Rated vs. Unrated


I rented the rated version at Blockbuster and was not very impressed, not with the film, persay, but with the OBVIOUS sloppy editing and tame gore. Hell, even in the bathroom scenes, all of the nude pics on the walls were blurred out!!

My question is this...is the UNRATED version better? I have it in my que on Blockbuster online and want to know. I saw a promising movie amongst the bad editing and would be curious if the unrated version makes the movie better.

Any input would be appreciated!

reply

Hey Troy,

You saw the chopped and screwed R-rated version. Usually in music this works, but with movies, it's an MPAA ordered slash and burn of all of the good stuff which in Live Feed's case is the gratuitous sex and violence. I did the imposed cuts myself and even with added sound fx, it still is a choppy edit. The problem was I had nothing I could cut to with and the bathroom stall scene was a mess which I could've easily avoided if I had shot a "clean" version without the penetration shots and the ultra-violent pics all over the bloody place. The Unrated version is 5 minutes longer. That's alot of gore and sex. There's one scene, the tempura penis eating scene, that is gone in the R version. This is the one of the best scenes in the movie and the one that pushes "Emily" over the edge, into her blood-soaked chopstick stapping spree.

The 5 minutes gone does take the movie in the direction I wanted to go in, total balls-out sex and gore.

If you can, check it out, PM me with your mailing addy, Hell I'll mail you a copy, afterall, you did pay for the rental.

Thanks,
Ryan Nicholson

writer/director/deviant "Live Feed"

reply

Awesome...as I said, the unrated version is in my Blockbuster online que, so I can't wait to check it out!

And I truly admire your effort to get this film made! Wish I had the balls to pursue doing such a thing! I have written a couple slasher screenplays that pretty much have sat in my file cabinet, so I think it is great when and independent filmmaker goes for it!

I'll let you know how I like the unrated version!

reply

Ryan,

If you are so ashamed of the R-rated edition, why would you compromise your vision as a director and allow it to be released?

TroyEsc: five minutes of titties doesn't make it better. The movie sucks in either version.

reply

[deleted]

Live Feed is an expolitation gory movie. So 5 minutes of gore is a lot. The unrated version is a cool movie for the gorehounds. i enjoyed it.

reply

[deleted]

After a response like that, I've GOT to see this film. Thanks for the inspiration.

"You're all worthless and weak...now drop and give me twenty!"

reply

I'd check it out, but defenitely not from Blockbuster. Sounds interesting.

reply

Yeah, go ahead and check it out. You'll be sorry though.

reply

*beep* Blockbuster. Blockbuster has the rated one, but if you have a Movie Gallery in your area, they have the unrated version. But if you have the chance to see the unrated version, I would always do so first. My first viewing of this film was disappointing, but I also saw the rated version as well. I came on here a while back and listed a few of the things I didn't like about the film, but I usually try to give movies I don't like the first time around a second chance. Sometimes I'll end up liking them, as I did with House of 1000 Corpses, but others still suck. I rented the unrated version of this the second time, I did not know at the time that Movie Gallery had the unrated version the first time I saw it, and I will have to admit the second viewing was much better than the first one. But this was one film I had waited on for a while, and when I do that, I tend to not really like the movie, but if you didn't like it the first time, I'd just say give it a couple months then try it again, you never know, you might like it. But if you aren't a fan of sleezy cinema, then deffinately pass on this....or just get the rated version

reply

Blockbusters here have the unrated...thats what I saw.

reply

Well Netflix carries the unrated version, so I'll probably put it in my queue and try to watch it with an open mind.

Then again, the director is in cahoots with Palumbo, so I'll take that info with a grain of salt (he doesn't seem to be shilling his film).

I like good EX type films, so I'd be willing to give this a shot.

I liked ROOMS FOR TOURISTS, which was low budget, but def worth a look IMO.

reply

I guess it’s hard to get it through to some people but at the end of the day if the cut version doesnt exist lots of places won't stock it. Its easy to say fight the censors, But if the film gets put in a category that means it never gets a full release it wont make money and disapears. If you do 2 versions 1 cut 1 uncut loads of people will go get the uncut version but it will get more people watching it! Personally im more bothered by the trend of making a film chopping 20 mins out so it can be rereleased at a later date as a longer version!

reply

I actually liked both versions of the film. I saw the R rated version first, not knowing about the unrated one, and I enjoyed it. When I found out about the unrated version, I bought that...and it's way sicker, tons more grue :) Live Feed is a fantastic horror/gore film....one of the best to come out in a long while if you ask me.

-Viscera Drip

reply

I'm pretty sure the director has his friends come to this forum and post nice stuff about this flick.

This movie, and pretty much everything that ignorant Canadian douche is garbage for the eyes.

reply

Saying you didnt like it is ok.
But a comment saying what you didnt like about the film would show that you were a person with a moderate amount of inteligence.

And I'm in no way connected with the film or director other than I bought and watched the DVD.

reply

I just saw the unrated, but where is all the gore? It was like watching the first Friday the 13th where you don't see any killing. Sure, it has some blood in it, but still, there's no real gore...

reply