The Director's Cut: Harvey Weinstein's non-mea culpa
http://www.vulture.com/2015/02/54-directors-cut.html
What's so appalling about Harvey Weinstein's non-mea culpa, saying that he's glad the current market will support such a picture as the newly-restored director's cut of "54", is that that suggests that they'd made the right decision in 1998 to eviscerate the movie.
How was that the right decision when "54" bombed in 1998 in large part because of the slashing of the film?
One of the articles above points out that BOOGIE NIGHTS a year earlier had a predictably-similar dismal test audience experience, yet NewLine Cinema trusted the film, released it anyway without slashing, and it became a huge hit. (And, given the comparable subject matter to "54," BOOGIE NIGHTS' success certainly proved that the late-'90s market could support such material).
I mean, if an uncut (pardon the pun) BOOGIE NIGHTS had bombed and a slashed "54" had been a box office smash, then Weinstein's passive-aggressive rationalization today for what they did 17 years ago might make a little more sense.
He'd had a lot more credibility if he'd just confess that they'd over-reacted in 1998 to "54"s test audience reaction. But I guess Hollywood just passes the Buck o' Blame, especially when their panicked scramble to save millions of bucks costs 'em those bucks instead.
--
The most profound of sin is tragedy unremembered.