Payback Directors Cut

[Huttjos]

Wow. I just recently bought Payback:directors cut on blu. I remember this movie was on TNT like every weekend in the past, so I grew to love it, which is why I picked it up.

But apparently the directors cut is WAY WAY different; and not for the better. I am so disappointed in this cut. The one I remember seeing was gritty, real and disturbing to a degree. This directors version is just so lame, and very...standard hollywood.

I really wish they would of included the other cut :( Seriously waste of money.

[jbar1026]

i agree i got it on dvd in a mel gibson pak and its missing so much that made the original cut so great. the voiceover is the most notable of these things.

[bdubprod]

so your advice would be to get the theatrical version over the directors cut?

[KcMsterpce]

It's been years since I saw the theatrical cut, but last year I popped in the DC and loved the HELL out of it.

I like both, but my thoughts are that I got a better impression from the DC.

[overwatch]

That is so ironic. The theatrical cut is the more hollywood version. The DC is much darker in tone, Porter is more violent. He just executes people for no reason. And the storytelling is much better in the DC. The end may be a little anti-climactic but at least it didn't have the silliness with Kris Kristopherson.

[Cronos]

I was very surprised at how different the two cuts were when I watched them back to back earlier in the year, overall I found the DC to be a lot better and the only one I'll pick up on DVD/blu-ray or whatever when I decide to buy it.

[Huttjos]

If you were a person who enjoyed watching the version that played on TNT or in the movies, I would NOT buy the DC. It is funny though because as Overwatch said, the hollywood version usually is the worse of the two when a DC is made.

The two version really are like two different films. I really want to return it I hate it so much. I am going to pick up the dvd later today, lol.

I just thought that the DC had no progression to it. And the ending was horrible to boot. If you are curious as to which to buy, I'd do a rental comparison just to see for yourself. But obviously there are some people who enjoy the DC more, but not me. The original had such a more artistic flair, and, I think Porter actually seemed more bad ass in that version.

[sirdizzy]

I hated the directors cut as well it was missing all the things that I loved from the theatrical version like the voice over. You can't change a much beloved film so drastically so much later on like that.

[Weapon X]

I'd have to cast my vote for the Director's Cut. For a movie promising that you'll "root for the bad guy", the theatrical version of Porter is too likeable. The DC hardened him something fierce. I prefered Bronson as Sally Kellerman's voice over a phone line rather than Kris Kristofferson; the whole arc with Bronson's son dragged the movie down, and the bit at the end where Porter blows the bad guys up in the hotel room felt so manufactured. The voiceover was nice, but didn't add much to the film (although the "maybe we were aiming high" line was funny). The worst thing the DC has going for it is that John Glover's part is reduced to a single mumbled line.