G. I. Raffe Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 When you haven't seen a film before, say, a classic. Would you watch the Original Theatrical Edit that made the film popular (and watch the Directors Cut later) or delve straight into the Directors extended cut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAXIMUS MISCHIEF Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 i watch the original because usually directors cuts are garbage. i also stay away from extended versions of things.. all that footage usually was taken out for a reason and you can clearly see that reason when you watch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest assegai Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I read some reviews first of which are the "definitive" version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Moss Acid Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 depends on the film. starwars 4-6 original before lucas rubbed his digital cock all over it. blade runner - see the ultimate d-cut the one that was bought out a few years ago w/ the work print. so i dont know.. just look at reviews on amazon and made your mind up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 personally I watch the director's cut...i figure if this is how the director originally wanted it, watch it that way...but then again im not a huge film critic, usually end up enjoying most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G. I. Raffe Posted January 23, 2010 Author Share Posted January 23, 2010 yeah I guess it depends. Lucas has lost the plot alright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 yeah I guess it depends. Lucas has lost the plot alright i suppose in those situations I get confused as to what "Director's Cut" means, because I would consider the re-edited Star Wars exactly that, re-edits...Director's Cut for me implies that it was the full film as originally and initially filmed and recorded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 That's a hard one because every now and then the director really fucks up what was once a great movie. Like it or not, Donnie Darko was alright to begin with. Didn't really need any changing but Richard Kelly went back and destroyed it completely by adding new scenes that didn't need to be added and he also changed the music and Frank's voice. The Lord of the Rings Extended Editions on the other hand are great. Yeah, they're long as hell but the new scenes fill in a lot of gaps... but they kinda overdid it with Return of the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3FF3R00 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I say 9 times out of 10 the non- directors cut is better. Usually a film's story is stronger with "trimmed fat". Sometimes a director can become overattached to a "vision" that ultimately doesn't serve a story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian trageskin Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 yeah i like LOTR director's cut better than the originals. though i would recommend the originals for someone who's never seen them. more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscillik Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 That's a hard one because every now and then the director really fucks up what was once a great movie. Like it or not, Donnie Darko was alright to begin with. Didn't really need any changing but Richard Kelly went back and destroyed it completely by adding new scenes that didn't need to be added and he also changed the music and Frank's voice. i am in TOTAL agreement here - i have quite a few director's cuts of films, and every one of them has been an improvement on the original. except that goddamn awful piece of shit called Donnie Darko Director's Cut. of all the director's cuts i have, i would rate Aliens and Blade Runner Final Cut to be the best of them. the one that was the most impression-changing was Alien3 Special Edition - as a young'un i wasn't very keen on that film, but after seeing the special edition with the re-inserted footage of Golic setting loose the alien my opinion changed of the film. Alien Resurrection, the only good thing about that Director's Cut is the WalMart joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Moss Acid Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 directors cut + directors commentary = me being one happy son of a bitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 i didn't really like the Aliens special edition/directors cut, showing the people on the planet before they were wiped out kind of ruined some of the mystery for me of the film. i prefer the original. but some of the scenes they added were interesting for sure i just overall wasn't too thrilled by it he also changed the music and Frank's voice. wtf, when did Richard kelly get Lucas syndrome? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Moss Acid Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 yeah he did, the box was probally worse then the phantom menance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpenprol Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 i didn't really like the Aliens special edition/directors cut, showing the people on the planet before they were wiped out kind of ruined some of the mystery for me of the film. i prefer the original. but some of the scenes they added were interesting for sure i just overall wasn't too thrilled by it completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redruth Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Directors Cut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Director's cuts usually are worse because a director will include extra scenes out of bias because of difficulty of shooting said scene, or just general excitement over certain shots etc. For example on Jaws, Speilberg wanted more shots of the shark cause they spent so much work on getting it look decent in the water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squee Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 i didn't really like the Aliens special edition/directors cut, showing the people on the planet before they were wiped out kind of ruined some of the mystery for me of the film. i prefer the original. but some of the scenes they added were interesting for sure i just overall wasn't too thrilled by it completely agree. Agreed. yeah he did, the box was probally worse then the phantom menance Damn... I haven't seen any of his other movies and I'm kinda glad that I haven't because everything seems to have gone downhill for him. Oh, and apparently Cameron Diaz ruined the ending of The Box at a press conference. But since I haven't seen it I can't verify whether or not the ending she revealed is true or not but if there's any kind of truth to what she said then all I can do is lean back, put my hands on my stomach and burst into laughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G. I. Raffe Posted January 24, 2010 Author Share Posted January 24, 2010 Director's cuts usually are worse because a director will include extra scenes out of bias because of difficulty of shooting said scene, or just general excitement over certain shots etc. For example on Jaws, Speilberg wanted more shots of the shark cause they spent so much work on getting it look decent in the water this is a very very good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.