Re: eyes wide shut

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: rev. bob pigeon: "Re: A question..."
• Previous message: JediMars@aol.com: "Re: eyes wide shut"
• Maybe in reply to: rev. bob pigeon: "eyes wide shut"
• Next in thread: rev. bob pigeon: "Re: eyes wide shut"

In a message dated 7/18/99 2:55:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
erespess@inil.com writes:

<< you know, though - i got the feeling that it was slaughtered to edit it
 down to a r rating from the nc-17 it would've gotten otherwise.  it seemed
 to me that the lack of continuity was due to the editing, not to the
 director's lack of vision of follow-through.
 
 did anyone else get that sense?
 
 elizabeth >>

i don't think that parts of the movie were edited out....
i heard kubrick left the movie as it was.. but added images in to cover up 
some parts of scenes that would make the movie have the nc-17 rating..
so the movie stayed the same length..

~marisa

• Next message: rev. bob pigeon: "Re: A question..."
• Previous message: JediMars@aol.com: "Re: eyes wide shut"
• Maybe in reply to: rev. bob pigeon: "eyes wide shut"
• Next in thread: rev. bob pigeon: "Re: eyes wide shut"