Update: I decided to ask Jane Goldman about this via Twitter and she says:
Truly, I’d challenge anyone to spot the difference – literally 3 shots are 1 or 2 seconds shorter and 2 audio stings turned down
To clarify, not a single shot different or missing & the rumours don’t accurately represent the situation, so no need for distress!
So essentially we are getting the movie they intended to made – and according to a forum poster on IMDb message baords, the director stated that the audio stings were turned down purely to avoid being distracted by what is going on visually.
So there you have it. I’m just annoyed that this whole BBFC thing got out of hand.
Well, now I’ve discovered that Jane Goldman’s adaptation of Susan Hill’s gothic horror (so no, not a prequel or sequel to the Gene Wilder movie) The Woman in Black has been given a 12A instead of the expected 15 rating due to particular content that the American MPAA seem to be okay with, but the BBFC aren’t – I don’t think I’ll be seeing this in the cinema as I smell the opportunity for the film company to release a 15-rated or even an unrated version of the film after the theatrical release window has expired.
So that means I could then watch the film – with all 6 seconds (yes, I know) intact – in the comfort of my own home. Yet I would dearly love to see this in the best possible place to watch a film – a cinema. So unless the film company then decides to re-release the film back in the cinemas with it’s original 15 rating I’ve just have to lump any extras in the comfort of my home, albeit with a much smaller screen and stereo sound system.
Of course having a 12A cert means that you’re going to get more bums on seats during the theatrical release. But for those of us that appreciate a higher rating – perhaps if only to filter out the less mature members of the cinema going public – then we’re screwed. 6 seconds is nothing to worry about, but it’s the fact that the film company did not contest or allow for the higher rating when confronted with the BBFC. Profits before artistic merit.
I know making films isn’t cheap, but COME ON. Treat your audience with some respect for God’s sake. Just because Daniel-sodding-Radcliffe is in this doesn’t automatically entitle you to cash in on the Harry Potter franchise, reduce the certificate to get more screaming girls in, and then count all the money at the expense of treating ALL the audience like rabid Potter fans.
This is why I won’t see this film – Hammer seem to lack any spine. For a horror company that’s screamingly awful.

