MovieChat Forums > Zombi 2 (1980) Discussion > The eye bursting scene - censored or not...

The eye bursting scene - censored or not?

posted 16 years ago by killer_kitty
11 replies | jump to latest

First I should probably say that I’m not a big fan of censorship, especially not in this type of film. Italian zombie films just don't seem right without a nice bit of gore. Its just that I have noticed that my views on this particular film seem to have changed over the years, in a way that kind of leaves me baffled.
I first saw Zombie Flash Eaters when I was 15. It was on British late night TV. Naturally the eye bursting scene had been cut out.

I should probably explain what this particular censored version was like:

You see the zombie dragging the woman’s face towards the jagged wooden splinter. It gets closer and closer. The wood actually makes contact with her eye... And then a picture of a boat.
No clever editing, nothing subtle. Just suddenly a picture of a boat. It couldn’t have looked more censored if they’d just blanked out the offending scene.

I was outraged. I wanted to see the eye burst! How dare they?

I have just got a copy of this film and have watched it for the first time since then. This copy has the eye bursting scene in. So now I’ve seen it. And yet…I find myself wanting the censored version.
It’s not that it was too gross or shocking. I’m happy to have (finally) seen the whole thing. But somewhere inside me I find a perverse humour in the censored copy. The fact that it didn’t looked like they had just removed it. It looked more like someone had seen it, thought ‘this is disgusting!’ and ripped out the bad bit in fury. The fact that the sudden shot of a boat made me think “what the hell?” but whoever censored it seemed to think no one would notice at all.
Maybe it’s just that I’ve seen gorier things over the years. Maybe I’ve matured (although I doubt it).
Has anyone else noticed they prefer the mangled censored version of gory films? Or is it just me being odd? Probably the latter :)
Still, I love this film.

[–] Squonkamatic 16 years ago

Interesting post! You're also free to enjoy the perversity of the older version. When I was a tadpole they used to show Hammer films here on the weekend afternoons and they too were cut. I would always wonder what was missing? and invariably when finally encountering the complete versions it was a disappointment, since in my mind's eye I envisioned things that were downright raunchy.

I've collected home video, laserdisc and now DVD releases of movies for years and have multiple versions of certain films, many of which were cut prints that have now been supposedly made obsolete by having restored pristine prints show up on DVD. And yes, they do sort of ruin the fun of not just imagining what might have been cut, but in terms of sort of closing the door on the film. Time and again I've seen it in the collecting field too that once that pristine uncut DVD shows up the fascination in the film tends to fade within a month or so. You get the pristine, supposedly perfect DVD, watch it a couple times, then sort of file it away. Then what?

So yeah, I still find myself watching cut or compromised older home video versions of films that have since been restored all the time. Collecting those versions was FUN. It was rewarding to find them & finally have a copy of my own, and just because there's a slick new DVD out that doesn't mean that the old tattered version is suddenly obsolete. One of my favorite examples is SLAUGHTER HOTEL with Klaus Kinski. The current DVD versions run about 95 minutes perfectly widescreened, but I will **never** part with my old MPI/Gorgon VHS version running 89 minutes and pan/scanned. It has a scummy, sleazy quality to it that is missing somehow from the DVD presentations. The assembly on the VHS is also slightly different than the one on the DVD, so it's delightful to know that the old tapes still sort of have an important archival purpose as well.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ccr1633 16 years ago

I will make the following unprovable assertion: any movie that would be improved by editing out the gore wasn't a very good film to begin with.

[–] DJMan-51 16 years ago

It was something of a touchstone, exploiting a very real fear (injury to the eye). People actuallyt left the treater after it played out . . . I saw it.

[–] keith-jamieson 15 years ago

Yes I agree, it does exploit the real fear of injury to the eye.Everytime I watch this movie, even though I know what is about to happen to the girls eyeball, I just can't watch the whole scene,I sometimes have to look the other way .However,it should not be censored,people should have the right to watch what they want.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] YankeeDood 16 years ago

I think the scene is a little bit overrated. You can easily tell it was a dummy head used right before the splinter went in.
But still an ok effect considering the budget allowed.

"You can't kill the boogeyman!"
- Tommy Doyle

[–] no-show 16 years ago

where can i see this scene!? I just read about it in the August '09 issue of GQ as one of Eli Roth's favorite violent scenes...

and I'm pretty sure I actually saw this movie on video when I was a toddler cause I've always had this vague memory of a movie in which a long sharp object is pierced into a woman's eye...and it still keeps going in and in and in...

I thought it was Boogyman from the early 80's until I read the article in GQ.

where can i see this scene!?

Wishing that heroes, they truly exist (since 2000)

[–] no-show 16 years ago

never mind, i saw it on u tube. ya, this is what i saw when i was young

Wishing that heroes, they truly exist (since 2000)

[–] thesecrethour 16 years ago

No, I see you're point completely. Sometimes things that you can't see are a hell of a lot scarier than what you don't see. I love the gore in Italian horror, it's breathtakingly awful but sometimes it's nice to imagine what happened rather than see it. Half the time, you're own mind can make it worse than someone elses (at least worse for you.)

---
Life is about jumping off the cliff and hoping to the high Heavens that you can fly!

[–] Nakrophile 15 years ago

One of my favourite censorship moments is actually for language rather than violance or sex. It's in Die Hard, when McClane says his line.

"Yippee-ki-yay, mother" *sound of lift beeping*

God bless you, ITV.

*sound of lift beeping*

In fact, that needs to be my signature from now on. Jack Burton can have a rest.

"We may be trapped."