Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DVD' started by Eric Emma, Mar 22, 2004.
I'd be very interested in seeing this since supposely WB cut close to an hour of it out.
Where'd you hear that they cut an hour?
I've read the book and if they stuck to the book the movie would have been alot better. Not that it sucked, it was good, but it wasn't great either.
I'd love to see a long extended edition, if it exists.
I'm sure we will. The director has commented publicly that there will be at least 2 , maybe 3 DVD releases. Surely one of those will be a director's cut to give it some added value.
Maybe it is just me, but I am kind of getting tired of all these directors cuts. I mean there are only 4 movies that I like the directors cut over the original. And thats the LOTR trilogy and Tombstone. Everything else I just want the absolute best picture and sound quality in it's unmolested theatrical version.
Well, there are a few movies where I like to have both versions:
Army Of Darkness: The theatrical cut flows better, but I like to see all the extra stuff integrated into the film.
Legend: if just to hear the difference between the two scores.
Highlander: I like things about both versions.
And others where I like the directors cuts better:
LotR: no explination needed.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Actually watchable now
Superman: Again, no problems
I guess if there are some scenes that were left out for time reasons, then maybe one is justified. Problem is, there seem to be too many out there just for marketing reasons (American Pie, anyone?)
There are some good directors cuts, some with minor changes from the theatrical cuts, some with more major ones, that are absolute gems.
Off the top of my head, I can think of a few that I'm glad exist:
"Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: The Director's Edition" - no huge additions, about two or three minutes of trimmed or deleted footage put back in that gives the film some more character depth.
"Almost Famous: Untitled" - perhaps my favorite director's cut. I can't think of another film offhand where the longer version is so clearly superior. With some longer cuts, you get an alternative version of the movie that's really no better or worse, just different. This is clearly better, it makes it a much richer film. This was a film for me that when I first saw it in theaters, I didn't want it to end, I didn't want to stop spending time with these characters in these places, and the longer version nicely expands on that.
"Touch Of Evil" - the new reconstruction offers the closest thing we'll ever get to a director's cut of this minor classic, and I'm glad to have it.
"Lord Of The Rings" Extended Editions - totally worthwhile. Though I didn't see the marathon theatrical showing, I did catch the extended cuts of the first two films in theaters at the beginning of December, and I really thought they were by far superior to the original versions. The added character development is priceless, and unlike some longer cuts that are just longer for the sake of being longer, everything put into these felt like it needed to be there. In seeing the original releases of the films, I remember at times feeling that something was paced poorly or that I would have liked more detail about something, and the extended editions provided it. One of the few instances I can think of where adding extra footage made the film flow so much better that it actually felt shorter watching it. Of all three theatrical cuts and the two extended editions currently out, the extended cut of "The Two Towers" is my favorite in the series.
I also like the director's cuts that James Cameron has put out for some of his films. I was never a big fan of "Aliens" so that doesn't really interest me. The longer cut of "The Abyss" is really fantastic, and the longer "T2" is excellent. In the case of The Abyss, it just felt to me that the theatrical cut didn't have enough detail, it felt a little rushed (even at its length) and it felt like more story and character stuff was needed, which the longer version provides. With T2, there's nothing wrong with the theatrical cut. The longer version doesn't fix anything because there really was nothing that needed fixing - however, as a big fan of the movie, it was just really great to be able to spend some more time with the characters and see the events unfold with added detail.
Thank-you Warner. Without James Cameron T3 was utter rubbish. You want even more of this cruddy movie?
I'm pretty sure I read in Empire magazine recently, in an interview with the director, that not only is the theatrical cut the "directors's approved cut", but there will be a super-special edition DVD further down the line - no new cut, but more extensive special features in line with the T2 ultimate edition.
I agree with most of Jason's list, but for Superman, I would say there are major problems. Most of the additions are completely gratuitous and mess with the pacing of a film that already dragged in spots. I would have much preferred a DVD that had them as deleted scenes rather than having them integrated into the movie.
I think what really did it for me was Apocalypse Now Redux. That version of the film is junk!
Regarding Superman - I think the additions made the entire Krypton scene make more sense (especially when JorEl was threatened). I always sensed something was missing and rushed before seeing the new cut. Also, the bullets/ice/fire scene reinforced just how invincible Superman really was. I have no desire to see the theatrical cut again.
Also, Almost Famous and Terminator 2 were better extended cuts in my opinion. Apoc Now Redux is hard to say. There are pros and cons to it. I do love the transfer on it though -- much better than the original.
I enjoy the longer cuts-although they sometimes add a little too much back. In Superman, I loved the extended coucil scene, the Father-Son talk with Supe & Jor-el & the Fire/Ice scene, which is what a comic book movie should have. The scene with the girl scouts wasn't helpful, but if I had to chose, I surely would pick the longer cut. Same with T2 extended cut. The surgery scene makes that cut worthwhile all by itself. If the director wants a longer cut, I think he should have it.
To be honest, I hadn't seen the film in years before picking up the DVD, and I don't think it drags much at all. It is the same with the audio, which there was such an uproar about, but I couldn't see the fuss.
I had forgotten about Almost Famous. A director's cut that makes the theatrical pointless.
I have never understood when people who fancy themselves experts on movies talk about "ruining the pace" of a movie. To lengthen Superman from 143min. to 151 doesn't seem like too much at all-it's an epic. My favorite claims of "ruining the pace" are for Star Trek 2, which is 3min 30 sec. longer and the latest version of Star Trek 6 which is longer by 4 SECONDS from the previous version. If I like a movie I want it to be longer-IF the added footage is good. I don't care about "pace". And please, no lectures about how pace has nothing to do with the actual time, but is an abstract concept.
If a film is already long and feels epic, then adding gratuitous scenes, such as the fire and ice sequence and the girl scouts under the Hollywood sign, is very unnecessary. The fire and ice scene is very cool, but it doesn't add much to the movie as a whole. That's why it would be a great "deleted scene". The girl scout scene creates a similar problem to the one supposedly solved by the extra Krypton scenes in that it creates an incomplete thread that is never resolved, unlike the other earthquake incidents that Superman is shown addressing.
The young Lois on the Train scene was also a throwaway moment that the film does not need, but would still be neat as a cut scene because of the inside joke cameos.
Even with the additional clarifying scenes, there is not enough tension created by the council's pursuit of Jor-El to make it worth all of the exposition. The imminent explosion of the planet seems to take precedence.
Also, Christopher Reeves' performance in the additional Jor-El conversation in the fortress of solitude is not his best work.
I hear in Mostow's director's cut of T3 it takes about another hour for Kristana Lokken to find a suitable outfit.
The worth of added scenes is subjective-as are the opinions of the scenes that are in the Theatrical cut. I have heard people say of theatrical cuts "I liked xxx movie, except for xxx scene." The audience can't be the editor of movies, it should be the director's choice. I can't see a director saying, "I'll add this bad scene back to the movie just to make longer." Live with director cuts the same way you live with the theatrical cut.
I think it's always a great idea too use Seamless branching and have both versions. Plus do not use the term Directors Cut so liberally. James Cameron has stated that those Extended cuts of his films are merely just that, extended cuts.
Make the theatrical cut available to me at home and I will gladly live with both.