Blue Lagoon the return has cut

[ARTHORIUS]

We certainly seen the blue lagoon with milla jovovich but this is the proof that the version exit is cut

[Image]

[infiniter]

"Cut" like there are scenes missing or "cut" like the screen is smaller than it supposed to be? The latter can be due to 4:3 to 16:9 conversion, like it happened with Pretty Baby, where they more or less hid Brooke's private parts this way.

[ARTHORIUS]

"Cut" like there are scenes missing or "cut" like the screen is smaller than it supposed to be? The latter can be due to 4:3 to 16:9 conversion, like it happened with Pretty Baby, where they more or less hid Brooke's private parts this way.

2nd

[ptguardian]

What is important here and is not cut is the scenes with the children...

I have this in HD and nothing important is cut.

[Movlova4]

i watched one version where it was not cut but later i couldnt find any which wasnt cut.

[deadman]

i watched one version where it was not cut but later i couldnt find any which wasnt cut.

It would be especially silly with this movie because there are other topless scenes which weren't cut. That makes me think it wasn't done for that reason, they just insisted on releasing it at 16:9 when the original aspect ratio was probably 24:13 (1920 x 1040) or 12:5 (1920 x 800). The first of those, when rendered properly, has tiny black bars at the top and bottom you barely notice, the second has bigger black bars and is a much wider picture. I'm sure you've seen both formats and know what I mean.

I personally would show a film in whatever format it was originally made. Not cut it to a 16:9 screen, losing parts of the picture to get that fit. But that's what they did here. If there's ever a bluray release maybe they'll get it right.

[Movlova4]

i watched one version where it was not cut but later i couldnt find any which wasnt cut.

It would be especially silly with this movie because there are other topless scenes which weren't cut. That makes me think it wasn't done for that reason, they just insisted on releasing it at 16:9 when the original aspect ratio was probably 24:13 (1920 x 1040) or 12:5 (1920 x 800). The first of those, when rendered properly, has tiny black bars at the top and bottom you barely notice, the second has bigger black bars and is a much wider picture. I'm sure you've seen both formats and know what I mean.

I personally would show a film in whatever format it was originally made. Not cut it to a 16:9 screen, losing parts of the picture to get that fit. But that's what they did here. If there's ever a bluray release maybe they'll get it right.

IMDb says this about the "cut": Both the US pan & scan DVD and the European wide screen DVD are reframed to cut out Lilli's breast in the scene where she's looking at herself in the mirror. The older VHS releases showed her nipple at the very bottom of the screen.

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0102782/alte ... tt_trv_alt

[deadman]

IMDb says this about the "cut": Both the US pan & scan DVD and the European wide screen DVD are reframed to cut out Lilli's breast in the scene where she's looking at herself in the mirror. The older VHS releases showed her nipple at the very bottom of the screen.

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0102782/alte ... tt_trv_alt

IMDb gets things wrong sometimes. The writer made an assumption about why it was cut. The same release shows her breasts several times during the film, so why cut this particular scene? It's no more "scandalous" than any of the others. Just one of those instances where the studio insisted on releasing a film in 16:9 aspect (even though it wasn't shot that way) and cropped the picture to get it. They do this to lots of films, unfortunately, including those with absolutely nothing to censor.

[Zorijer]

I've seen cases where that happened too(and heard about some where the widescreen version went beyond the set), but I did find a DVD rip in 1.36 aspect ratio where this scene was censored by moving the frame.

Censorship is not very rational in the first place, but emotional and not necessarily honest; This scene being from up-close and the front, and/or its overt focus, may have made it feel just a little too strong for whoever made the decision. Censor boards don't always have very explicit rules, either, there was a horror movie that got an X rating reduced to an R by cutting one scene to have fewer stabbings. Not less graphic stabbings, just fewer.