Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 12:30:12 PM

Login with username, password and session length

"Director's Cuts" that diminish the originals

Started by Replies From View, October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Replies From View

I agree with this:

Quote from: Noodle Lizard on October 10, 2013, 11:59:08 PM
An entire thread could be devoted to "Director's Cuts" which absolutely reek, which is most of them as far as I can tell.  Pretty much the only argument against directors having total creative control of their films - lovely in theory, usually total shite in practise.

'Apocalypse Now: Redux' is pretty shit.

So here is a thread devoted to it.  An entire one, no less.

I find it hard to think of any Director's Cuts that were particularly necessary.  Sometimes there's an occasional scene that was cut for time and should have stayed, but usually then to justify calling it an all-new "cut" loads of other stuff is added that should have stayed out, and the entire thing becomes a bloated, over-explanatory mess. 

Apocalypse Now: Redux is a fine example, but that has its own thread.  The Terminator 2 Special Edition (if we're allowed to include "Special Editions") was exciting at first but those mirror and smiling sequences made me realise the whole film was immensely close to being embarrassing.  The Aliens Special Edition, again, exciting on first viewing, strips out too much mystery by showing us the planet before the marines settle on it.

The only exception I can think of right now is the Final Cut of Blade Runner, which really feels much more like the film that should have existed in the first place.


Any thoughts?  And are there any films you've had ruined for you by seeing the Director's Cut first?

Frazer

I prefer the Aliens director's cut.[nb]Even though it does add more screaming child.[/nb] Seeing the dumb ass colonists going about their business makes it more suspenseful, eerie when the marines first enter the station.

I was going to mention The Good, the Bad and the Ugly but that wouldn't be fair as it's a restored version rather than director's cut.

Replies From View

Are there many Director's Cuts that have gone no further than adding the occasional sequence and removing a couple of other things?  If so I can believe something akin to a director's original vision is being expressed, but usually I suspect the whole project, being governed mostly by the desire for studio profit, has to aim in part towards a substantially altered version to justify the effort.

The Director's Cut of Ridley Scott's Alien is quite interesting, as it takes out as much as it puts in.  I still prefer the original though.

Pepotamo1985

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM
Aliens

Yeah.

The Director's Cut is way too fucking long, with the additional bits adding nothing, whilst pointlessly padding out the film, reducing drama and tension in the process. It also makes the action scenes that little bit more nebulous and tacked on.

The Director's Cut of Leon fucks things up for similar reasons. It adds too much and ruins the flow and pacing of what was a really tight and gripping little number.

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM
only exception is Blade Runner.

The Director's Cut/Extended/Extra-Gory version of Robocop is THE indispensable version of the first RC film.

Also, the Assembly Cut of Alien3 is really, really good. I'm not a fan of Alien3, but I don't think it's half as bad as people say. However, the AC departs from the original film so much it's basically a different movie.

Replies From View

Thing is the way the alien in Alien3 moves, it makes sense that it came out of a dog and not an ox, whatever the original intentions might have been.

But then I've always thought Alien3 was underrated in the first place.  I saw it before I saw the second film, so I didn't feel that same sense that some beloved characters were needlessly killed in the opening sequence.  And once I saw the second one I realised I loved the nihilism of killing them off.

olliebean

I have no particular evidence for this, but I suspect that a lot of "director's cuts" are produced not because the director thought there were improvements to be made, but at the studio's behest in the hope of increasing DVD sales. I bet some so-called "Director's cuts" aren't even done by the director.

Old Nehamkin

Quote from: Frazer on October 11, 2013, 04:09:31 PM
I was going to mention The Good, the Bad and the Ugly but that wouldn't be fair as it's a restored version rather than director's cut.

I'm going to mention it anyway: It's rubbish. Actually, that's a bit harsh, I appreciate the intent of restoring the scenes from the original Italian version, but none of them are especially good and having the elderly actors dubbing in their dialogue just doesn't work at all. Eli Wallach in particular sounds so completely different as an old man that there was really no point in bringing him back at all. And there's at least one scene (the one with Tuco and his gang members) included that was actually cut by Leone for pacing reasons after the Italian premiere. And rightly so- the scene is pointless and grinds the movie to a halt.

I wouldn't mind its existence so much, but as far as I'm aware the "restored" version is still the one that's used on all the dvd/ blu-ray releases, which is a bit annoying.

It's stretching the remit of the thread a bit, but on the subject of alternate cuts of Leone films there's also the crappy alternate opening scene that was added to A Fistful of Dollars when it first aired on American TV: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppZuqec9lq0

I know it's a bit obvious, but a thread like this wouldn't be complete without a mention of George Lucas's shitty Star Wars remasters. There's something uniquely ugly about plastering bad 90s CGI all over a 70s Sci-Fi film.

Famous Mortimer

It's why they now do "unrated" versions of films in the US (which in a lot of cases is just unnecessary swearing added to jokes that didn't need it). No need to invoke the director at all.




Pepotamo1985

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 04:27:03 PM
Thing is the way the alien in Alien3 moves, it makes sense that it came out of a dog and not an ox, whatever the original intentions might have been.

That's very true. In fact, the facehugger stuff that's excised/changed in Alien3 is one of the few things that makes watching both the AC and the theatrical version a necessity. When you see the dog with the hole in its neck, there's a real a sense of creeping dread which works on several levels; if you get its significance, you know what's about to happen - if you're not familiar with the Alien life-cycle, it's troubling and mysterious. In the AC, an almost imperceptible spent facehugger is held up in long-shot and its discoverer asks "what's this?", in a frivolous and jokey wink and nudge to the audience.

There's also that creepy shot of the facehugger exiting the craft in the theatrical version, which isn't in the Assembly Cut for whatever reason.

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM
But then I've always thought Alien3 was underrated in the first place.

Indeed. Maybe it's a case of inversely subverted expectations but I was expecting something incredibly shitty and actually got a really good movie. I almost prefer it to Aliens, in fact. The film is even better when you take into account its absolutely nightmarish background. I know Fincher has disowned it, but he should be applauded for managing to put together something so coherent and watchable despite the endless enforced rewrites and studio meddling.

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM
I loved the nihilism of killing them off.

Absolutely. It's a wonderfully bleak and unforgiving beginning and sets the tone for the movie wonderfully.

Quote from: Replies From View on October 11, 2013, 03:43:22 PM
I didn't feel that same sense that some beloved characters were needlessly killed in the opening sequence.

I don't know, I think it's very much a self-indulgent, embittered fanboy thing to get really incensed about the deaths of Hicks and Newt at the start. In an unrelentingly bleak movie universe (in every sense), typified by the brutal killing of pretty much everyone and anyone who appears onscreen for more than 10 seconds, their deaths are small fry.

Further to this, Hicks doesn't have a particularly pronounced personality in Aliens, especially compared to his marine cohorts, and it's not like his 'relationship' with Ripley is prominent, well-developed or key to that film. Newt is a different story, but again, her death sets the tone for Alien3, and brings viewers crashing back to earth after the relatively optimistic ending to Aliens.

I can imagine it was a bit of a shock/source of upset to viewers at the time, though, given all the mutterings about how Alien3 was set on Earth with Ripley and Hicks married and Newt as their adopted daughter etc.

mothman

The original release of Good/Bad/Ugly was a bit disjointed in parts though not excessively so - does it really matter how Tuco reunites with his gang? The fact that it happens offscreen is taken as read. But the problem I have with the restored scene is the terrible quality of the audio, seemingly recorded using an aged Eli Wallach reading the lines from down the hall in the restorer's guest toilet.

It's also worth remembering the Director's Cuts we'll never get to see - Magnificent Ambersons, Cleopatra, perhaps even The Devils...

gabrielconroy

I haven't watched it, since I don't want to sully the film, but by all accounts the director's cut of Donnie Darko is absolutely, almost inexplicably, godawful.

Feralkid

That extended director's cut of Amadeus ruins the whole thing. None of the fucked about newer versions of Close Encounters are as good as the original cut.

Replies From View

Quote from: gabrielconroy on October 11, 2013, 05:58:32 PM
I haven't watched it, since I don't want to sully the film, but by all accounts the director's cut of Donnie Darko is absolutely, almost inexplicably, godawful.

I rented the DVD of this in 2003 or 4 without knowing that there were different versions, because I had heard positive things about the film.  I basically wasn't impressed, thought  I was too old for what felt like a teenager's film, and didn't bother seeking out the original version when I learned that I'd seen "the shitty director's cut", purely because nothing about it appealed to me enough to want to see it again.

So that's an example of a director's cut diminishing the original, I guess.

I.D. Smith

The Director's Cut of Dumb and Dumber pushes the darkness and sleaziness up a few notches in some of scenes, which tips the balance of the film for me. I've always been very fond of the original, which I think got the balance right between being a bit of a gross-out film but also a slightly sweet and innocent naive-friends-on-road-trip-film[nb]This is why I was slightly disappointed by There's Something About Mary. It was funny, but it seemed a bit more cynical at heart. I suppose that's my fault for expecting it to be the same[/nb], but it seems that the Director's Cut is now the definitive version these days, annoyingly. Admittedly, I haven't researched this claim of mine to the Nth Degree, but from what I've heard about the Blu-Ray versions being Director's Cut only, to seeing the Director's Cut being on TV recently, gives the impression this is the case.

Chichester Cathedral

Quote from: Pepotamo1985 on October 11, 2013, 04:24:06 PM
The Director's Cut is way too fucking long, with the additional bits adding nothing, whilst pointlessly padding out the film, reducing drama and tension in the process. It also makes the action scenes that little bit more nebulous and tacked on.

The DC much improves the stuff with Ripley's daughter, enhancing her later relationship with Newt. In the the theatrical she gets over the news in a minute.

Cerys

Quote from: Feralkid on October 11, 2013, 06:11:38 PM
That extended director's cut of Amadeus ruins the whole thing.

What did they do to it?

Miasma

One thing the Aliens DC has going for it is the remote sentry gun scenes which are supercool... Too bad they`re not in the theatrical cut.

I recall the director's cuts of Bad Santa and Battle Royale disappointing though, with the extra scenes throwing the pace of the films off, but adding little to the story or characters.

Phil_A

For the Director's Cut of The Warriors, Walter Hill inserted a load of fake comic panel transitions between scenes, complete with captions in Comic Sans. It looks like absolute dogshit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqmAHGPRaYU

Pepotamo1985

I was gonna mention Warriors.

Again, the butcher job seems to be the 'Definitive' edition now, shockingly.

the psyche intangible

Quote from: I.D. Smith on October 11, 2013, 07:00:38 PM
The Director's Cut of Dumb and Dumber pushes the darkness and sleaziness up a few notches in some of scenes, which tips the balance of the film for me. I've always been very fond of the original, which I think got the balance right between being a bit of a gross-out film but also a slightly sweet and innocent naive-friends-on-road-trip-film[nb]This is why I was slightly disappointed by There's Something About Mary. It was funny, but it seemed a bit more cynical at heart. I suppose that's my fault for expecting it to be the same[/nb], but it seems that the Director's Cut is now the definitive version these days, annoyingly. Admittedly, I haven't researched this claim of mine to the Nth Degree, but from what I've heard about the Blu-Ray versions being Director's Cut only, to seeing the Director's Cut being on TV recently, gives the impression this is the case.

What's the difference between the original and director's version?

thenoise

Quote from: Phil_A on October 11, 2013, 07:14:00 PM
For the Director's Cut of The Warriors, Walter Hill inserted a load of fake comic panel transitions between scenes, complete with captions in Comic Sans. It looks like absolute dogshit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqmAHGPRaYU

"Milleniums" - ugh, is that acceptable in America or did they just not bother to check with someone who'd gone to school?

The added scenes in 'The Wicker Man' greatly improve it I think, with the possible exception of the church scenes at the beginning which are a bit misplaced.  I liked the mystery of the plane arriving at the island with no explanation whatsoever.  But the extra songs are great and the snails making love and all the rest of it - lovely stuff.

Famous Mortimer

Quote from: Phil_A on October 11, 2013, 07:14:00 PM
For the Director's Cut of The Warriors, Walter Hill inserted a load of fake comic panel transitions between scenes, complete with captions in Comic Sans. It looks like absolute dogshit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqmAHGPRaYU
It's one of the most disappointing film experiences of recent years, waiting eagerly for one of my all-time favourite films to come out on blu-ray, only for the director to go "well, I always saw it as a comic book, so here's a bunch of shit that throws the film off". It looks like dogshit and is dogshit and is the only available version for fans of HD>.

El Unicornio, mang

I quite like the DC of Gladiator, especially the scene of Commodus standing in the way of all the archers. It shows even more how much of a psycho he is, and how he seems to view himself as being immortal.

NoSleep

The "director's cut" of Once Upon A Time In America certainly makes you think even less of the original commercial release.

I.D. Smith

Quote from: the psyche intangible on October 11, 2013, 08:06:42 PM
What's the difference between the original and director's version?

Well, off the top of my head (as I've only watched the DC through once, that first time, as I've been loathe to go back to it due to the disappointment from seeing it first time):

- The scene where Lloyd and Harry are in the Honeymoon Motel Hot Tub. In the Theatrical Version it just cuts to them both in the Hot Tub, talking about Freda Felcher (sp). In the Director's Cut there's a bit before where Lloyd is perving through the wall, listening to a couple having sex in the next room. He also makes some comments to Harry that if he was a woman he'd do him/her this or that way, in a sort of rapey fashion. This bit isn't so bad, although I did prefer the idea of  the innocence of them just sitting in the Hot Tub together, reminiscing about lost loves.

- The scene where Lloyd bumps into the trucker again in the service station toilet. I admit this scene was a bit unpleasant in the first instance, but it's extended in the DC. IIRC, I think the trucker even blatantly says "I'm gonna rape and kill you" to Lloyd, as well a lot more whimpering and crying from Lloyd. This was the worst bit, I thought. Just a bit nasty all round.

- The gob in the burger. Basically, you get to see the big loogie coming out of the trucker's mouth and onto the burger. Tell, not show was better in this occasion, I thought.

That's the ones I can remember that make the film a little bit worse, for me anyway. I guess it's just down personal preference - they don't ruin the story so much, or add plot points that don't make sense, but for me it makes the film just that little bit more unpleasant.

Oh, and possibly as an aside, The Ballad Of Peter Pumpkinhead cover by Crash Test Dummies is removed (I think - I really should go check as I'm doing this from memory!), replaced by no music.

SavageHedgehog

Yeah, that is removed, or at least it was in the UK DVD version when I bought it in 2007.

Didn't mind the DC as much as a lot of people, but then the only version I'd seen (numerous times) up to that point had been a version taped off SKY TV from the late 90s edited to get the film down to the equivalent of a PG, so I don't think I was really in the best position to judge it.

I.D. Smith

Quote from: SavageHedgehog on October 11, 2013, 10:09:09 PM
Yeah, that is removed, or at least it was in the UK DVD version when I bought it in 2007.

Cheers! I was doubting myself there - I've just got a vague memory of an unexpected eerie silence at the start of that scene, which jarred quite a bit when I first saw it as I was so used to the song being there, so thanks for confirming.

I.D. Smith

Quote from: SavageHedgehog on October 11, 2013, 10:09:09 PM
Didn't mind the DC as much as a lot of people, but then the only version I'd seen (numerous times) up to that point had been a version taped off SKY TV from the late 90s edited to get the film down to the equivalent of a PG, so I don't think I was really in the best position to judge it.

I think it was probably just because I watched it so much as a kid, that to be suddenly presented with this darker version of the film left a sour taste. A bit like finding an old treasured Teddy Bear from your childhood during a nostalgic loft clear-out, only to find a grotesque penis sewn to it that you'd never noticed before up till then.

the psyche intangible

I've not seen the DC version then, none of those changes are particularly bothersome to me, just pointless. I was curious to new additional scenes as extra parts, not just look at what's under the covers.

I.D. Smith

Quote from: the psyche intangible on October 11, 2013, 10:26:55 PM
I've not seen the DC version then, none of those changes are particularly bothersome to me, just pointless. I was curious to new additional scenes as extra parts, not just look at what's under the covers.

There is also an alternate ending (which is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i2Y7xiiUUI. Contains an F word, which could be a reason it was cut - maybe that would've pushed it from a 12 to a 15), but yeah, from what I recall it's just extensions of scenes that are already there.