'Johnny Mnemonic' B&W Cut Covertly Appeared on Itunes in 2021
Plus: 'Prey' Comanche Version and 'Fall' Vubbing
Table of ContentsJOHNNY MNEMONIC is back… sans color and promotion
On Tuesday (8/16), two new alternate versions are coming out on Blu-Ray.
The one you are more likely to have heard of is the suddenly announced 160-minute extended edition of the 2022 blockbuster Jurassic World: Dominion, which is packaged alongside the theatrical version in a snazzy, old-school special edition Blu-Ray.
The other is the black-and-white version of 1995 cult cyberpunk thriller Johnny Mnemonic, which starred a pre-Matrix Keanu Reeves as a data courier who uses his own mind to transport information in the dystopian future of 2021.* The Blu-Ray will be largely bare bones (though some early owners are reporting that it includes a 30-minute retrospective featurette), which is unfortunate given the movie’s strange bts history and the availability of a special edition release overseas.
*Critics apparently hated the movie upon its initial release, though it has garnered a cult following over the years. My memories of the movie are hazy but I distinctly recall it being funny and weird. There was a sentient dolphin that I think was the leader of some sort of cyber-resistance movement, a gonzo appearance by Dolph Lundgren as an evil, nigh-unkillable preacher who wanted the ‘medicine’ inside Johnny’s body, and Keanu Reeves delivering a wooden, yet earnest and likable performance amidst all the insanity.
The B&W Version and its history:
According to director Robert Longo, Johnny Mnemonic in Black White is not a ‘director’s cut’ of the film, though it is closer to what he had initially envisioned it as, which was an artsy, low-budget picture.
In an extensive interview published by Screenslate around the time of the B&W Version’s brief theatrical premiere in June 2021, the director explains that he initially created the B&W Version himself by ripping a Blu-Ray and wanted to do an illicit release via a site like YouTube before being convinced to get in touch with Sony, which came to support the new version.
Regarding his motivations, he states:
“…I always had this fantasy that on the 25th anniversary I would try to get some redemption in relation to this film, because making it was really difficult. And I, at one point, thought about re-editing, but then I realized if I just turned it black-and-white that would be the best, easiest thing to do, and the most radical way of kind of imprinting how I really wanted it, because I wanted to make it in black-and-white originally.… For me, for William, and for Keanu, this is a bit of redemption. They really love this new black-and-white conversion. And it looks like a shitty, million-dollar movie. It has a bit of a grunge to it and an attitude to it, which I think is really great.”
Contrary to his claims that the B&W version is only distinguished from the initial release by the color conversion, and did not involve any re-editing, the film’s screenwriter - and author of the original story the film is based on - William Gibson has said that this was a ‘director’s cut‘ and did involve some re-editing, even as its running time seems identical to that the theatrical cut.
As I have not seen it yet myself, I cannot verify, whether or not this is the case. But it certainly raises the question of whether or not the picture’s assemblage has indeed been slightly revised, and if so, why director Robert Longo has claimed otherwise. I am certain that after the Blu-Ray release, we shall get some clarification.
On a final note, Longo’s intention to release the b/w version dates back to at least 2015. At the time, he had apparently considered cutting Dolph Lundgren’s character from the movie, reducing its running time considerably in the process, jokingly remarking that it could be reduced to 45 minutes.
Source: The Hollywood Reporter article by Jordan Riefe
On the Japanese Extended Cut:
The B&W Version should not be confused with what has been referred to as the ‘Japanese director’s cut,’ which is a version released in Japan with additional footage featuring a character played by the actor-director Takeshi Kitano. You can view an extended breakdown of the differences between the cuts here.
This cut, despite being referred to as such in marketing is not really a ‘director’s cut‘ at all. As Longo explains in the aforementioned interview:
“There's never been a director's cut. Ironically, there is a version that some people misunderstand to be a “director's cut,” the Japanese version of it, but it's not a di-rector's cut. It's basically got more Takeshi Kitano in it. That's basically what it is.”
The existence of this cut is attributable to a financing deal worked out with the film’s Japanese distributor by Jordan Hoffman, former president of Carolco, the production company where Johnny Mnemonic was set up.
“Adds Hoffman, ”Takeshi’s a big star in Japan, and [the Japanese distributor] wanted to see more Takeshi, so I made a deal.” The deal: Eight minutes of extra screen time showing the actor was added to the Japanese version of the film.”
Source: Entertainment Weekly, June 23, 1995.
This version of the picture was released earlier this Summer as part of a packed limited edition Blu-Ray in the UK by 101 Films, which also included commentary tracks, bts materials, art cards and a collector’s booklet.
Hidden on Itunes, Visible on Blu-Ray?
Let’s talk about something that is quite peculiar about this version’s distribution. The way that Sony’s announced it seems to suggest that this the first time the B&W version is being released on video. But this isn’t actually the case.
In fact, the B&W version was actually released back in December 2021 though seemingly only on one ‘participating platform’ - namely Itunes/Apple TV.
The announcement of the release flew largely under the radar, as Sony apparently limited it to some brief posts on its Twitter and Facebook accounts, with almost no video or film press websites having been aware, judging by the lack of news articles. Moreover, if you actually check the Johnny Mnemonic ‘extras’ text description in the Itunes/Apple menu when deciding to purchase it, there is NO MENTION of the B&W Version at all. Click on the ‘extras’ menu preview though and there it is!
In other words, you likely wouldn’t know the B&W Version was there unless you first bought the movie and then stumbled on it while checking out the ‘extras’ menu. In effect, Sony had largely concealed the fact of the B&W Version’s release on Itunes , leaving only a small number of internet video sleuths aware of the situation.
Why? What is the point of hiding it?
I don’t know. But I suspect - based on the wording of the Announcement Tweet - is that Johnny Mnemonic was originally released on Itunes only in the Color version and the B&W Version was added as an extra later, with the text listing never updated.
All this would suggest Sony didn’t really see much potential profit in making it available for digital download and so didn’t waste much time or effort on the promotion. Perhaps then it stands to gain more from the standalone Blu-Ray copy and was just obligated by pre-existing contracts to do an Itunes release?
In any case, if you are interested in getting both color and monochrome versions of this film for the cheap price of (currently) $12.99, you can simply buy it on Itunes.*
*This is what I am intending to do in the next few days, as I am both interested in revisiting the movie and in comparing the two versions to one another. Not sure if this will result in another article but I might update this piece with my impressions.
PREY brings language to the forefront:
Though I intend to publish a more extensive article on the film and its different versions later, I want to talk a little bit about Prey (2022, dir. Dan Trachtenberg). The film just came out on Hulu last Friday and has finally managed to get critics to laud a new installment of the long-running Predator franchise. I can gladly say that it’s an amazing little genre picture, perhaps the most artistically ambitious Predator film and easily the best installment since the original.
It has some lush cinematography, with vistas and wide open landscape shots set in natural light that recall the films of Terence Malick. It has some excellent action scenes, especially a confrontation between the Predator and a group of French trappers in a misty forest area. And it has a great lead in Amber Midthunder’s Naru, a Comanche woman seeking to prove her worth as a warrior.
But what especially fascinated me about Prey was its use of language, an aspect that really comes to the foreground in the movie’s alternative “Comanche Version,” which Hulu has made available alongside the traditional English-language release.
Here are some notes on this version and its differences from the English-language release:
Also listed as the “Comanche Dub,” the alternate version of Prey - similar to that of Mnemonic - has been somewhat concealed on its digital platform. The version can be selected by going into the “Menu” or ‘details‘ page of the film on Hulu, scrolling down and selecting it from there. You can also find a link available in the ‘extras’ sub-menu. In this case, I wouldn’t say that Hulu is actively trying to conceal it, but I do think more people would be aware of it and be able to access it, were it to receive a separate listing altogether.
As its name implies, the Comanche version is a ‘dub,’ meaning the Comanche language was largely added in post-production. Because of this, the Comanche version does not always have great lyp-synching, which can be a little distracting as you watch.
However, it’s important to note that Prey was actually shot as a hybrid English-Comanche movie, meaning that the main Native American characters’ dialogue is predominantly English, with select words and/or lines are spoken in Comanche. When Comanche is spoken in the English version, the words are not subtitled, though their meaning is often easy to infer. Conversely, when they appear in the Comanche Version, they are fully subtitled.
Notably, not all instances of foreign speech are translated. Both versions include passages of French dialogue that is neither subtitled, nor dubbed. (Though if the captions are on, the French is transliterated.) This transfers Naru’s sense of confusion to the audience. Much like her, the viewer does not follow what the Frenchmen are saying.
Certain lines of dialogue between the two versions differ, which can influence the reading of a scene’s meaning. For instance, there is a scene early on when Naru’s mother asks he why she wants to hunt. In the English version, Naru responds: “Because you all think I can’t.“ In the Comanche version, she says: “Because you all think I’ll fail.“
Although the Comanche dub is essentially an alternate audio track, it is not possible to switch between the English and Comanche via the ‘audio’ submenu in the course of viewing.
And now, here are some suggested links for reading if you are interested in the Comanche version’s development:
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/the-definitive-cut-of-prey-is-in-comanche/
https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a40794039/predator-prey-comanche-language-release/
FALL finds a better means of censorship
Speaking of lip-synching, there is an interesting article in Variety that I’ve come upon that discusses the pre-release censorship of a survival thriller called Fall. The picture was initially filmed with some coarse language (rather than sex or violence) that would’ve resulted in the picture getting an R rating. At some point, the decision came down to release the picture as a PG-13.
This led director Scott Mann to utilize an AI dubbing technology system “developed by London-based Flawless, for which he also serves as co-CEO.”
The next passage is worth quoting more extensively (highlights my own):
According to Mann, the Flawless team in post-production changed more than 30 F-bombs throughout the movie into PG-13-acceptable epithets...
Flawless, founded in 2021, originally designed its TrueSync AI-based system to provide a better dubbing solution for films translated into other languages.
…TrueSync alters the mouth movements of the actors to match the alternate dialogue being spoken (a process the startup calls “vubbing”). Mann realized the Flawless engine could also be used to clean up the F-words in his movie.
“For a movie like this, we can’t reshoot it. We’re not a big tentpole… we don’t have the resources, we don’t have the time, more than anything else,” Mann said in a behind-the-scenes video feature about the film. “What really saved this movie and brought it into a wider audience was technology.”
Let’s put aside some of the creepy real-life implications of this TrueSync technology. What’s interesting to me here is the way the article positions the new vubbing approach as an alternative to reshooting numerous scenes filled with profanity.
This is very odd, given that language censorship nowadays is traditionally conducted through the use of dubbing and/or a process known as ADR (“Automatic Dialogue Replacement”). In such cases, either the original actor or an uncredited stand-in would record alternative lines of dialogue to replace the ones in the picture.
The new audio would then be edited in place of the previous and synchronized as best as possible with the image.* For years, this is how Hollywood would tone down harsh or suggestive language for television broadcasts of feature films. Meanwhile, reshoots were only considered necessary to replace scenes containing sex or violence.
*Not to mention, the instances of bad language could also be simply muted, cut, or ‘bleeped’ out with a noise though this would likely destroy a viewer’s sense of immersion in a theater.
Here is an example of how Universal had the violent crime classic Scarface (1983, dir. Brian DePalma) revised for television. [Video posted by Anameth on December 2 2011]:
So, why would the producers of Fall need to reshoot scenes for the picture in order to do away with the bad language? Why couldn’t they simply redub or re-record them? Were the actors swearing filmed too much in closeup for the traditional dubbing to look convincing?
If you ask me, I’d say the producers are just exaggerating the significance of the vubbing tech to make it look and sell better. Honestly, the idea that you can now more convincingly alter mouth movements in post-production is both fascinating and kind-of scary but it is not exactly groundbreaking.
For years now, digital technologies have been used to help clean-up, sanitize, and otherwise make Hollywood features more family-friendly. Digital VFX have long been used to remove filmed blood and gore, as well as to alter on-screen filmed action in various way, such as by actively removing or painting out sexual acts.*
*For an example, look at this comparison between the R-rated and Unrated versions of Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut.
TrueSync could very well become widely applied in the production of what Raiford Guins has referred to as the “Edited Clean Version” or “Sanitized Version” of a movie.1 Broadcast cuts of feature films might start looking relatively more convincing when bad language is modified, while family friendly cuts might potentially start showing up more on streaming platforms.*
*And of course, lyp-synching for foreign language versions could be considerably improved. Had the Prey Comanche Dub used TrueSync, it might’ve been more immersive as a whole.
From that perspective, the article suggests that one view Fall as a kind-of digital censorship promotional picture. This, imo, is not a good approach in that it diminishes the value of the movie itself.
At the same time, the article makes for good promotion insofar as I had no idea this movie even existed until I read the piece. Now, knowing that it was revised in such a manner, I am interested in potentially seeing it. More interestingly, it points to the possibility of the harder, R-rated cut eventually coming out on home video. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were distributed as an ‘uncensored’ edition.
This is the first of an attempted relaunch of my ‘Variations’ series. The new issues will consist of several short mini-articles about the alteration, restoration, modernization, variation, and revision of audiovisual works, such as films, TV shows, and videogames.
Sometimes, it will just summarize and react to news stories about instances of alteration, sometimes it will offer some quick thoughts on this or that version being released.
In any case, it’s a chance for me to share certain ideas and views faster, to react more to the fast-changing media landscape around us, as well as highlight in an informal manner about instances of textual variation readers might not be aware of.
Apologies for the somewhat late posting as it was a bit more on-the-fly and I was working on this while traveling. I hope to do more of these in the future on a regular schedule.
Guins, Raiford. “Sanitizing.” Edited clean version: Technology and the culture of control. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009. Print. 89-124