.
While the DVD shows both men being arrested, with Fu gladly accepting his
just punishment.

For those who care, there's also the crummy looking, full-frame, dubbed DVD
out there (orange cover). This version shares more scenes in common with the

dubbed tape including the ending (minus a short coda), but only runs 1:29, and

has all the violence edited out. So this was most likely sourced from an 'edited

for TV' version of the dubbed print.

Since the Steeplechase VHS is long out of print, newer fans will probably
only ever see this newest DVD representation, and that's a shame. The fight
footage that's missing on the DVD release includes a great gang rumble with

prolonged duels between Lo Meng and Kuo Choi, and Wang Lung-Wei and

Fu Sheng.

It would be great if Celestial re-released it as a 'Special Uncut Edition',
with either both versions included, or with the alternate footage available as

extras, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Kung Fu Bob

 

 

Human Lanterns is an interesting one. The initial Celestial restoration was heavily cut, but two years later they restored a different, longer print

 

 

Yeah, this is a strange one. Check out these comments by a gentleman that created an uncut custom of the film:

 

"UNCUT COMPOSITE version of Sun Chung's Shaw Brothers horror classic!

Sourced from French PAL DVD (16x9 anamorphic progressive) and HK DVD for the missing scene (converted to proper progressive PAL 16x9). All versions are missing either the beginning or the ending of the skin peeling shot but this version puts them together into a complete shot (notice a colour-shift when the new footage starts), making this the most complete version you will get anywhere as of this writing. About the re-encoding, the video is only re-encoded for the re-inserted scene. Rest is original.  -Knetan"

 

Bizarre that the different versions would each have these scenes edited differently. BTW- despite his mention of a 'color shift', I found this custom to be outstanding quality, and very professionally put together.

 

Regarding that, someone posted before that Image Entertainment got that extended print from another source than Celestial. I have no idea if that is true or not. Or maybe they took what Celestial gave them and just added in the missing scenes. But, this does bring up the issue that we are still getting edited prints of some of these films with no intention of providing uncut material. Avenging Eagle is still missing that minute.

 

I wish we could hear from someone that worked at Image Entertainment at the time, and that they could provide us with those answers.

 

That minute (I think it's closer to a minute, 20 seconds) from AVENGING EAGLE was supposedly damaged, and instead of trying to repair it, they simply removed it. It's important footage too, right from the middle of the climactic fight. This remastered IVL release of AVENGING EAGLE was one of the most exciting and highly anticipated for me, an therefore also one of the most disappointing to see in such a compromised version.

 

Along these same lines, I was surprised when I purchased the TVP Shaw Brothers Blu-ray releases and saw that they had reinserted footage into the films which I hadn't even realized was missing from the IVL/Celestial DVDs. THE NEW ONE ARMED SWORDSMAN has 4 or 5 instances of this from what I can remember. The prints used to source the missing footage are faded and scratched, but I was thrilled to see the films in longer versions, and didn't mind the brief changes in print quality one bit. There are 7 TVP Shaw Brothers BD's, and I have 6 of them. I recall at least one other title also contained additional footage, but not sure which one it was.

 

Here are the titles they released:

New One-Armed Swordsman (Schwert des gelben Tigers) Includes English dub

Shaolin Avengers (Shaolin - Die Rache mit der Todeshand) Includes English dub
The Savage Five (Die Wilden Fuenf)  Includes English dub
Five Shaolin Masters (Die gnadenlosen Fuenf)  Includes English dub
Disciples of Shaolin (Karato - Sein Haertester Schlag)
Crippled Avengers (Vier gnadenlose Raecher)
Seven Man Army (Die unschlagbaren Sieben)

 

Why does Asian cinema have to be so difficult? If there is an uncut version then release it. It would be that easy. Don't remix the soundtrack and add bird sounds, etc. Just give us the damn movie the way it was intended. Also, where are all the directors standing up for their past works? I know some of them are either really old now or dead, but no one complained when they were alive about how their films had been treated by shitty remastering or censorship. Of course, the irony is that Celestial offer beautiful looking prints with missing/censored scenes and Fortune Star offer (mostly) uncut/extended films with horrible looking upscales.

For the most part I doubt that the films, nor we fans, will ever get the releases they deserve.

 

As for why the filmmakers don't stand up for their work... In stark contrast to what may seem logical, the artists (filmmakers, musicians, etc.) are very rarely in positions of power. The producers/studios/people that handle the financial aspect are the ones with the power. They put up the money, so they typically get to control their 'product', which is how they likely look at it, as opposed to 'art'. So if they cry foul all they are doing is wasting their breath and making themselves less viable, as no one will want to work with 'a troublemaker'.

 

To illustrate the situation and show just how looney and illogical it can be, I'll share a personal story...

 

This year I was paid to create poster artwork (also to be used on the DVD release) for a horror film. The producer/director told me what he had in mind and provided me with some on-set photos to use as reference material. I came up with several different compositions, then did very fast color sketches of them. Creating the ideas/compositions/designs and working them out is the most time-consuming part of the job, and depending on the project, can take anywhere from several days, to many months to complete properly. But once I have that worked out, (unless it's an extremely complicated piece) the sketching itself is relatively easy. In this case I only spent about 10-30 minutes each doing the sketches. I sent them over to my client for him to check out. He chose his favorite one, asked for a few specific details he wanted, and I painted the final piece in watercolors using a heavy, opaque technique. I sent him the finished piece and he was thrilled. It was used for the poster, DVD, and for advertising.

 

Months later he called me to say he had some "upsetting news" for me. He had made a deal with a German company for them to release his film there, and as is typical, had included assets such as the poster art, publicity photos, and text on the film when he sent them the print of the movie. They informed him that they did not like my painting, and found it 'cartoonish'. Was this the bad news I wondered? No big deal, to each his own. No he said. He explained that he argued with them that it was the art meant to represent the film, and that he had hired the artist he'd wanted to do the work, and that they should use it. They asked if they could use any of the official material he had sent them, and he said begrudgingly agreed. They decided they liked one of my fast sketches, which were certainly never meant for public consumption, and used that as the cover for their release instead of my painting! How could they say my finished piece was 'too cartoonish' but then opt for a rushed sketch, which to me looked like something you'd find in a (inappropriate for children) coloring book?! And why did they even have my sketches?! My client explained apologetically that the sketches happened to be in the same file as the completed artwork, and he hadn't thought to remove them before sending the German company the file. Well, what could I do? The DVD had already been produced by the time he saw what they had done and called me. Now my shitty little sketch is out there in the world representing 'my art'. Any action I tried to take to stop this would simply result in bad publicity and burn bridges. So... that's just the way it goes sometimes. I've since added a contract clause that implicitly states that sketches I provide are not be published publicly, but that's about all I could reasonably do.

 

So now imagine a director seeing a terrible DVD release of a film he made 35 years ago. Does he really have any say or options to fix that situation? Nope.

[Lady Jin Szu-Yi]

Thanks very much Bob. A very illuminating post. 

[panku]

Bit off-topic but how is quality of red sun/pan media bootleg? Desert island classics look sth like 3rd-4th generation vhs copy which is a real shame as violent version is ace.

There are some screenshots of the panmedia vs the venomsfan version as well as information regarding the different cuts of the film in this thread:
http://www.shaolinchamber36.com/kungfufandom/index.php?/topic/16900-chinatown-kid-remastered-120min-international-version/

 

[reason108]

 

Good questions and interesting theories.

 

 

For those of you interested in seeing these photos, I did an interview with the team that took them. You can check out the article/interview/photos here: http://www.shaolinchamber36.com/buddhist-blog/sc36-interview-hk-urbex/

 

 

It's misleading for them to simply call it an 'Uncut Edition' as that's not really the case. To explain further I'm posting what I wrote about it at the time of the IVL/Celestial DVD release (which was originally published in the 'Review Section for CHINATOWN KID on the HKFLIX website)...

 

Comments: Just want to share a bit of technical info for viewers of this
very enjoyable Shaw classic. The release of this film by IVL / Celestial is
not the 'ultimate edition' you might expect from them, but it has some
interesting differences from the version that many of us are accustomed

to seeing.

I have watched the film in it's dubbed version many times. In fact,

lucky fans may have discovered the version that Steeplechase

released on VHS, many years back, in a dubbed widescreen version.

The picture was a little dark, but with a running time
of approx. 1:54, and with all the carnage intact, it was certainly a great
representation of the film. Not only is the new Celestial DVD shorter by
nearly a half hour, but it features some completely different footage and an
alternate ending! The print they restored looks stunning, but some of the
edits are down-right jarring. There are three main gangsters (played by Lo Meng,

Kuo Choi, and Wang Lung-Wei) in this version, completely omitting an entire
subplot following a fourth gangster. Several great fights are missing, and
Fu Sheng's more violent and blatantly criminal acts are edited out,
downplaying his immersion into the underworld. But most curious, are the
scenes between Fu Sheng and Kuo Choi's characters at the gangster's hideout.
The VHS version shows a super groovy, psychedelic place where Kuo's character

acts like the violent scum he is. The DVD version features some of the same

dialogue, but in completely different takes on a much less elaborate set. It also
presents a more sympathetic version of Kuo's character. In fact, in the DVD
version he seems like he could be a misunderstood hero for most of the film.
The dubbed version ends much more dramatically than the digital one.

***SPOILER ALERT***

In the dubbed one, Fu Sheng kills Kuo Choi and dies from a knife in the gut.
While the DVD shows both men being arrested, with Fu gladly accepting his
just punishment.

For those who care, there's also the crummy looking, full-frame, dubbed DVD
out there (orange cover). This version shares more scenes in common with the

dubbed tape including the ending (minus a short coda), but only runs 1:29, and

has all the violence edited out. So this was most likely sourced from an 'edited

for TV' version of the dubbed print.

Since the Steeplechase VHS is long out of print, newer fans will probably
only ever see this newest DVD representation, and that's a shame. The fight
footage that's missing on the DVD release includes a great gang rumble with

prolonged duels between Lo Meng and Kuo Choi, and Wang Lung-Wei and

Fu Sheng.

It would be great if Celestial re-released it as a 'Special Uncut Edition',
with either both versions included, or with the alternate footage available as

extras, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Kung Fu Bob
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, this is a strange one. Check out these comments by a gentleman that created an uncut custom of the film:

 

"UNCUT COMPOSITE version of Sun Chung's Shaw Brothers horror classic!

Sourced from French PAL DVD (16x9 anamorphic progressive) and HK DVD for the missing scene (converted to proper progressive PAL 16x9). All versions are missing either the beginning or the ending of the skin peeling shot but this version puts them together into a complete shot (notice a colour-shift when the new footage starts), making this the most complete version you will get anywhere as of this writing. About the re-encoding, the video is only re-encoded for the re-inserted scene. Rest is original.  -Knetan"

 

Bizarre that the different versions would each have these scenes edited differently. BTW- despite his mention of a 'color shift', I found this custom to be outstanding quality, and very professionally put together.

 

 

 

I wish we could hear from someone that worked at Image Entertainment at the time, and that they could provide us with those answers.

 

That minute (I think it's closer to a minute, 20 seconds) from AVENGING EAGLE was supposedly damaged, and instead of trying to repair it, they simply removed it. It's important footage too, right from the middle of the climactic fight. This remastered IVL release of AVENGING EAGLE was one of the most exciting and highly anticipated for me, an therefore also one of the most disappointing to see in such a compromised version.

 

Along these same lines, I was surprised when I purchased the TVP Shaw Brothers Blu-ray releases and saw that they had reinserted footage into the films which I hadn't even realized was missing from the IVL/Celestial DVDs. THE NEW ONE ARMED SWORDSMAN has 4 or 5 instances of this from what I can remember. The prints used to source the missing footage are faded and scratched, but I was thrilled to see the films in longer versions, and didn't mind the brief changes in print quality one bit. There are 7 TVP Shaw Brothers BD's, and I have 6 of them. I recall at least one other title also contained additional footage, but not sure which one it was.

 

Here are the titles they released:

 

New One-Armed Swordsman (Schwert des gelben Tigers) Includes English dub

Shaolin Avengers (Shaolin - Die Rache mit der Todeshand) Includes English dub
The Savage Five (Die Wilden Fuenf)  Includes English dub
Five Shaolin Masters (Die gnadenlosen Fuenf)  Includes English dub
Disciples of Shaolin (Karato - Sein Haertester Schlag)
Crippled Avengers (Vier gnadenlose Raecher)
Seven Man Army (Die unschlagbaren Sieben)

 

 

 

 

For the most part I doubt that the films, nor we fans, will ever get the releases they deserve.

 

As for why the filmmakers don't stand up for their work... In stark contrast to what may seem logical, the artists (filmmakers, musicians, etc.) are very rarely in positions of power. The producers/studios/people that handle the financial aspect are the ones with the power. They put up the money, so they typically get to control their 'product', which is how they likely look at it, as opposed to 'art'. So if they cry foul all they are doing is wasting their breath and making themselves less viable, as no one will want to work with 'a troublemaker'.

 

To illustrate the situation and show just how looney and illogical it can be, I'll share a personal story...

 

This year I was paid to create poster artwork (also to be used on the DVD release) for a horror film. The producer/director told me what he had in mind and provided me with some on-set photos to use as reference material. I came up with several different compositions, then did very fast color sketches of them. Creating the ideas/compositions/designs and working them out is the most time-consuming part of the job, and depending on the project, can take anywhere from several days, to many months to complete properly. But once I have that worked out, (unless it's an extremely complicated piece) the sketching itself is relatively easy. In this case I only spent about 10-30 minutes each doing the sketches. I sent them over to my client for him to check out. He chose his favorite one, asked for a few specific details he wanted, and I painted the final piece in watercolors using a heavy, opaque technique. I sent him the finished piece and he was thrilled. It was used for the poster, DVD, and for advertising.

 

Months later he called me to say he had some "upsetting news" for me. He had made a deal with a German company for them to release his film there, and as is typical, had included assets such as the poster art, publicity photos, and text on the film when he sent them the print of the movie. They informed him that they did not like my painting, and found it 'cartoonish'. Was this the bad news I wondered? No big deal, to each his own. No he said. He explained that he argued with them that it was the art meant to represent the film, and that he had hired the artist he'd wanted to do the work, and that they should use it. They asked if they could use any of the official material he had sent them, and he said begrudgingly agreed. They decided they liked one of my fast sketches, which were certainly never meant for public consumption, and used that as the cover for their release instead of my painting! How could they say my finished piece was 'too cartoonish' but then opt for a rushed sketch, which to me looked like something you'd find in a (inappropriate for children) coloring book?! And why did they even have my sketches?! My client explained apologetically that the sketches happened to be in the same file as the completed artwork, and he hadn't thought to remove them before sending the German company the file. Well, what could I do? The DVD had already been produced by the time he saw what they had done and called me. Now my shitty little sketch is out there in the world representing 'my art'. Any action I tried to take to stop this would simply result in bad publicity and burn bridges. So... that's just the way it goes sometimes. I've since added a contract clause that implicitly states that sketches I provide are not be published publicly, but that's about all I could reasonably do.

 

So now imagine a director seeing a terrible DVD release of a film he made 35 years ago. Does he really have any say or options to fix that situation? Nope.

 

 

Thanks for responding with that additional info. Maybe the old post regarding all the cuts could find its way into a sticky or something.  

 

 

I guess my point about the directors complaining was pertaining more to the attitude towards older HK films in general by the filmmakers themselves. But, I think about filmmakers here in the States. If a director is totally unhappy with the film due to studio interference, or whatever, they can use the pseudonym Alan Smithee. Of course I know that HK probably does not have such a thing. But, perhaps the attitude towards one`s past work is the real issue here. If Jackie made a big enough stink about his past work getting true HD release on blu-ray and all that then it would probably get done. But, it doesn't seem like he cares. He is more interested in the next project. Of course, I think that the main person that was affected by censorship and damaged restoration was Chang Cheh. But, then again, he had the most output of any Shaw`s director that I can think of. And, it did not help that most of his films were pretty bloody action films.

 

My other question is, was the "happy ending" version made with or without Chang Cheh`s involvement/consent? There is only one clue that might suggest that he was involved, and that is the fact that you can catch a glimpse of Fu Sheng`s bloody shirt when he was arrested at the end. If the producers decided to go in and re-shoot the film for censorship reasons, why not just grab a clean shirt. Did they only have one that was never washed?  Was it possible that Chang Cheh was making two films from the start? Perhaps one for one market and one for another? But, was there ever alternate storylines/endings/less violent versions of his films released anywhere else in the world? I know that there were requests for a few films to add a sex scene or some nudity for the foreign market (7 Blows of the Dragon, I think it was). 

[Killer Meteor]

 

 

Regarding that, someone posted before that Image Entertainment got that extended print from another source than Celestial. I have no idea if that is true or not. Or maybe they took what Celestial gave them and just added in the missing scenes. But, this does bring up the issue that we are still getting edited prints of some of these films with no intention of providing uncut material. Avenging Eagle is still missing that minute. 

 

Why does Asian cinema have to be so difficult? If there is an uncut version then release it. It would be that easy. Don't remix the soundtrack and add bird sounds, etc. Just give us the damn movie the way it was intended. Also, where are all the directors standing up for their past works? I know some of them are either really old now or dead, but no one complained when they were alive about how their films had been treated by shitty remastering or censorship. Of course, the irony is that Celestial offer beautiful looking prints with missing/censored scenes and Fortune Star offer (mostly) uncut/extended films with horrible looking upscales. 

Momentum Asia in the UK was the first to release the extended Human Lanterns, and that was from Celestial.

 

I think some of it is just time and bad luck - we all know Avenging Eagle is missing footage because we had the tape. Would we have been any the wiser otherwise? 

 

Celestial's problem, in a way, was trying to get everything looking "pretty" and uniform. Hence the frame cutting, to save time on restoration, and although the remixes seem to only on the IVL/Deltamac discs, a fair few of the genuine mono tracks are horribly compressed. I'd rather some had been restored 100% care (as Come Drink With Me was), and the rest left as "warts and all" transfers.

 

As for the filmmakers, you have to remember that many of these films were not intended for long-term consumption. Were it not for Celestial, only the handful released to VHS by Warners, Southgate and MadeInHongKong (plus Tarentino releasing Mighty Peking Man) would have been seen by us. And a fair few filmmakers don't tend to look back at their earlier work. Film (and TV - look at the BBC's mass junkings) was not always treated as a commodity that could been enjoyed again and again. And I'm glad we have Shaws output looking fairly good, which is more than can be said for Cathay or First Films. Doesn't excuse the shoddy remixes, upscales, standards conversions...but we should count the blessings as well as the problems.

[reason108]

 

Momentum Asia in the UK was the first to release the extended Human Lanterns, and that was from Celestial.

 

I think some of it is just time and bad luck - we all know Avenging Eagle is missing footage because we had the tape. Would we have been any the wiser otherwise? 

 

Celestial's problem, in a way, was trying to get everything looking "pretty" and uniform. Hence the frame cutting, to save time on restoration, and although the remixes seem to only on the IVL/Deltamac discs, a fair few of the genuine mono tracks are horribly compressed. I'd rather some had been restored 100% care (as Come Drink With Me was), and the rest left as "warts and all" transfers.

 

As for the filmmakers, you have to remember that many of these films were not intended for long-term consumption. Were it not for Celestial, only the handful released to VHS by Warners, Southgate and MadeInHongKong (plus Tarentino releasing Mighty Peking Man) would have been seen by us. And a fair few filmmakers don't tend to look back at their earlier work. Film (and TV - look at the BBC's mass junkings) was not always treated as a commodity that could been enjoyed again and again. And I'm glad we have Shaws output looking fairly good, which is more than can be said for Cathay or First Films. Doesn't excuse the shoddy remixes, upscales, standards conversions...but we should count the blessings as well as the problems.

 

I thank Celestial for all the great work they have done and the fact that they have preserved these films and that we now have so many Shaws films. It just makes me sad that they made some "choices" in the preservation of the films that I would not agree with. And, so far, Celestial have done a better job than Fortune Star. Maybe the tides will turn over the next couple of years and the older films that know and love will begin to get the respect that they deserve. I continue to support Celestial by purchasing through iTunes; though I prefer blu-ray. 

 

But, a few concerns still linger in my mind. I still wonder if some of these prints were censored by Shaws themselves and we have lost those sections forever, or are there different versions of the films and Celestial just remastered the wrong ones? I just wish that someone there would make the effort to find out. I know that it would not be cheap but a "completely uncut" re-release would probably only help. Worse case is that Shaws edited the original negatives before Celestial bought them. Celestial released them and caught flack for not knowing. Then, add on top of it, any film damage that would cost them lots of money to fix and, well, cheaper to toss it out than repair it. Makes sense to them if they were doing volumes and needed to begin making a profit on their investment. 

 

So certainly, there is praise and damnation.  And, I am thankful for what we have. I just wish that Celestial would have been a little more careful with their investment. There are still some theatrical prints out there that could be copied and remastered that are complete. I think that some of those recent German blu-ray releases did just that. They edited the missing scenes back into the film. 

[masterofoneinchpunch]

...

But, a few concerns still linger in my mind. I still wonder if some of these prints were censored by Shaws themselves and we have lost those sections forever, or are there different versions of the films and Celestial just remastered the wrong ones? I just wish that someone there would make the effort to find out. I know that it would not be cheap but a "completely uncut" re-release would probably only help. Worse case is that Shaws edited the original negatives before Celestial bought them. Celestial released them and caught flack for not knowing. Then, add on top of it, any film damage that would cost them lots of money to fix and, well, cheaper to toss it out than repair it. Makes sense to them if they were doing volumes and needed to begin making a profit on their investment. 

...

For many of these cuts for Shaws we have to look back at the distribution of the film:

I'll quote David Bordwell from his book Planet Hong Kong: "To satisfy censorship regulations, kung-fu films circulated in three versions: the tamest cut went to Malaysia, Thailand, and Taiwan; a stronger one was made for Hong Kong; and the bloodiest version went to Europe and North America, where censorship was lenient." 

Now of course we can extend that idea to any of Shaws films, not just kung fu (or Shaw Brothers) that were shown in multiple locations.  Shaw's were particularly smart about transnational sales.  Some of this is mentioned in the book China Forever: The Shaw Brothers and Diasporic Cinema.  But the crux of this is that Hong Kong often kept a cut that did not have all of the scenes pushed in Europe and North America.  This also begs an important question: could the longer versions be considered uncut or just versions with additional scenes like an extended dvd/bd version?  Just because a film is longer, does not mean that is the best version of the film or even the one intended by the director/producer.  We have to take a film-by-film basis on this.

And to make it more difficult sometimes as mentioned above the edited versions are for other reasons such as bad original stock footage or say a director revisits his work for a newer release.  On a side-note anyone who is interested in silent film should read about the insane amount of versions you can find even with existing films back when there was not only state-by-state censorship (in the US), but also they usually filmed two camera at the same time, put together two main negatives: one for domestic and one for foreign distribution.

[theThirdMaster]

On 11/15/2015 at 11:42 AM, Killer Meteor said:

 

 

I think some of it is just time and bad luck - we all know Avenging Eagle is missing footage because we had the tape. Would we have been any the wiser otherwise? 

 

 

 

Actually that cut is pretty jarring and I noticed it my first time watching the movie, without knowing it was a cut beforehand.

 

But on another note, I've never seen Chinatown Kid.  Which cut would you recommend to someone who has never seen it before?  I see differences listed in this thread, but wondering which one is the best.  I prefer watching in original language with subs when possible.  Was going to order one of the DVDs.