The Exorcist: Is there a difference between these two cuts of the 1973 film? (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Are there any differences between "The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen" and "The Exorcist: The Extended Director's Cut"? Is it the same film cut with two different film titles? Both are 132 minutes long.

Man, I wish Warner would release this on 4K/UHD with Dolby Atmos.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Robert,

I am pretty sure they are one and the same. I think the wording is how the initial DVD release was marketed.

In other words, "The Version You've Never Seen" was the original marketing slogan for the extended-release on DVD and then it just became the "Director's Cut" by the time it arrived on Blu-ray.

BestBuy just got a new Steelbook of this for about $15 and it is the Director's Cut.

No doubt a 4k release is forthcoming. This is a crown jewel in the Warner library. The only problem I see is that studio really doesn't seem to be churning out 4k catalog titles that quickly.

 

[DVBRD]

Isn't this "Director's Cut" branding kind of misleading (even with the word "Extended" in front of it)? I know William Friedkin oversaw it, but this cut was meant to be more faithful to William Peter Blatty's vision than Friedkin's.

 

[Lord Dalek]

The Version You Never Seen has an extra subliminal shot of Pazuzu that wasn't replicated when they did the 4K master for the "Extended Director's Cut", otherwise they're identical.

 

[Robert Crawford]

The Version You Never Seen has an extra subliminal shot of Pazuzu that wasn't replicated when they did the 4K master for the "Extended Director's Cut", otherwise they're identical.

Is that the shot in the darken bedroom?

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

“After my final cut of the original The Exorcist, I took out 12 more minutes before we actually released it in theatres. Years later, Bill Blatty asked if I’d consider reviewing some of that rejected footage (which he always felt should have remained) with an eye towards putting it into a new version. Bill gave me the best piece of material I've ever received and because of that and because the film had such a major reputation over some 25 years, I agreed to revisit all these scenes. When I saw them, I came to realize that Bill was, in fact, right. With technical advances, scenes that didn’t work then could now be fixed with CGI and there were others that I thought strengthened the spiritual aspect of the film. Warner agreed and released a whole new theatrical print in 2000 which we called The Exorcist: The Version You’ve Never Seen. And I now agree with Blatty that this is the best and most complete version.” -William Friedkin

 

[Lord Dalek]

Is that the shot in the darken bedroom?

Yes.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yes.

Yeah, I loved that shot for some reason. I wished they left it in.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

“After my final cut of the original The Exorcist, I took out 12 more minutes before we actually released it in theatres. Years later, Bill Blatty asked if I’d consider reviewing some of that rejected footage (which he always felt should have remained) with an eye towards putting it into a new version. Bill gave me the best piece of material I've ever received and because of that and because the film had such a major reputation over some 25 years, I agreed to revisit all these scenes. When I saw them, I came to realize that Bill was, in fact, right. With technical advances, scenes that didn’t work then could now be fixed with CGI and there were others that I thought strengthened the spiritual aspect of the film. Warner agreed and released a whole new theatrical print in 2000 which we called The Exorcist: The Version You’ve Never Seen. And I now agree with Blatty that this is the best and most complete version.” -William Friedkin

I never believed Friedkin when he claimed he had a change of heart. I think he wanted the $$$ the "new" version brought but I don't think he suddenly decided the updated cut was better.

He'd argued passionately against the Blatty preferences only a couple of years earlier when the two recorded a commentary together!

 

[Radioman970]

OT. I wish Spielberg would do a new 3D movie that put us inside this movie. there, I said it !

The version you've never seen should have become the version you have maybe seen a few time but seen less times than that original one. I would have LOVED that.

4K can't come fast enough.

 

[Cranston37+]

Multiple versions haunt all of Blatty's work.

There are the 2 versions of "The Exorcist" movie.

The novel of "The Exorcist" that was so popular essentially doesn't exist anymore as the 40th anniversary edition that you can buy now was re-written.

The 3rd Exorcist movie has two versions - "The Exorcist 3" and "Legion."

The movie of "The Ninth Configuration" has something like 7-8 different cuts.

The book version was released as "Twinkle Twinkle Killer Kane" then re-written as "The Ninth Configuration."

If you want to include something related to him - there are the 2 completely different Exorcist prequels.

Confusing but I do love the man's work.

 

[JohnMor]

I never believed Friedkin when he claimed he had a change of heart. I think he wanted the $$$ the "new" version brought but I don't think he suddenly decided the updated cut was better.

He'd argued passionately against the Blatty preferences only a couple of years earlier when the two recorded a commentary together!

I know Billy. He was a client of mine for about a decade. The change of heart was genuine, and I think it surprised even him when he saw it all put together.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I know Billy. He was a client of mine for about a decade. The change of heart was genuine, and I think it surprised even him when he saw it all put together.

Genuine or not, he was wrong. The original cut works better than the updated one!

 

[Brian Kidd]

Genuine or not, he was wrong. The original cut works better than the updated one!

I agree, unfortunately. Although I like some of the additions to the newer cut, the added digital Pazuzu faces really pull me out of the film and don't work nearly as well as the couple of quick flashes that were in the original. The one where Karras' mother is walking up out of the subway unsettles me to this day.

I wish that Blatty had been able to finish his original vision for what became Exorcist III, rather than being forced to add in an unnecessary exorcism and an out-of-place Jason Miller. The novel was exceptional. Unfortunately, the Legion cut on Blu-ray is still very-much an unfinished product in need of some editing, but it's good to be able to see what exists. I still think that the third film, even in its compromised state, is far better than a lot of folks give it credit for being. It should have never been marketed as an Exorcist sequel, though. It really isn't, even though Kinderman is the main character.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I never believed Friedkin when he claimed he had a change of heart. I think he wanted the $$$ the "new" version brought but I don't think he suddenly decided the updated cut was better.

He'd argued passionately against the Blatty preferences only a couple of years earlier when the two recorded a commentary together!

You are likely right, in that Friedkin was likely doing a sales job. He did really like Blatty though, the two had another project brewing for some time and it is possible he eventually convinced him. I do think when Friedkin made the picture they had sort of different views on things but over the years I do think Friedkin came around to much of what Blatty said about the story.

One interesting thing, though I posted about it in the movies section and it got practically no discussion, was in a strange twist Friedkin returned to this sort of material with The Devil and Father Amorth a "supposed documentary" about the Vatican's lead exorcist. Sadly, this appears to be the note that Friedkin's career ended on. I believe he is officially retired. It's truly a horrid piece of work, is an abomination as a documentary, and was not even something silly enough to appear on one of the channels that shows those idiotic ghost hunter shows. Perhaps the "devil" got his revenge with this one.

 

[TravisR]

Genuine or not, he was wrong. The original cut works better than the updated one!

Like alot of extended/director's cuts, there's a few things that I wish were included in the theatrical cut and some I wish were left out. I think the scene with Merrin and Karras talking on the steps near the end is fantastic.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

By the way, I love Friedkin and this always cracks me up...



I don't know if Refn was yanking Friedkin's chain with his "masterpiece" crap but what he gets as a response from Friedkin is priceless. I believe on Marc Maron's podcast when he was interviewing Friedkin he does intentionally goad Friedkin with a comment about Refn's films being masterpieces and Friedkin says something like "What? What are you talking about? That's shit. Sorry, if you're listening Nick, but it's shit."

Which made me laugh out loud because I think Friedkin thought for a moment that Maron was not joking.

 

[JohnMor]

Like alot of extended/director's cuts, there's a few things that I wish were included in the theatrical cut and some I wish were left out. I think the scene with Merrin and Karras talking on the steps near the end is fantastic.

I agree. There’s bits I’d keep from the extended version, including that and some of the additional medical scenes.

 

[JohnMor]

I agree, unfortunately. Although I like some of the additions to the newer cut, the added digital Pazuzu faces really pull me out of the film and don't work nearly as well as the couple of quick flashes that were in the original. The one where Karras' mother is walking up out of the subway unsettles me to this day.

I agree on the added Pazuzu. It didn’t work for me. I liked a couple of the additional scenes though. And I have always loved the subway shots. They probably scared me more than anything in the film.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Are there any differences between "The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen" and "The Exorcist: The Extended Director's Cut"? Is it the same film cut with two different film titles? Both are 132 minutes long.

Man, I wish Warner would release this on 4K/UHD with Dolby Atmos.

Well now, the reason why I started this thread was to ascertain the differences between the two extended versions of "The Exorcist" because "The Version You've Never Seen" was on digital sale at Vudu for $7.99. I already had the theatrical and extended director's cut in my digital library at Vudu and iTunes due to Ultraviolet redemption and MoviesAnywhere. Since, there wasn't any major differences between "The Version You've Never Seen" and "Extended Director's Cut" I didn't purchase the former for $7.99.

Today, "The Version You've Never Seen" pops up as a recently added title in my Vudu library. I now have three different HD digitals in my Vudu library. The 'Theatrical", "Extended Director's Cut" and "The Version You've Never Seen". On iTunes, I have two versions, but not "The Version You've Never Seen". I don't think iTunes carries "The Version You've Never Seen" as Vudu appears to be the only one that has all three film versions. On MoviesAnywhere, they have two versions, "Theatrical" and "The Version You've Never Seen". I checked my Vudu history and it does show "The Version You've Never Seen" added to my Vudu library today without any charges. It's probably due to Ultraviolet being down now. By the way, "The Version You've Never Seen" and "Extended Director's Cut" have the exact run time down to the seconds.

Kind of strange considering my initial interest in purchasing that third film version earlier this week. This is one of my all-time favorite horror movies. Matter of fact, it's really one of my all-time favorite films period. The book and movie came out while I was in high school. I read the book first and then watched the movie several times during my high school years. My first viewing of the movie was at my neighborhood theater that no longer exists. It's about a 15 minute walk from my parents house in which I take a shortcut through some woods. To get through the woods it's about 3 minutes of walking with no lights in those woods. Of course, it was dark when I walked back home and my house was empty because the rest of my family were at some function. Needless to say, during that walk home that night, you could've said boo to me and I was off and running. Furthermore, I remember it was a very windy and cold winter night as I walked home alone. An empty house makes a lot of noise as it creaks and such due to those weather conditions. Yup, I had every light in the house on until my family returned. Even though, I read the book beforehand, this ground-breaking movie still gave me the creeps after seeing it the first time. I'm from Fairfield County, Connecticut and growing up in that area there are all kinds of paranormal stories. Ed and Lorraine Warren (Conjuring Movies) were local residents so they would be on the local radio all of the time telling their stories. Hell, even Linda Blair was a local girl. Anyhow, Crawdaddy was a bit of a scary cat back in early 1974, when "The Exorcist" opened in my hometown. It's probably why I'm not a big fan of modern horror films today. I can watch such movies and have enjoyed them for the most part, but I usually have to talk myself into seeing something like "The Conjuring".