Doghouse Director's Cut?

Chat here about anything horror related. Be it movies, news, remakes or events.
Post Reply

Do you want to see a "Director's Cut" of Jake West's Doghouse released?

Yes
12
75%
No
0
No votes
Couldn't give a monkey's
4
25%
 
Total votes: 16

Mr Bill
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: City of the Dead (London)

Doghouse Director's Cut?

Post by Mr Bill »

Is anybody else interested in seeing a Director's Cut of Jake West's Doghouse released on dvd? I believe it's Sony we have to convince!

For the sake of "declareing my interests" i should say that i have invested a few quid in Doghouse shares, got to meet all the great people involved either side of the camera and even managed to sneak into the pub scene at the beginning. So I will always be biased and do stand to benefit from the film's success. That said, my main interest in seeing a director's cut released, is as a British horror fan, who would like to see the entire film as the director intended.

Many people will allready know that there was an introduction sequence, written and filmed, that demonstrates the horror waiting in Moodley before "the boys" are introduced at the beginning of the main story. Although excerpts from this sequence were used in some early trailers and the sequence was included in Jake West's original 98 minute cut, the decision was made to remove it in order to make the film shorter.

I feel strongly that this has been a mistake and would really like to see it reinstated in a second release.

A strong president can be seen in the case of successful films in the same tradition and genre as Doghouse, such as; Severance, Dog Soldiers and Jake West’s Evil Aliens. In the case of these films, and countless others, there has been an introductory sequence that grabs the audience’s attention and hints at the horrors that await the film’s main characters before they are introduced at the beginning of the story proper. This is a tried and tested device and characteristic of almost all good films in the genre.

In the case of Doghouse (as Severance and Dog Soldiers would have been) the omission of this introduction damages the overall narrative and roundness of the film. Some events and developments have become non-sequitus, pretexts and themes have been missed, and the fundamental “audience grab” and crucial sense of foreboding schadenfreude is completely absent from the outset of the film.

I would really like to see the complete film released, and believe that Sony would be willing to do so (possibly also with a director's commentary and other new extras) if they are made aware of demand for it.

Is anybody interested?
Let me know what you think, or better still, tell Sony.

(agree or disagree, want to know more or tell me what you know, all replies and pms welcomed- make some noise)
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum
streetrw
Frightfest Hardcore
Frightfest Hardcore
Posts: 1560
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: A hell of my own making
Contact:

Post by streetrw »

Tricky. To the question "do I want to see it released?" the answer is that I don't much care one way or the other. But that's because although I genuinely didn't like the film and have no desire to ever watch it again, I don't think it shouldn't be out there for the people who did like it. I can't vote "no" because that would be incredibly arrogant of me!

But the film really isn't very good and in all honesty I doubt the reinstatement of a prologue sequence is going to make it better because that's not where the film's central problem lies. The film's central problem is that I basically don't give a damn whether any of these people live or die. More damagingly, I'm hoping that in a few cases they do die because they're hugely unlikeable people. And when I'm wishing sharp pointy things into the hero of the piece - when I'm on the side of the "zombies" - the film is failing.

Because the crew of "blokes" - a gang of leering, boozing, dimwitted and misogynistic oafs led by the charmless Danny Dyer - don't represent any kind of heroic character worth rooting for. There's a scene fairly early on in a pub where Dyer or one of his cohorts start smoking and when someone asked them to stop, he tells them in typically colourful fashion to Go Away. Why am I then supposed to invest any interest or any time in these loathesome people? Why do men have to be portrayed in such unflattering terms? Most men, even Blokes, even Blokes who watch Top Gear and Match Of The Day and lesbian porn videos and like to get drunk a lot and "check out the knockers on that!" - aren't like that. Some of us are interesting, intelligent individuals who wash and read subtitled films and who don't fixate about MUFC and Nuts magazine. With all the men as "allo darlin!" dimwits and all the women either as lust objects or monsters, it's like Benny Hill never went away....

It's not a Jake West thing - even though I didn't like Razor Blade Smile either! I rather enjoyed Evil Aliens, and he did a Pumpkinhead movie as well which was quite fun (though how much of that is A Jake West Film and how much A Pumpkinhead Movie I don't know). But this.... this I just didn't enjoy at all.

And fundamentally it is the same film as Lesbian Vampire Killers, only much cruder with far less interesting people and not as well shot. Now I liked LVK when I was it at the FF one-dayer but in retrospect it possibly came across as better than it actually is, because it followed directly on from Repo: The Genetic Opera (one of the five worst films I've seen in a cinema this year - full lists to follow). Thinking about it, LVK is not great, but it is funnier, more cinematic, and more infused with the heritage of British genre cinema than Doghouse.
http://streetrw.blogspot.com - For all your occasional film rambling needs.
http://twitter.com/streetrw - For when you really need to know what I had for breakfast.

AND NOW: SKYPE!
Grindhouse
Frightfest Hardcore
Frightfest Hardcore
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by Grindhouse »

I have to vote yes for a directors cut,not because im a fan of the film i havent actually seen it,but having bought it for my freind and sat through the extras the dvd and BR release wasnt very good at all hastily packaged and rushed out to meet a sell date for the shops.

This could have easily had a better release of extras, commentaries a theatrical cut and directors version an an all round better package if the demand is there and its re released like it evidently will be then i would rather wait for the more comprehensive edition of the film.
after all they spent so much time making the movie and investing in the time to do all the extras,a few commentaries wouldnt take too much effort.

as for Severance what a mess that film is,its neither comedy nor horror and its not even funny just a very poor film i expected better after Creep which has its flaws but is a pretty good movie set on the underground when compared to say the likes of Gnaw or Umbrage.
"Time To Nut Up Or Shut Up"
Mr Bill
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: City of the Dead (London)

Post by Mr Bill »

Well that's got things off to a great start!
One person who didn't like the film and one who hasn't seen it but doesn't like the dvd package. Last time i looked on this forum there seemed to be some frightfest support for the film and it certainly seemed to go down well at the q&a screening at the Prince Charles, when i first raised this missing intro issue.

As is becoming a habit, I couldn't disagree more with Mr Street's comments.
I concede that there is a very laddish quality to Danny Dyer's character, but only to Danny's character, the rest of the ensemble being more subtle and varied, and the many references Street made to lad culture (MUFC, Nuts, etc) simply aren't present in the film. I think he may be "projecting" a lot more onto the character (and the rest of the cast by association) out of a dislike of the character Danny plays. I also think that this is perfectly reasonable, and the audience is intended to have little sympathy for him and revel in his being stabbed, whipped and terrorised by the magnificent "Bubbles". I don't think a horror film fails if you are wishing ill against the dislikeable characters, i rather think its part of the point. Seeing the bad get what they deserve or the cocky brought down a peg or two is a big part of what these films are about. (by the end of REC i was ready to kill that whineing tv presenter myself!)
The comment about barmaid being outnumbered was most likely a sideways swipe at the "democratic" nature of the total smokeing ban, and if it pissed off non smokers it was probably intended to.
All of these finer points are much of a muchness, if you didn't like the film you didn't like the film and that's your bussiness, so rather than provoke a renewed torrent of critical bluster by saying all that i could on the points raised about the film's content, i'll skate over them and return to the point of this thread that is the Director's Cut.
Whether you think the film is beyond redemption or not, i would still maintain that the film should be "out there" in it's best and complete form and as the Director intended, and that there is no need to excessively cut it on dvd, as has been done for the cinema audience, purely for the sake of time. I can see plenty of benefit and absolutely no harm in the ultimate edit of the film being 98 minutes long and including the deleted intro.
On the subject of the intro, i do believe it is important.
As i have already said it is important to the format of this type of film that the "horror" be introduced before the "victims". It also explains the military type pinned to the fence, the titular reference to the "doghouse" and most significantly the role of "The Snipper" as an embodiment of the male fear of castration and not just a pretty zombie girl with a pair of scissors.
I doubt that this increase to the plot and characterisation would significantly improve the film from Mr Street's point of view, but it may go some way towards explaining why "the boys" are introduced in such an excessively "blokeish" way. I think we are surposed to want to see their macho bubble burst by the many "sharp pointy things" directed towards their heads.
As for the notion that Lesbian Vampire Killers is a better film along the same lines- i really have to disagree. I enjoyed LVK but it doesn't have nearly as much going for it as Doghouse. It could be argued that the ladies are prettier, but this would be because the horror make-up isn't nearly as ambitious or accomplished, and it could be argued that the male characters are more likeable, but this would be because they have less gritt and substance and rely on the already popular Horne and Corden pairing. However LVK does have an intro sequence where the concept of Lesbian Vampires is introduced prior to the introduction of the decidedly meek leading man, this juxtaposition is crucial to the way that character is received by the audience, and this is what is missing from the opening of Doghouse.

Anyway- all that aside, whether you love or hate Doghouse or are overwhelmed by indifference, my assertion remains that the sub-ninety minute version of the film (that is still the only version currently available) is not the best the film can be, nor is it the film as the Director intended. As a fan, i want to see the full and best version of the film out there.

Am I really all alone on this?
Last edited by Mr Bill on Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum
Grindhouse
Frightfest Hardcore
Frightfest Hardcore
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:01 pm
Location: Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by Grindhouse »

But i did buy it on bluray :)
"Time To Nut Up Or Shut Up"
Mr Bill
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: City of the Dead (London)

Post by Mr Bill »

Grindhouse wrote:But i did buy it on bluray :)
I can see Grindhouse's earlier point that it feels like a rushed release in terms of the overall package.
There are some good extras: the deleted scenes and a great gag reel.
But i was underwhelmed by the final artwork, and there didn't seem to be as much "making of" stuff, particularly involveing the girls, as i had expected.

But this means that there is more that could be put on a special edition.
I'm sure Jake West would be more than happy to do a directors commentary, on a director's cut of the film. (I can perfectly understand why he didn't do one opening with "now, there should be an intro here.")
There is also plenty more pre production stuff I have seen that could go on, early trailers and footage of how the Zombirds were created, and Emily Booth seemed to be holding a camcorder whenever she wasn't holding a pair of scissors, so her behind the scenes film could also be included.

You also pointed out how hard people have worked to make this or any film, and how it seems unfair to take the final cut out of their hands.
In the case of the intro, i remember how cold it was that night, and a well covered but stark bollock naked man had to run around in the rain for some times before being finally castrated by Ms Booth, now that takes balls (ahem) and for his part to end up completely on Sony's cutting room floor just seems rotten.

There is much that could be added to the overall Doghouse package, but it mightn't happen if Sony aren't made aware that people want it.
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum
streetrw
Frightfest Hardcore
Frightfest Hardcore
Posts: 1560
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: A hell of my own making
Contact:

Post by streetrw »

Mr Bill wrote:As is becoming a habit, I couldn't disagree more with Mr Street's comments.
I concede that there is a very laddish quality to Danny Dyer's character, but only to Danny's character, the rest of the ensemble being more subtle and varied, and the many references Street made to lad culture (MUFC, Nuts, etc) simply aren't present in the film. I think he may be "projecting" a lot more onto the character (and the rest of the cast by association) out of a dislike of the character Danny plays. I also think that this is perfectly reasonable, and the audience is intended to have little sympathy for him and revel in his being stabbed, whipped and terrorised by the magnificent "Bubbles". I don't think a horror film fails if you are wishing ill against the dislikeable characters, i rather think its part of the point. Seeing the bad get what they deserve or the cocky brought down a peg or two is a big part of what these films are about. (by the end of REC i was ready to kill that whineing tv presenter myself!)
The comment about barmaid being outnumbered was most likely a sideways swipe at the "democratic" nature of the total smokeing ban, and if it pissed off non smokers it was probably intended to.
All of these finer points are much of a muchness, if you didn't like the film you didn't like the film and that's your bussiness, so rather than provoke a renewed torrent of critical bluster by saying all that i could on the points raised about the film's content, i'll skate over them and return to the point of this thread that is the Director's Cut.
Whether you think the film is beyond redemption or not, i would still maintain that the film should be "out there" in it's best and complete form and as the Director intended, and that there is no need to excessively cut it on dvd, as has been done for the cinema audience, purely for the sake of time. I can see plenty of benefit and absolutely no harm in the ultimate edit of the film being 98 minutes long and including the deleted intro.
On the subject of the intro, i do believe it is important.
As i have already said it is important to the format of this type of film that the "horror" be introduced before the "victims". It also explains the military type pinned to the fence, the titular reference to the "doghouse" and most significantly the role of "The Snipper" as an embodiment of the male fear of castration and not just a pretty zombie girl with a pair of scissors.
I doubt that this increase to the plot and characterisation would significantly improve the film from Mr Street's point of view, but it may go some way towards explaining why "the boys" are introduced in such an excessively "blokeish" way. I think we are surposed to want to see their macho bubble burst by the many "sharp pointy things" directed towards their heads.
As for the notion that Lesbian Vampire Killers is a better film along the same lines- i really have to disagree. I enjoyed LVK but it doesn't have nearly as much going for it as Doghouse. It could be argued that the ladies are prettier, but this would be because the horror make-up isn't nearly as ambitious or accomplished, and it could be argued that the male characters are more likeable, but this would be because they have less gritt and substance and rely on the already popular Horne and Corden pairing. However LVK does have an intro sequence where the concept of Lesbian Vampires is introduced prior to the introduction of the decidedly meek leading man, this juxtaposition is crucial to the way that character is received by the audience, and this is what is missing from the opening of Doghouse.

Anyway- all that aside, whether you love or hate Doghouse or are overwhelmed by indifference, my assertion remains that the sub-ninety minute version of the film (that is still the only version currently available) is not the best the film can be, nor is it the film as the Director intended. As a fan, i want to see the full and best version of the film out there.

Am I really all alone on this?
No, you're not! The vote currently stands at seven in favour, none against, with two abstentions.

In principle I'm always in favour of the film being out there in the best version. In practice I'm not sure it's workable as there are so many versions of so many films - which is the definitive DAWN OF THE DEAD, for example? The Romero cut or the International version? Which is the definitive ALIENS? Or BLADE RUNNER? Or APOCALYPSE NOW? Those are movies where the differences and changes are significant and the alterations do more than just make the film longer, and sometimes that's not for the best. ALIENS, for example, is perfect in its standard release cut rather than the Special Edition with 20 minutes of unnecessary material. Sometimes the studio suits know what they're doing.

Would the discarded scenes from DOGHOUSE really make a significant difference to Danny Dyer's character? My basic problem with him is not that he's so despicably laddish that I want to see him suffer, it's that he's so despicably laddish that I just want him to go away. I don't agree that wishing ill against dislikeable characters is part of the point of a horror film - seeing the bad guys get what they deserve is the point of DEATH WISH or HARRY BROWN. The point of horror movies is not seeing bad things happen to people who deserve it, it's seeing bad things happen to people who DON'T. None of the original troupe of machete fodder in the first run of FRIDAY THE 13THs and HALLOWEENS etc deserved to die. There's usually one who does, but he or she isn't usually the main character and for him or her you can cheer on Jason (or Michael Myes or whoever) - but for much of the time you're surely on the side of the innocent victims. Result: I don't care. And I didn't care about Dyer or any of his buddies. I didn't enjoy being with them.

On the other hand I didn't mind spending time with the heroes of Lesbian Vampire Killers, as they weren't obnoxious Neanderthal misogynists. LVK worked as a better film not just because the leads were more personable individuals (incidentally I had no knowledge of the Horne and Corden pairing at the time) - it also worked because it was playing on the traditions of the British genre heritage, specifically the Hammers. Doghouse seems more to be playing on the traditions of a Guy Ritchie film.

But I'm not against a Special Edition of Doghouse! I just don't want to see it..... :)
http://streetrw.blogspot.com - For all your occasional film rambling needs.
http://twitter.com/streetrw - For when you really need to know what I had for breakfast.

AND NOW: SKYPE!
thesavageintruder
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by thesavageintruder »

I think there is plenty of space for horror movies with (at least one) sympathetic protagonist and those with none whatsoever. While there was usually more than one likeable soul in all the Friday and Halloween movies, i have enjoyed plenty of slasher flicks where the pleasure stems largely from watching annoying or unpleasant folks buying the farm.
In the case of Doghouse i thought this was a really enjoyable flick. I took the characterisation of the blokey-bloke characters to be a refreshing and fun satire of the whole lads mag culture - and i also felt that the movie succeeded in getting the balance right with these guys. It invited us to laugh at their credible (if deliberately exaggerated - after all its a comedy horror film!) character traits/flaws while also showing us enough humanity to make them sufficiently likeable.
Its a mistake to take the movie seriously, but i liked that there's more to it than initially meets the eye. I would welcome a director's cut, though if anything the one thing i thought it needed more of was splatter - a couple of parts in particular seemed surprisingly restrained!
Mr Bill
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: City of the Dead (London)

Post by Mr Bill »

I agree there wasn't nearly as much gore as Evil Aliens, possibly part of aiming at a slightly broader cinema audience and keeping the certificate down to a 15.
The death of Patrick at the hands of the Snipper was originally intended to be the longest stabbing scene in cinema history at over two minutes, I'm not sure what happened to that idea.

I could see the appeal of a "harder" cut, reinstatement of the castration scene at the top of the movie would be a good first step in that direction.
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum
Payne
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:12 am

Post by Payne »

I'd certainly like to see a longer cut, preferably with seemless branching so as not to get stuck with one or the other.

Also more Christina cole would be nice.
Mr Bill
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:31 pm
Location: City of the Dead (London)

Re:

Post by Mr Bill »

Payne wrote:I'd certainly like to see a longer cut, preferably with seemless branching so as not to get stuck with one or the other.

Also more Christina cole would be nice.
Yes, Christina Cole's "there are worse things than getting divorced" speech on the bus, that can be glimpsed in some early trailers on the extras, has been cut, probably because it ties into the intro, and i would expect it to be reinstated also.

It's Sony that are holding up any re-release of the film. If you (or anybody else) would like to contact them with your thoughts on the subject, let me know and i will give you an address.
I've come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass... and I'm all out of bubblegum
PeterPan
Running Zombie
Running Zombie
Posts: 194
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:39 am
Location: Swansea

Re: Doghouse Director's Cut?

Post by PeterPan »

Unfortunately I think this is a catch-22 situation. Sony won't release an extended cut unless there is sufficient sales on the original release. Although I enjoyed the film, I can't see it appealing to a larger audience and the niche nature of the movie will mean even if sales are great for a small genre film it won't make an impression on Sony. The best hope is that Sony sells distribution rights to an indipendant distributor down the line and they restore the film to it's original glory.
"The little pissed Welsh tit is here. And pissed"
Marlin
Twitching Corpse
Twitching Corpse
Posts: 49
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 2:49 pm
Location: London

Re: Doghouse Director's Cut?

Post by Marlin »

The sad thing is, films like Doghouse will only ever appeal to a niche market and, like it or not, that niche market shrinks even further when you cast Danny Dyer in your product.

I'd always back the release of any edit that keeps a film's fans happy, but I think this is one you'll struggle with as, for some unknown reason, they cast the world's biggest oik as their central character/star. The loathing that Dyer generates among certain aficionados is broadly justified - one of those few actors who divides opinion to the point that I have friends who would avoid anything he is in like the plague, regardless of plot. I'm happy to email Sony if you PM me the address Bill, but given the costs involved I don't see this campaign being as successful as the Killing In The Name effort that I'm still laughing about...

See you in Glasgow.

:)
Post Reply