| Author |
Message |
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | I can't recall ther correct answer so I'll ask.
I was just adding the rating details to "The Town" as I like to keep them local for unrated discs. The Blu-ray has the "extended version" listed on front and the back says that cut is unrated.
I just went to filmratings.com and now the Extended cut has an R rating and details for it (slightly different than the theater version ratings shown under it). I want to include these reasons in a contribution, but should I leave the rating saying it is unrated like the back cover (and it might've been unrated at time of release), or go with the new rating I found on the most reputable site for ratings? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,744 |
| |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agree... rules states to take the rating from the cover. | | | | Pete |
|
  | Eagle | | Registered: Oct 31, 2001 |
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 563 |
| | Posted: | | | | There's an Ultimate Collector's Edition due out in a few months...maybe that R rating for the extended cut is referring to that release?
In any case, I do agree with the others on your version in that the cover wins over the web. | | | | My phpDVDprofiler collection |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,550 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Eagle: Quote:
There's an Ultimate Collector's Edition due out in a few months...maybe that R rating for the extended cut is referring to that release? I'm thinking that's the rating it's referring to. I have access to Warner's press site so I'll see if there's a back cover scan of that release to find out. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Agreed, the cover wins. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Blair | | Resistance is Futile! |
| Registered: October 30, 2008 | | Posts: 1,249 |
| | Posted: | | | | *ding ding ding* Ladies and gentleman we have a winner by unanimous decision:
Cover !
(In other words, I agree with the above) | | | If at first you don't succeed, skydiving isn't for you.
He who MUST get the last word in on a pointless, endless argument doesn't win. It makes him the bigger jerk. |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Eagle: Quote:
There's an Ultimate Collector's Edition due out in a few months...maybe that R rating for the extended cut is referring to that release?
In any case, I do agree with the others on your version in that the cover wins over the web. Seriously? I just found the dang 2-disc for a reasonable price. Go frag WB, I'm not starting to upgrade BD's this early, if at all! They did the same thing with Clockwork Orange, a new version within weeks of me finally finding a nice price on the original.  |
|
| Eagle | | Registered: Oct 31, 2001 |
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 563 |
| | Posted: | | | | Here's the details on the upcoming release, which appears to be only as a BD/DVD combo. There also seems to be a discrepancy in the release date between Feb 7 and Mar 6, with some sites listing the earlier date while other sites list the later date. The Town | | | | My phpDVDprofiler collection |
|
| Registered: June 21, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,621 |
| | Posted: | | | | I honestly can't tell if there's supposed to be a 3rd version of the film on that UE. One poster on dvdactive says there is, then provides a link right back to the same page/post thta isn't clear. I'm hoping it's just a new doc and all the non-video extras like book and faux props. I can live without those, but might be interested in another cut as the current extended is such a better film than the theater version that I will never watch again. |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'd be all for listing the rating if you are able to confirm it's talking about the same cut of the film. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ace_of_Sevens: Quote:
I'd be all for listing the rating if you are able to confirm it's talking about the same cut of the film. I don't see that being allowed by the rules. If the version, as per the case, is 'Unrated', and there aren't any ratings details on the case, there shouldn't be any included in the profile. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
I don't see that being allowed by the rules. If the version, as per the case, is 'Unrated', and there aren't any ratings details on the case, there shouldn't be any included in the profile. Theoretically, anyway. This rule doesn't make a lot of sense. If other film details are wrong on the cover, we don't copy that to the profile, otherwise Blade 2 and Hulk would be 2.35:1. What's more useful: a filed that tells you the rating of the film or a field that tells you what the cover says, regardless of whether it's correct? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ace_of_Sevens: Quote:
Theoretically, anyway. This rule doesn't make a lot of sense. If other film details are wrong on the cover, we don't copy that to the profile, otherwise Blade 2 and Hulk would be 2.35:1. What's more useful: a filed that tells you the rating of the film or a field that tells you what the cover says, regardless of whether it's correct? But is is correct...at least it was at the time of that release. If they re-release that same version, with a rating, the rating and details should only apply to the re-release. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
But is is correct...at least it was at the time of that release. If they re-release that same version, with a rating, the rating and details should only apply to the re-release. Why? If we're willing to change common names post-release, I don't see why other info that changes shouldn't get updated as well. Besides, this isn't the only cause of this issue. DVD publishers which aren't major studios (particularly Anchor Bay and Criterion) don't necessarily include rating information even on movies that were rated at the time of release. Also, we accept ratings details from filmratings.com that aren't on the case. Why not the rating itself? | | | | Last edited: by Ace_of_Sevens |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Why? Because the rules clearly says not to. To take the rating from the cover. As long as the rules say that... that is what must be followed for the online.
I know I would definitely vote no for anything other then what is on the cover. | | | | Pete |
|