"Director's Cuts" that diminish the originals

[Danger Man]

The Director's cut of The Killing of a Chinese Bookie is almost 30 minutes shorter than the original.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_of_a_Chinese_Bookie

Is this unique?

[El Unicornio, mang]

Tony Kaye wanted to release his cut of American History X which was about 30 mins shorter, but the studio put paid to that. Be interested to see it though.

One of the most interesting DCs is the Donner Cut of Superman II. It basically removes an hour of Richard Lester footage and replaces it with about an hour of Richard Donner footage (even using a screen test for one scene). Makes it quite a different film altogether.

[Noodle Lizard]

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.

I was going to mention this in the other thread, but from what I can remember the longer version is actually the theatrical one screened in most countries, and it's our European (or UK version) which is Luc Besson's preferred one.  I may be misremembering that, though.

Similarly, would you call 'The Shining' a director's cut in its confusingly truncated European release?  Kubrick said it was his preferred version, but it cuts out some great scenes (some of which are vital - the line about how there's no booze in the hotel is gone, for instance).  It's one of the least mentioned yet most glaring and widespread "alternate versions" - most people in Europe don't know they're missing 20 odd minutes and most Americans don't know a shorter version exists.  I can only imagine the documentary 'Room 237' confusing a fair few people who have only been exposed to the European cut ("Hey, I don't remember a scene with Wendy finding a room full of skeletons!")

[Noodle Lizard]

By the way, the 'Donnie Darko' one is one of the worst director's cuts available and forever tainted my opinion of what I once considered to be an interesting and inventive film.

[vrailaine]

The directors (or at least the original festival circuit version)  cut of Southland tales was pretty dreadful,  removes all the fun.


The directors cut of Margaret is meant to correct a lot of the issues most people had with that film And received uniformly positive reviews . For some reason I can't seem to find it online but I know it got some unusual release (I think maybe the dvd in one of those bluray dvd sets of the same film is actually the directors cut or something like that).

[Tiny Poster]

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.

I'm assuming that doorman character had a few more scenes that were cut too.

[Bored of Canada]

Problem with this is, generally I don't watch different versions of films. I've either seen the Directors Cut or the Theatrical Cut, so I'm not sure which is better. It's rare I watch a film more than once, because there's so many other ones I'm trying to get to.

Leon, for instance, I loved. I think I saw the Criterion Collection one, fairly sure it was the longest version, was all uncut because it had all the parts that really went into detail with the Natalie Portman romance, which I presume was a large reason for the cuts happening. I thought the pace was great. I don't think it's a perfect film, but I do love it, regardless.

I've only seen Apocalypse Now: Redux.

The only version of Blade Runner I saw was...uh...shit...one of them. There's like 7 or 8, right? I saw it on VHS, and it had Ford's narration over it all. I think that's generally considered the bad version, so I should check out one of the other ones, especially on Blu-Ray. I can imagine it looking really lovely restored. At least for the vista shots.

[Noodle Lizard]

Leon, for instance, I loved. I think I saw the Criterion Collection one, fairly sure it was the longest version, was all uncut because it had all the parts that really went into detail with the Natalie Portman romance, which I presume was a large reason for the cuts happening. I thought the pace was great. I don't think it's a perfect film, but I do love it, regardless.

Got that stupid bit where he takes her on a hit which is fucking stupid so fuck off.

[Replies From View]

Bored of Canada:  Sounds like you saw the theatrical version of Blade Runner; there is another version with voiceover but it's fairly obscure.  I recommend you check out the Final Cut - which is actually more a Director's Cut than the version with that title - as it sufficiently deviates tonally from the theatrical release to make it feel like a completely different film.

[Chichester Cathedral]

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.

One thing that stood out for me is - if I recall correctly - there's a shot on a lion being fed which they've put in the extra scenes, but which also appear in the theatrical version at a different point. So the same shot is repeated in completely different parts of the film, which distracted me. I think.

[Ignatius_S]

The Director's cut of The Killing of a Chinese Bookie is almost 30 minutes shorter than the original.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_of_a_Chinese_Bookie

Is this unique?

It's very rare, but not unknown. Bad Santa, for instance, was a few minutes shorter, IIRC. What's more common (in my opinion) is where the director gives approval to the shorter version - particularly when the director's cut would be more accurately described as 'the cut that the director doesn't actually want but the studio wants to make more money version'.

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.

No, not by all accounts - for example, quite a lot of critics praised it and I think you'll find quite a few fans online.

One reason there was so much animosity to it, was that the new version blew out of the water a lot of interpretations people came up with about what Kelly meant (although, IIRC, Kelly had been vocal in criticising the original release). It's easy to forget how rabid some fans were about the film and how many produced websites to explain what Kelly intended.

Rather than shrugging their shoulders at the director's cut and thinking 'well, that's not very good', an awful lot seemed to take it far too personally, which shaped what was being expressed about the film.

Personally, I think Kelly should have just moved on - but then again, I think a lot of people would have liked if he didn't.

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....

One thing  about Spaghetti Westerns - well not the East German ones - is that it was common for original prints to be edited down when they sent to the next county and that footage destroyed/thrown away - so the versions that we have today are ones that may have been edited a number of times.  To be able to get an approximation of what the original version for this film is incredibly exciting - we're able to see how it was edited down for the various versions. On the first DVD release that had missing scenes, they were as extras rather than integrated into the film.

Although a lot of people share your feeling about the extra material, a lot of people don't - whilst, others feel some would be better left out, but some better in.

Leone wanted a slower paced film than the international edits - I say edits, because there were various. In England, the first version was the 148 minutes edit and then another one, cut to under two hours (in order to show it as a double-feature, which illustrates why these films were sometimes cut). This was the director evolving as an artist, so there is academic worth, if nothing else.

....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.

Several scenes didn't make the finalised Italian cut. The Grotto scene you mentioned was put back in because Alberto Grimaldi, who produced the film claimed that it was taken out to lower the running time for commercial reasons, against Leone's wishes. Personally, I'm inclined to believe that as looking at how his style was developing, tight pacing wasn't something that springs to mind - also when he talked about his influences for the film, again, it suggests he wasn't worried about pacing. Something he was worried about, however, was that he was working for an American company for the first time and it wanted a film under two hours. That he went the other way is interesting.

I think it's fair to say opinion is divided about the inclusion of the Grotto scene - and for what it's worth, I appreciate all views about it and have a (reasonably) open mind.

...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 very frustrating - especially as some versions are advertised and packaged as being the shorter version. However, it's very easy (and cheap) to pick up second-hand DVDs and the 1998 one is worth looking out for if you're so inclined.

What did they do to it?

There's an extra 20 minutes - there are detailed breakdowns online, if you're want the lowdown. I haven't seen it myself, but certain incidents like Mozart proposed as a tutor and Constance going to see Salieri are expanded upon with news scenes, and one big effect is Salieri is much more of a villain and more aggressive in attacking Mozart. Some people seem to like it a lot - the first person who told me, I think preferred the theatrical version but found the the new stuff interesting.

...One of the most interesting DCs is the Donner Cut of Superman II. It basically removes an hour of Richard Lester footage and replaces it with about an hour of Richard Donner footage (even using a screen test for one scene). Makes it quite a different film altogether.

Yup.

[Cerys]

There's an extra 20 minutes - there are detailed breakdowns online, if you're want the lowdown. I haven't seen it myself, but certain incidents like Mozart proposed as a tutor and Constance going to see Salieri are expanded upon with news scenes, and one big effect is Salieri is much more of a villain and more aggressive in attacking Mozart. Some people seem to like it a lot - the first person who told me, I think preferred the theatrical version but found the the new stuff interesting.

Thankyou muchly!  I may have to have a look at that.  I assume it's the reason I've seen references to Constanza getting her tits out.

[phantom_power]

The directors (or at least the original festival circuit version)  cut of Southland tales was pretty dreadful,  removes all the fun.


The directors cut of Margaret is meant to correct a lot of the issues most people had with that film And received uniformly positive reviews . For some reason I can't seem to find it online but I know it got some unusual release (I think maybe the dvd in one of those bluray dvd sets of the same film is actually the directors cut or something like that).

Is the festival cut of Southland Tales available online?

[The Region Legion]

By the way, the 'Donnie Darko' one is one of the worst director's cuts available and forever tainted my opinion of what I once considered to be an interesting and inventive film.

I was going to say this. Dire. I don't think I watched the film ever again after seeing the Directors Cut.

[Pepotamo1985]

Got that stupid bit where he takes her on a hit which is fucking stupid so fuck off.

Although, thinking about it, the DC is also home to that really cracking montage where NP helps Leon carry out hits by knocking on doors, which is a really good sequence.

[vrailaine]

Is the festival cut of Southland Tales available online?

It was, dunno about now. For some reason that's the version a load  of cable movie networks got at the time.

[I.D. Smith]

I'm assuming that doorman character had a few more scenes that were cut too.

Possibly - I'm not sure. I think he has more lines in that deleted scene than he has in the whole movie. I could be wrong, though.

[Mango Chimes]

Similarly, would you call 'The Shining' a director's cut in its confusingly truncated European release?  Kubrick said it was his preferred version

Here's something I'm going to do a cackhanded job of recalling because I can't be arsed looking it up:
The American cut is actually the second released version.  It was released/screened for a day or few with an extra scene at the end where the hotel manager reappears (post-hotel events) and gives Danny the ball that Jack had been throwing about, basically going, "ahh, I totally knew this'd happen, oho."

Kubrick decided he didn't like it, cut it.  And then he cut the film again, after it'd had it's wide American release, to give Europe what he considered a better version.

There's also some tricky 'director's intent' business with Kubrick films now that widescreen TVs are standard.  Kubrick preferred The Shining home release open-matt, for the extra height (considering the format of TVs at the time.)  So The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut were released on DVD at 4:3.  But if Kubrick had lived to see 16:9 become the standard, would he have wanted us watching with vertical bars?

[Replies From View]

I would have just zoomed out a bit more during filming - hey presto, loads more picture on all four sides and no need for the vertical bars.  I'm amazed that I'm not Kubrick, in a way, with ideas like this.

[Brundle-Fly]

Cinema Paradiso

Possibly, my second favourite film but I still haven't watched The Directors Cut because apparently it fills in too many gaps unnecessarily. I'm frightened it might ruin the version I sobbed my pathetic eyes out to in 1989.

Would it?

[Noodle Lizard]

Kubrick

He's basically a big fucking dick, let's be honest.

[Bored of Canada]

He's basically a big fucking dick, let's be honest.

Selfie-taking motherfucker. Fuck off.

[Tairy_Green]

One reason there was so much animosity to it, was that the new version blew out of the water a lot of interpretations people came up with about what Kelly meant (although, IIRC, Kelly had been vocal in criticising the original release). It's easy to forget how rabid some fans were about the film and how many produced websites to explain what Kelly intended.

It is, I suppose, the epitome of a Director's Cut. The film that Kelly wanted to make rather than the (superior) version cut down by the studio.

The problems with the DC are innumerable, although there are two main issues. Firstly, it removes any ambiguity and turns a wonderful puzzle into a rather dreary angst-ridden sci-fi. Perhaps more importantly, the other is that Echo and the Bunnymen were replaced by INXS.

As bad as it was, the DC did serve the purpose of quickly clearing up any misconception that Kelly was a genius film maker, with Southland Tales and The Box backing this up superbly. Enjoyable overly ambitious B-movie hokum both, but nothing that could hold a candle to the TC of Darko.

[Mango Chimes]

I really should try to watch that Director's Darko.  The praise that the theatrical got really irked me, because it was just a straight sci-fi/fantasy film with an ending that didn't make sense.  Like if you watched 90% of Back To The Future, Marty's racing to get to the clock tower on time...  And then you cut to him waking up in the 80s.  It's not cleverly ambiguous; you're just missing a bit of the narrative.

[Noodle Lizard]

The ending made perfect sense to me.  I can't think of another film like it, really, I don't think the praise it got was unwarranted.

The problem with the Director's Cut is that it adds in more scenes to explain exactly what's happening to the viewer (sometimes literally flashing up pages of that time travel book he's reading onto the screen) which makes the ending a lot less satisfying after having slowed the pace of the rest of the film to a crawl.  Then there are scenes which are just plain stupid, as well as added "super special effects" where they weren't needed.  It really bummed me out and watching the theatrical cut isn't as good now as a result. 

[Noodle Lizard]

the other is that Echo and the Bunnymen were replaced by INXS.

Which is actually in the script and was Richard Kelly's preferred choice, but they couldn't get the licensing for the theatrical release.  He also wanted West End Girls for the Sparkle Motion dance scene.

I agree though, I think the back-ups were better.

[Replies From View]

Like if you watched 90% of Back To The Future, Marty's racing to get to the clock tower on time...  And then you cut to him waking up in the 80s.

*commences fan edit*

[kngen]

Which is actually in the script and was Richard Kelly's preferred choice, but they couldn't get the licensing for the theatrical release.  He also wanted West End Girls for the Sparkle Motion dance scene.

I agree though, I think the back-ups were better.

Christ, he really did deserve to have that film taken off him for its own protection.

[Bored of Canada]

They've retrieved and restored "The Final Cut" of the Wicker Man and I'm going to go see it in a couple weeks.
Exciting. From the sounds of it, this one sounds good, in that there's still cuts in it, but for things that seem unnecessary, like a monologue of Christopher Lee talking about apples and the film starting with Eewar Woowar on the mainland, which just doesn't sound as good as just that lovely opening of the sweeping helicopter shots of the island 

http://astortheatreblog.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/the-wicker-man-the-final-cut/

I'm not entirely sure which version I saw. Probably the "Short Version" on DVD, the quality was pretty arse though. Even by the standards of old films on DVDs.
Looked like a VHS. Curious to see how much better it looks on fully restored 35mm prints. Excited to see it again. And regardless of it all, it's just a good excuse to go see it again. I really like that film. I thought it was going to be a Don't Look Now double bill but turns out it's not. Disappointing.
That's the ideal double bill for them films. 

[Famous Mortimer]

Eewar Woowar

Was this part of some old comedy show? Because my Mum also used to call him Eewar Woowar.