Dark City Director's Cut in 2006 - Page 2

The first viewing of a picture is hardly the only one from which I derive meaning or pleasure, particularly with the passage of years.

-p

Bill, the comparison was not meant to be an exact comparison, only to show that people are willing to do certain things to get the movies in the way they view to be the best.

The studio forced the VO for Dark City. Lucas forces the new changes in the SEs. The viewers are trying to remedy that by doing the various "fixes" whether it's muting the center channel or hanging on/transferring to their original SW LDs.

I understand YOU think it's ridiculous for YOU, but if it works for other people, who am I to judge?

Paul, not sure if your comment is directed at me

Word!

I haven't seen "Dark City" in years--though it's great--and I didn't remember the VO until it was brought up in this thread. If that's all the director's cut consists of... fine.

Actually--if that's all the eventual director's cut does consist of, someone please let us know. Muting is easier on the wallet than $20+

When theatrically released, I walked into DARK CITY late -- literally when Rufus Sewell wakes up in the tub -- so I basically saw the movie as Proyas intended: as an evolving mystery, where you're trying to figure out what's going on.

It was only months later that I bought the DVD and saw how the opening narration RUINED a prime component of my enjoyment of the movie the first around. There is NO reason for that voice-over -- it spoils everything that you're about to see, and was so obviously added by the studio as a means of telling the audience what was happening as opposed to (what Proyas intended) them figuring it out on their own while the film went along.

I can't even draw a comparison between it and BLADE RUNNER. Whether you like it or not, at least in the latter the Ford narration provides some atmosphere and does clarify plot points.

The DARK CITY prologue empties the entire bag of tricks right up front at the start, and that was surely NOT the intention of the filmmakers.

I also have to disagree with the earlier poster. Saying "pressing mute is riduclous" IS ridiculous, because listening to that Sutherland intro up front ruins what ought to be one of the film's chief pleasures (that you're not completely sure what's happening and you can fill it out for yourself while the story unfolds). Sure, you can say it didn't "ruin it" for you on your first viewing, but frankly -- unless you saw the movie the very first time MINUS the narration -- you have no idea how much more effective the film plays out without the knowledge of the film's backdrop from the very first scene.

Subsequently, I'm all for this DVD!

I clearly remember the test screening reviews posted and the film the director intended may not be as "quick cutting" as the one we saw. Dark Horizens has a very interesting post about this and I for one am very much looking forward to seeing the director's cut.

The fast editing pace is intentional. The director's cut will mostly contain new scenes that weren't shot.

The Folks at Mi-Casa Studios has it listed as being in the works for mixing and mastering in 2.0 , 5.1 and 6.1

Quint, nice! Thanks for the heads-up. Any future updates will be greatly anticipated.

Mike, what a unique perspective! Thanks for sharing your experience. When I did mute the VO for my friends they reacted the same way upon hearing the VO after the movie was over, but you never know if they're just pleasing the host

Terrific, DTS.

Yeah, Quint--thank you. http://www.robertmargouleff.com/newsite/

I still remember being impressed with their re-mix work for the Platinum Se7en.

-p

F**k yes!

Does anyone know for sure what is going to be new?

What makes people think its going to get scenes that were not shot before?

Because of what Alex Proyas had said on his own messageboard at Mysteryclock.com and various chats.

So, he's shooting additional material? I don't quite understand. Can someone clarify? I liked the film a lot, but I do think that the editing was way, way ADD-crazed and I'm not at all surprised that Proyas wanted more spaciousness in there.

I think it would be more along the lines of new visual effects.

Tim, you should see it ASAP. At it's current price point, it's well worth the $5-$10 for a blind purchase and also spending the money on the double-dip. It's a film so visually stimulating that it will take more than one screening to absorb all of the aesthetics.

As far as having to be "in the mood" to see it, I'm always in the mood for a quality movie, as I'm sure you are.



This is a point where we see a lot of hypocrisy. There are those who will clamor and pump their fists in the air saying that "we must have the movie the way it was presented in the theaters" yet, those same people will proclaim that they must have the director's cut of films because they feel it is the only way the film should be seen. Let's get some consistency here.

Myself, I would love to see the director's cut as long as the original theatrical version is on the DVD as well. The DVD format allows a filmmaker who has to battle the studios for his/her version to become the auteur that he/she wanted to be in the first place. Why not use the format to placate everyone, fans and filmmakers?

Confirmed yet again!

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...gory=ANSWERMAN

New Line shouldn't waste time with including the theatrical cut since you can get it for $5 and it's an excellent disc already.

I will mute the VO every single time I see it! If the movie plays better without the VO, why would I want to listen to it later just because I already know what happens? When I watch a movie I own, even though I know what happens, it still becomes a new experience for me. In a mystery type movie, I want to watch the story unfold and learn the facts as the main character is learning them. A good movie will have me experience the characters emotions at finding this information out for the first time. The Dark City VO destroys the whole mystery of the movie. When watching John wake up in the bathtub not knowing what the heck is going on, just like the first time watching the movie, I don't want someone to tell me the whole story before the action even starts.

I am not sure if anyone watches those NFL or NHL DVDs that they put out at the end of the season for each team. There is a little introduction part in the beginning of each of these that shows a little "summary" of what is on the DVD, then they start at the beginning of the season. I have the Red Wings DVDs of their 3 most recent cup wins, and I can't watch the beginning into for any of them. I want the excitement to build over the course of watching the DVD until they show the cup ceremony! Of course I know what is going to happen already, but I get to watch the season/story unfold for the first time all over again!

Well it's not quite so black and white for most people.

I think those of us who are excited over the new cut do not in any way want to discredit the original theatrical cut. I would even like it to be on the new DVD if it's an improved transfer. It's not an either/or situation for me. I'm glad the original is out, I'd love to see the new cut.

I am not a fan of "Original Version" vs. "Director's Cuts" - I'm a fan of film, and more specifically in this case, THIS film, and I want to see it in whatever form Proyas presents but am glad that the original still exists, even if I find the new cut superior. (this is a marked difference from a certain space trilogy whose maker now wants the original versions wiped from everyone's memory)

I really like this movie, but I'm not a big fan of the voiceover. Unless its an integral part of the storytelling and conceit of the film (a.k.a. Royal Tennenbaums), voiceover should be avoided, especially when it serves as a crutch to get JSP "caught up to speed" in challenging narratives.

That said, I think Harrison Ford's voiceover in Blade Runner fits into the "casual private detective voiceover" convention, which is a staple of noir and fits into the cinematography and (osensibly) into the genre. That's probably why some people still like it, and why it doesn't completely ruin the film for me. That said, I might be one of the only people I know who prefers both the darker ending to Blade Runner AND the Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Anyway, yeah, this is a Dark City thread, huh? I should mention that I thought the "shift" late in DC to a special-effects action extravaganza - slash - romantic melodrama was a bit much, and I hope some scenes temper this shift a little. While it stays true to the redemptive message of the film, I still see studio hands all over the finale.

Well it's 2006...is the DC: DC here yet?

Seriously though, anyone hear anything about a possible concrete release date?

BTW - I messed up the "Fight For The Title" story in my post on the previous page. It went like this:

1. Dark City was considered to be too close to Mad City (WB movie, parent of New Line). Changed to...
2. Dark World. Spielberg's estate threatens legal action: too close to Lost World (Jurassic Park 2). Changed to...
3. Dark Empire. Lucasfilm threatens legal action: too close to Empire Strikes Back, Dark Side of the Force, and the Dark Empire comics made about the Star Wars universe.
4. Mad City bombs.
5. Original title of Dark City approved.

Does anyone know when we can expect this to come out? Surely not Q1 of 2006 now.

DC is running on Starz-HD and it looks and sounds AMAZING!

Mark Talmadge, your silence has me curious...

DC on Starz? Huh? I saw it on Starz HD and it was the theatrical cut, complete with stupid opening narration.

I think he means DC as in 'Dark City' (not director's cut).

The opening narration never really bothered me. While it's happening there's some fantastic visuals going on and I think most people just kind of zone out. I sure wasn't listening that closely the first time I saw it in the theater.

I really hope the director's cut doesn't ruin the pacing. I have faith in Proyas but you never know.

Please DTS 6.1 and no VO please......