The First 7th Night (Herman Yau)?

[dleedlee]

Just noticed that the upcoming DVD release is rated Cat.IIB. The original theatrical posters show it as Cat.III.
Anyone know why the difference?

http://www.yesasia.com/us/the-first-7th ... /info.html

[Brian Thibodeau]

The review of the theatrical release at LoveHKFilm mentions that the film carries a Cat. III rating, but that the content isn't really worthy of it. Perhaps there is no difference between the two except that the DVD release carries the legitimate rating rather than one designed to scrounge up a few patrons at theatres?

[dleedlee]

I read the same review and took away a more positive response than you did, Brian. I'm not a gore-hound so I don't really care if it's not a Miike blood and torture fest. Herman Yau always seems to be , at least, interesting, though I've haven't kept up with his recent works, as much as I'd like to. Anyway, I'm just curious as to why the change, something had to have been cut, right? But why? (Or, did it get re-classified, somehow?) Sex and Chopsticks I AND II seem to have retained it's Cat. III rating for their respective DVD releases.

[Brian Thibodeau]

I think you may have misread me, as the review actually made me want to see the film too (I haven't yet). My only point was that I suspect there may have been no changes to the film between the theatrical to DVD releases, and that the Category III rating was possibly just a ploy to get a few extra bums on theatre seats for a film they may have known wasn't going to be a smash hit, no matter the quality (thus LoveHKfilm noting that nothing in it is worthy of a Cat. III rating, and their review is of the theatrical release).

This reminds me of LETHAL ANGELS, only in the reverse: I believe that film was rated IIB in theatres, then appeared in some home video incarnations with a Cat. III tag, even though there was only ever one version of the film in existence. The version I bought stated Cat.III on the package, but the film contained nothing that would earn it such a rating: no skin, no gore, no triad shenanigans, etc. If anything, it sets a precedent (among others I'm sure) of filmmakers/distributors playing fast and loose with the rating labels.

[dleedlee]

Thanks for the clarification, Brian.
You're probably right in that it's the same version, and somehow the classifcation changed going from theater to DVD. You'd think TELA or whomever would have to approve these things.

[Brian Thibodeau]

When LETHAL ANGELS came out, the subject of TELA came up here in the forums. Someone mentioned that the film was approved by TELA with a IIB rating, but it still showed up on DVD and VCD with the Cat. III tag, which made me wonder whether TELA might have a few loopholes in their process, one that certain folks can exploit if it means luring a few more people to a theatre or selling a few more VCDs and DVDs. I have vague recollections of other semi-recent "Cat. III" productions that were anything but, such as many of the video productions from the turn of the century, including the lame DEVIL KILLER from 2003. I wonder if TELA sometimes just looks the other way . . .