Special "outtakes" and deleted scenes from movies. Nothing but a ploy.

[Supernovametalstar]

I've noticed this recently. With the advent of DVD, many studios are purposly taking scenes out of movies so they can sell them on DVD and tout "special never before seen outtakes" and such. None is worse than Disney. With their recent hit, Monsters Inc, a couple of weeks ago they starting commercials claiming to have outtakes from the movie. Obviously, making computer animation is neither cheap, nor easy, and purposely making scenes like the one in the commerical would not prove cost effective. Those "outtakes" never would have occured if the movie had flopped. It is a ploy not only to get more people in theaters to watch another Disney *masterpiece* "Snow Dogs", but to sell the DVD when it comes out.

A true outtake from a movie such as Monsters, would be only be voice flubs, since the animation was already done, or at least planned out, and there is no time to make silly extras like that unless the movie is successful.

In another post, I read about scenes from the movie "Orange County", which could be considered a bait and switch ploy. And while reading an interview of Cerina Vincent and another actor from "Not Another Teen Movie", it is said that there were scenes that were funny and brought something to the characters and the movie (at least from the actors standpoint) that were cut, but will be added to the DVD, which is why the other actor didn't want to spoil it, because he wanted people to buy the DVD when it comes out.

Even "Scary Movie 2" did the same thing.

It kinda makes me mad that studios are purposely making movies not as good as they could be the first time, and make them classics, or at least memorable, but rather opting to make them mediocre, or well enough to get an audience, and then hit them up for more money with DVD. It may sound like I'm whining, or complaining, but I'm not (really). I don't even have a DVD player yet. It just seems...unethical to me somehow. Especially when I hear a kid begging his mother to see Monsters Inc again because they have new "outtakes" and they don't understand that they were never outtakes in the first place, just new scenes that were animated because they know little kids don't think about things like that (I know if I was promised outtakes of Transformers the Movie when I was 8, I'd want to go back).

[VinceA]

I think the first instance of Disney doin' the "OK, you already saw the movie once when it first came out but now we've added the outtakes so come see it again" dance was either for "A Bug's Life" or "Toy Story 2". Obviously they're not outtakes - it's just a ploy to get kids to bug their parents to take them to see the movie again so they can see the outtakes

[Vigo Sprax]

I knew Disney would do this and I even told my friends, "Should we go see it now? Or wait for the version with the outtakes". Of course they're not real outtakes, but whats the matter with adding something a little extra to try to milk a bit more money? Its not like you've missed something critical from the film.

And as for leaving off scenes, yes this is annoying me but some directors have made some points that its actually better. Most movies have certain time constraints for the film so they can't include every scene, now directors are able to film the scenes knowing they'll have a home on DVD...instead of just sitting on the cuttin room floor. Director's Cuts weren't invented with DVD, they've just become a lot more popular.

[Terminatah]

It never originated as a ploy. A Bug's Life premiered with funny outtakes already in the credits. OBVIOUSLY THESE WERE NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY - THEY WERE A SATIRE. It wasn't until they thought up more outtakes and sent them to theaters that they began featuring them in commercials as incentive to see the movie again. But big deal if they do that; if you liked the movie, you'll see all the outtakes when you watch it again in your own home.

-Terminatah

[kiddiesunshine]

i see movies for free, so this topic means little to me.

[Calhoun07]

Sometimes I do think it can work out ok. Kevin Smith's cuts from his movies do not make the movie mediocre, and you can see why he made the cuts, but I really appreciate the fact he saves them all for his DVD releases. Lucas on the other hand is rushing out his Star Wars movies with the knowlege that they can always go back and finish scenes for the DVD release later on, so I do feel cheated somewhat with the new Star Wars DVDs.

But most out takes are really lame and you can see why they got cut. There are a few, such as some on the Monkeybone DVD that I think would have made the final movie better if they had stayed in, but it's still good to see on DVD.

[Maxie Zeus]

I'm waiting for the publishing industry to catch on. Release a Stephen King novel, and then 6 months later release the "special edition" of the same novel with all the stuff he and his editors cut out of the first draft.

[Joe Tully]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus
I'm waiting for the publishing industry to catch on. Release a Stephen King novel, and then 6 months later release the "special edition" of the same novel with all the stuff he and his editors cut out of the first draft.

Isn't Chris Tolkien already doing this with his dad's work? :p

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Joe Tully


Isn't Chris Tolkien already doing this with his dad's work? :p

:blinks: You're right! :D

[Karkull]

I've seen this a lot over the past few years. One of the main reasons that they do this is because the particular scene that they wanted to include was cut in order to get a lower rating (examples include American Pie and Saving Silverman). Then they add the cut materials to the disk in order to sell it. Why do you think that all the bonus features are "unrated?"

(Actually, in the case of Saving Silverman, the director told Entertainment Weekly about the cuts and how he was going to restore them to the DVD!)

[Calhoun07]

I cases like that where the artistic integrity of the director almost demands for the cut footage to be put back in to the DVD, then I think it's all for good. But when you include cut scenes from a lame movie that had no artistic integrity in the first place, it's like why did they bother? To make people think this movie was actually worthwhile to include something extra?

[The Mad Hatter]

Deleted scenes can be a marketing ploy (a la Saving Silverman), or they could be a useful tool for directors who want to do the scenes even when they know they won't make it in the theatrical print (a la Kevin Smith). It all just depends on who's doing it.

[RockItShipper]

What I'm thinking is that DVD is the closest you get from a book to filmed entertainment. The opportunities are endless, and you're not as required to tell a linear story designed to unfold in one sitting. In DVD, you can revisit sections and maybe take in some diversions- just like in books. But has anyone taken advantage of this possibility yet?

[Overkill of ASE]

Whenever Disney takes a CG movie and inserts "outtakes", it makes me cringe. How dare they spit in the face of all legitimate bloopers, follies, and outtakes of every other movie? This is crap and is more evidence of Disney's current defication over the entertainment industry in general.

Michael Eisner must die before that company has a chance of regaining any of its former glory.

[The Mad Hatter]

Er, Disney had nothing to do with the outtakes. They were concieved and made by Pixar. Disney could only wish they created a marketing ploy that managed to be entertaining...