Devils Again

email this story
read comments (17)
post a comment

Silence continues to emanate from Warner Home Video about its weird suppression of Ken Russell's The Devils, which I reported about yesterday. Last Sunday I rented this 1971 film for iPhone viewing, a day or two before WHV withdrew it from iTunes, and it looked beautiful, obviously indicating that WHV put serious money into remastering it. But they're now keeping this major film by a respected director from being seen. Okay, by a relatively small (but fanatical) nation of film buffs, but it's the principal of the thing. Suppressing a film crosses ethical lines.

Presumably a certain Warner Bros. bigwig hates the film and has said "no way...Warner Home Video is not issuing this film...not on my watch." (Or so the rumble goes.) Either he's afraid of some sort of adverse reaction by the religious right or he just hates it himself, I'm guessing. In doing this he's standing, of course, alongside a long line of uglies who've made similar calls in the name of governmental or political prohibition. Does he really want to be identified in this light?

This person is personalizing an issue that is of great interest and concern to tens of thousands. He may have the power to suppress circulation of The Devils but he doesn't have the right to do this. His personal feelings don't (or shouldn't) matter. What matters is the right of film lovers to savor valuable films, and the right of filmmakers to see their work distributed as widely as possible. It's morally wrong to stand in the way of this.

There's an equitable solution, of course. Warner Bros. simply needs to sub-license the film to someone like Criterion or MPI or Acorn Media -- one of those guys. It would be nice if WHV could at least say if discussions have happened along these lines, or if they're open to same.

Select Company<< previous | next >>Basic, Essential

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 23, 2010 at 5:30 PM

comment #1

Deathtongue_Groupie says ...

Not to get all D.Z and this is SORTA related in theme - Viacome has lost the first stage of their legal battle with Google over YouTube.

Perhaps this will give Google the space to relax their rules regarding using copyrighted material (ie, satire, critical appraisal, creating entirely new work, etc).

Posted by Deathtongue_Groupie at June 23, 2010 6:19 PM

comment #2

Glenn Kenny says ...

Way to actually go ahead and assemble your own straw man, there, Jeff. Who exactly are you asking over at Warner, anyway? And, maybe more importantly, how are you asking it?

You might be interested to learn that starting the end of July the Film Society of Lincoln Center's doing a mini-Russell retrospective, with the maestro himself present for a Q&A after each screening, and one of the films screening is...yes, "The Devils." Here's the press release:

http://tiny.cc/2j3aw

I gotta say, sometimes you do make me feel like Hedley Lamarr talking to Governer LePetomane in "Blazing Saddles:" "Right as usual, sir."

I kid, and you know why...

Posted by Glenn Kenny at June 23, 2010 6:20 PM

comment #3

DeeZee says ...

"Presumably a certain Warner Bros. bigwig hates the film and has said "no way...Warner Home Video is not issuing this film...not on my watch."

Now you know how Song of the South fans feel. On a related note, why is Devils any worse than Jazz Singer, Warner?

Anyway, Lithgow and Pinto go ape for prequel.
Damon ready to walk with and talk to the animals.
Joel Schumacher turns Twelve.
Anyone want Supes to "visit" their town?
The Rileys gets new distributor.
Wanted guy heads to Kazakhstan.
More 3D from Disney.
Reitman's next gig.
Get Wimpy again with Bowers.
Anyone wanna see Kimba, I mean, Simba in 3D?
Akira goes through another draft.
Foxx tries his luck with shorts.
Another penguin movie.
Insert dirty quip about Cronenberg sci-fi gig here.
Anyone want more Major League?
District 9 guy drops the Hobbit.
Hill's top 5.
Could Knight + Day doing badly kill MI4?
Q+A w/ Darabont.
Kilmer forced to apologize for rant against New Mexico.
End of an era?
Kind of ironic after that Dan Quayle thing.
At least Obama will have something to his legacy. Wish I could say the same for his predecessor.

Glenn: I already noted a prior screening. That doesn't mean they'll put it on DVD, though, which is what Jeff's really upset about.

Posted by DeeZee at June 23, 2010 7:00 PM

comment #4

citizenmilton says ...

I'd lay odds that the real source of the problem is with Apple, not WHV. I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

WHV might be publicly taking the heat, gladly, to keep their stuff on the iTunes iMoney-machine.... it's not like WHV to initiate a move like this. But this is precisely the kind of B.S. that Apple is doing throughout its stores.

Posted by citizenmilton at June 23, 2010 7:24 PM

comment #5

Gordn27 says ...

"I already noted a prior screening."

Nobody reads your links because this is not a website for your links. It is a website for movies, which is why it's an odd place for you to hang out, seeing as how you lack any basic knowledge or understanding about movies. (For instance, "why is Devils any worse than Jazz Singer")

Posted by Gordn27 at June 23, 2010 7:48 PM

comment #6

DeeZee says ...

Gordon: So black-face is fine, but religious commentary is "controversial"?

Posted by DeeZee at June 23, 2010 8:39 PM

comment #7

Robert Cashill says ...

Russell is said to be screening the 111-minute "Rape of Christ" version, so who needs the 108-minute one anyway? (Well, me, and I own it now.)

Posted by Robert Cashill at June 23, 2010 9:18 PM

comment #8

Robert Cashill says ...

WB did put THE DEVILS out on VHS, so it does have some history with the title.

Posted by Robert Cashill at June 23, 2010 9:52 PM

comment #9

markj says ...

I think it is Jeff's duty to go to the screening and ask Russell for his opinion on why The Devils isn't available on DVD. I'm sure there will be a memorable quote or two from the big man.

Posted by markj at June 24, 2010 12:58 AM

comment #10

... says ...

DZ: '...but religious commentary is "controversial"?'

Why is controversial in quotation marks? It doesn't work as sarcasm, or a quote. 0/10.

'Now you know...'

how a peanut sized cock emotionally cripples a person, and drives them to seek revenge through a contrived interest for something they are (of course) not really interested in.

Posted by ... at June 24, 2010 2:22 AM

comment #11

dietcock says ...

Sadly, "The Music Lovers" and "Lisztomania" aren't available on DVD, either.

Posted by dietcock at June 24, 2010 2:45 AM

comment #12

... says ...

The amateur comma before either = DZ.

Posted by ... at June 24, 2010 2:51 AM

comment #13

DeeZee says ...

I don't even know dietcock, but I do know that "..." likes the cock.

Posted by DeeZee at June 24, 2010 2:58 AM

comment #14

The Hoyk says ...

Huxley Russell posted a very informative breakdown of the new "director's cut" on the first DEVILS post you made on Monday. No one seems to have a running time for this print, which only exists digitally and not on film; I think it would have to be longer than 111 minutes, since that is the cut sent to the BBFC that was already missing the footage since reinstated.

Posted by The Hoyk at June 24, 2010 5:17 AM

comment #15

moviemorlock says ...

Why is it okay to see endless buckets of entrails fly across the screen in an extended cut blu ray of a super crapfest like the Wolfman (which my wife and I had to fast forward after a while it was so bad) and the Devils which, by today's standards, is really not a graphic film at all, can't be re-released? It's stupid. The Devils is amazing and I'd buy it on Blu Ray the second it comes out.

Posted by moviemorlock at June 24, 2010 12:45 PM

comment #16