Years ago, I bought a video bootleg of the uncut version of this film. It had a backstory about gypsies and how the killer came to be.
I can't remember the whole thing because my copy is pretty worn and unwatchable now. It seems like the backstory really made this better than most other low-end slashers.
I was just wondering if anyone else had seen it and if they could remind me of the whole backstory.
sounds cool. i'd like to see this uncut version being released on dvd.
"how about... a royal flush!" *loren avedon kicks a cauldron of boiling water into the bad guys*
92 minutes, is this uncut?
shareI have the uncut version, it was released in Australia under the Video Classics label, yes a lengthy flashback scene and some near-hardcore gypsy sex!!
shareare you serious?
shareim in australia however i bought the US version! shame to find out it is the edited version!
"how about... a royal flush!" *loren avedon kicks a cauldron of boiling water into the bad guys*
The uncut version is a *beep* myth. Gimme some proof.
The Dorm That Dripped Video Tape
http://www.tdtdvt.blogspot.com
It's real. I have the Japanese VHS which runs 96 minutes. There is some softcore sex scenes, and a lengthy flashback scene which is so long, you forget what the movie is really about.
shareAnyway to get a copy?
share[deleted]
Well I have finally seen part of the uncut copy. It has been posted on the internet. I can't tell you where cause my post already got deleted. The old scenes are played by a couple of old porno stars from the 80's. The flashback scene is quite long. The copy I have seen has subtitles. Yes it does exist!!! I couldn't believe that somebody actually filled my request on this movie.
shareYou can download the uncut version here:
http://cinemageddon.org/details.php?id=60224&hit=1
See Tony, I told you that the uncut version existed, and that I did own it. Ye of little faith....
Yeah, so I too just watched the "uncut" version of this movie, and I actually think that footage was added at a later time. Like someone at one point tried to make the movie a little longer and give it some more background. I tell you this, it is completely unnescessary.
For starters you can tell Joel's voice changes right before and right after this story about the gypsies. It's also a really long friggin story that should have been like 5 minutes tops, but instead run like 15-20 minutes. There's some soft porn-type scenes in it too. I swear to God, the Gypsy guy that ends up having sex with one of the local married women I've seen in a porno before - lol.
The only redeeming quality from this "uncut" portion is that you learn the killer is actually named Leo, and when he was 6 years old he had the body of a 16 year-old - much larger than everyone else. Other than that, this whole Gypsy scene kills the momentum and overall creepy feel of the movie. It seems very out of place.
You asked for proof that it exists, so here you go...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6g70m2zB5Q
Hate to say it, but this so-called "uncut" version is not uncut. Although it contains the gypsy sequence (which was obviously meant to open the film instead of appearing as a flashback), there are minor trims of some stuff that appeared in the 80 minute version (mostly nature shots, but talk of the constellations, Bostwick's story of the wide-mouthed frog and his banjo-playing scene are noticeably absent). Not to mention they've removed the "Monkey's Paw" story (which is why Joel seemed badly dubbed -- he was!).
And sorry gorehounds, the violence/gore is identical in both versions, so you're not missing much.
I agree with others who've said the gypsy scenes interrupt the flow and seem irrelevant. As a prologue the sequence could've worked well, but I suspect there was more to it. (There'd kinda have to be since Leo was only shown once from a distance).
That said, you guys made me think the gypsy scene was akin to porn. Hardly. There's a couple bare chests briefly glimpsed while gypsy Marco is humping his girlfriends (with his pants on!) but nothing shocking or out of place for a '70s horror movie. It's really not much raunchier than the campers' sex scenes, though there might be a little more moaning and a few more shots of side-boob. Hell, '90s sex thrillers like "Basic Instinct" and "Body of Evidence" were far more explicit.
@hip_school_preppie - You probably DID see the woman who played Mary in porn. Looks like the director shot porn movies and made this one attempt to cross over into mainstream. Unfortunately, none of the people from the gypsy scenes were credited, though someone identified Marco as porn star John Leslie.