Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Movie Talk! > General Movie Talk
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-24-2007, 10:35 PM
Theatrical Cuts you enjoy more than the Director's Cut

Legend

The new scenes add very little to the story. In fact with the exception of the extra couple minutes of Meg Mucklebones I don't think I cared for any of the additional footage.

The music was also a poor replacement. Tangerine Dream did a dark brooding score while Jerry Goldsmith gave the film a childish playful score which didn't work for me.

Also scene with Lord darkness bathed in blue light with neon green is a great sight for the eyes which was cut out from the DC.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-24-2007, 11:05 PM
Daredevil

i was disapointed in the DC
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2007, 11:38 PM
Only Army of Darkness I guess.

And unlike some people, I think Donnie Darko has a better DC than TC.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-24-2007, 11:51 PM
I like the Taledega Nights theatrical cut more than the Unrated cut.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-25-2007, 12:01 AM
Army of Darkness comes to mind. And Blade Trinity. I really didn't like how they altered the ending in the unrated cut.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-25-2007, 12:01 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by moviefreak1980
Daredevil

i was disapointed in the DC

Holy crap! You mean to tell me I'm not the only who actually prefers the theatrical to the director's cut?!?!



The Matt/Elektra romance was pretty much my favorite thing about Daredevil and it barely exists in the director's cut. Infact, poor Jennifer Garner, her role pretty much got butchered in the DC. And it added a subplot of a case Matt Murdock was working on that I frankly didn't care much for.


It was still alright. But I definitely liked the theatrical cut WAY more. I loved the theatrical cut. Infact, it remains one of all time favorite comic book movies.


Theatrical cut: 8/10
Director's cut: 7/10
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2007, 02:05 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ilovemovies
And it added a subplot of a case Matt Murdock was working on that I frankly didn't care much for.
Yeah the crime investigation plot was really lame and took like 15 minutes of the film. I mean there simply wasn't any reason to care, the audience KNOWS who Kingpin is and that he is the villain. Detective stories are interesting only if there is a mysterious whoddunit aspect to it. With Daredevil DV It was a case of waiting for the heroes to catch up with the audience, which is never very interesting to watch.

I did like some scenes thought, like Daredevil going to sleep etc.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-25-2007, 03:01 AM
Blade Runner- Made an already murky movie incomprehensible.

Apaocalypse Now- Nice to see the added footage, but the journey to Kurtz took plenty long enough without all of the French shit.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:05 AM
Land of the Dead
Payback
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BigSugar
Blade Runner- Made an already murky movie incomprehensible.

Apaocalypse Now- Nice to see the added footage, but the journey to Kurtz took plenty long enough without all of the French shit.
I agree 100% with Apocalypse Now, but I disagree 100% with Blade Runner. The director's cut is the only way to watch it, as far as I'm concerned. The theatrical version is so "safe," I guess would be the word. Pointless voice-over and everything. The new sequences in the director's cut add so much to the movie, in my opinion. They leave so much more to think about.

I tend to like director's cuts more than theatrical versions though. Even Apocalypse Now, the "Redux" isn't REALLY a "director's cut," since Coppola did indeed get his way the first time around. The Redux was just him toying with it for experiment's sake. The only theatrical version I can think of that is superior to the director's cut is Army of Darkness, which has already been mentioned twice.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:56 AM
out of all the theatrical/director's cuts that ive seen i cant think of one time that i've preferred the theatrical cut....aside from the Star Wars OT

Last edited by Cronos; 04-25-2007 at 11:43 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:56 AM
Donnie Darko.

The theatrical cut just had more mystery, I didnt care for the "explanations" in the DC.

Terminator 2

I didnt like the T1000's "glitches" at the end of the DC.

Do the Star Wars Special Editions count?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:56 AM
Funny, I was going to make a thread about which was better of the two "Legend" cuts.

I like "Donnie Darko" and "Not Another Teen Movie" (especially) much more in their regular cut than the director's cut.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:04 AM
The Warriors
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:52 AM
Donnie Darko
Blade Trinity
Alexander (2nd version, but I liked the 3rd version)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:24 AM
Chronicles of Riddick - The theatrical cut was way better.

Army Of Darkness - A very shitty ending to the movie.

Apocalypse Now - That French community bullshit was so boring. Move on!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:17 AM
Quote:
I agree 100% with Apocalypse Now, but I disagree 100% with Blade Runner. The director's cut is the only way to watch it, as far as I'm concerned. The theatrical version is so "safe," I guess would be the word. Pointless voice-over and everything. The new sequences in the director's cut add so much to the movie, in my opinion. They leave so much more to think about.


Okay, but here's the the thing, and maybe you can explain this to me: The point of the film was, I thought to show us how a human is so worn down and emotionless as compared to the replicants. In the DC, Dekard is supposed to BE a replicant. I think the book hinted at this as well. It just doesn't work for me as a viewer. At leat the voicover couched the film in the cinematic language of noir. If Alien is a horror film in scifi wrapping, then too Blade Runner a noir film in scifi wrapping. Or thus was my interpretation.

And yes, the Star Wars OT in its original theatrical cuts is vastly superior to the "Special Editions."
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by mutesaint
The Warriors
What exactly got changed? The only version I've seen is the Director's cut with the goofy comic book transitions.

Totally agree with Talladega, Apocalypse, and Army of Darkness. Apocalypse and Talladega just dragged on with the 'bonus' footage and Army's ending was really lame. I think the original ending gives it much more stylized and energetic closing.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:53 AM
This is the first time I ever saw any hostility to the Army of Darkness DC. A lot of Evil Dead fanatics I have talked to prefer the original ending. The only problem I had with the DC was some of the lines they changed.

The version that I prefer more though is the Cut they play on Sci-Fi channel which I wish they would release on DVD.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-25-2007, 12:49 PM
Donnie Darko
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-25-2007, 05:31 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BigSugar
Okay, but here's the the thing, and maybe you can explain this to me: The point of the film was, I thought to show us how a human is so worn down and emotionless as compared to the replicants. In the DC, Dekard is supposed to BE a replicant. I think the book hinted at this as well. It just doesn't work for me as a viewer. At leat the voicover couched the film in the cinematic language of noir. If Alien is a horror film in scifi wrapping, then too Blade Runner a noir film in scifi wrapping. Or thus was my interpretation.
Whether or nock Deckard is a replicant is ambiguous in the Director's Cut, and not even really suggested in the theatrical version. There is certainly no clear indication that he is a replicant in either version, and I'd like to hear your interpretation of how he is. But it is one of the more fascinating aspects of the movie, the whole "is he or isn't he?" thing. It's never answered, and the same goes for some other questions the movie brings up.

I don't think it hurts the story at all even if he were a replicant. In the theatrical version, you're right, it is ironic than Deckard seems to display less emotion than the replicants, and that gets into the whole "dangers of technology" and artificial intelligence theme that's been explored in approximately 4,000 other stories. It was pretty good the way it was, but the new spin given by the director's cut (which is more faithful to Dick's original story) opens up many entirely new possibilities, making the movie much more than just another dystopian view showing what happens when you let technology get out of hand. Not that it still doesn't have that in it. But now it's got all these philosophical angles that were watered down or eliminated altogether in the theatrical version.

And I can understand that you think the voice-over gave it more of a film noir feel, and while I agree that it is a noir in sci-fi wrapping, it somehow feels less gimmicky this way. I think the noirish atmosphere is still very heavy in the director's cut. The voice-over was just unnecessary. But if you liked it, that's fine, I'm not saying you're wrong. That's the good thing about having 2 dramatically different versions of the movie: if you don't like one, you could still like the other.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ilovemovies
Holy crap! You mean to tell me I'm not the only who actually prefers the theatrical to the director's cut?!?!



The Matt/Elektra romance was pretty much my favorite thing about Daredevil and it barely exists in the director's cut. Infact, poor Jennifer Garner, her role pretty much got butchered in the DC. And it added a subplot of a case Matt Murdock was working on that I frankly didn't care much for.
that's why i didn't like the DC
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:27 PM
Okay, then I've bought into the whole propaganda bit on this.

SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!


Deckard has the dream with a unicorn in it, then the Olmos character leaves the Oragami unicorn for him at the end of the film. In the book, Deckard is arrested for being a Replicant (which is where the whole thing goes off the rails for me). So, if this is wrong, what's the deal here?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:31 PM
Just out of curiosity did anyone see the Elektra DC, did it make any difference?

And yeah I agree with ilovemovies and moviefreak1980, I preferred the theatrical cut of DD more.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:34 PM
Brazil
Cinema Paradiso
Donnie Darko

I love the directors cut of Apocalypse Now.
But most directors cuts are just marketing gambits.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-25-2007, 06:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Kevin Smith fan
What exactly got changed? The only version I've seen is the Director's cut with the goofy comic book transitions.

Totally agree with Talladega, Apocalypse, and Army of Darkness. Apocalypse and Talladega just dragged on with the 'bonus' footage and Army's ending was really lame. I think the original ending gives it much more stylized and energetic closing.
Thats the only thing different, those damn comic book transitions. I'm not sure why but they really REALLY annoy me.

On to other things. I can't wait for the theatrical version of Blade Runner to come out on dvd. I haven't seen the movie in years and I refuse to watch it without the bomb-tacular voice over.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-25-2007, 07:36 PM
MIAMI VICE

love the theatre cut of opening in the night club. The dc had it open in a boat race. lame.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-25-2007, 08:08 PM
The Donnie Darko Directos cut sucked major balls.. it was too distracting and tried to tell the audince instead of showing them.. DD was an amazing movie in everything it did and the directors cut just cluttered the visual style.. Plus they changed some music and thats a BIG NO NO
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:37 PM
ALIEN is the big one for me.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-25-2007, 09:51 PM
I like both versions of Alien myself. I prefer the theatrical cut a little more, but that scene of the alien smacking the box with the cat in it around is worth watching the director's cut repeatedly.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:03 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by zeppelin
Whether or nock Deckard is a replicant is ambiguous in the Director's Cut, and not even really suggested in the theatrical version. There is certainly no clear indication that he is a replicant in either version, and I'd like to hear your interpretation of how he is. But it is one of the more fascinating aspects of the movie, the whole "is he or isn't he?" thing. It's never answered, and the same goes for some other questions the movie brings up.
The back of the Director's Cut DVD suggests that the sequence in which Deckard is playing the piano and there's that cut of the unicorn is supposed to hint that he's a replicant. Doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe replicants are supposed to have some sort of relative thinking mechanism. In any case, the scene seemed kind of pointless to me.

I can't comment on the theatrical cut as I've never seen it. I'd be eager to though when this supposed theatrical DVD is released.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:20 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Le_Big_Mac
The back of the Director's Cut DVD suggests that the sequence in which Deckard is playing the piano and there's that cut of the unicorn is supposed to hint that he's a replicant. Doesn't make much sense to me. Maybe replicants are supposed to have some sort of relative thinking mechanism. In any case, the scene seemed kind of pointless to me.

I can't comment on the theatrical cut as I've never seen it. I'd be eager to though when this supposed theatrical DVD is released.
Don't hold your breath, I like many others have been waiting for a looooong time for that fabled DVD to come out.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:23 PM
everyone likes to watch a good 'ol disney flick every now and again right?......well i do and i have to say, on the platinum editions of some, the added songs just don't do it for me. Not really directors cuts, but added footage that i could care less for ie.

The lion king
Beauty and the beast
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nodo31
everyone likes to watch a good 'ol disney flick every now and again right?......well i do and i have to say, on the platinum editions of some, the added songs just don't do it for me. Not really directors cuts, but added footage that i could care less for ie.

The lion king
Beauty and the beast
Excellent call. The version in the DVD isn't a 'Director's Cut', but just an extended thing (neither Minkoff nor Allers claimed wanting that extra song). I really don't like either better. What pisses me off is that if they were going to add a song from the stage show . . .
. . . why the fuck did they go with the least relevant one? "Morning Report" is fine and all, but for the love of god, they should've added "Shadowland", "The Madness of King Scar" (complete) or "Endless Night".

But hey, something's something.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-26-2007, 12:00 AM
Anyone else get bored watching the director's cut of Aliens?
The 135 minute OC is pretty long as it is and the extra 20 minutes from the DC isn't all that special.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-26-2007, 12:29 AM
Re: Theatrical Cuts you enjoy more than the Director's Cut

Quote:
Originally posted by EVILxxx
Legend

The new scenes add very little to the story. In fact with the exception of the extra couple minutes of Meg Mucklebones I don't think I cared for any of the additional footage.

The music was also a poor replacement. Tangerine Dream did a dark brooding score while Jerry Goldsmith gave the film a childish playful score which didn't work for me.

Also scene with Lord darkness bathed in blue light with neon green is a great sight for the eyes which was cut out from the DC.
I disagree. The DC is a much better film. Also Goldsmith's score fits the film much more then Dream's weird (but still good) score. I thought the TC score didn't fit the film, at all.

The TC felt like it was missing stuff and the DC didn't. Although the Lord darkness neon opening was creepy, the film works better without it as were not shown his face till later in the movie. The TC ruins that as we see his face right away. I like the mystery of not seeing his face much better.

But thats my opinion.

I found the Theatrical Cut of Superman II to be much better then Richard Donner's cut. Donner's cut felt more like a collection of deleted scenes then a full film. Plus Superman blowing up the fortress with luthor still inside, WTF.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-26-2007, 01:54 AM
Last of the Mohicans.

(Obnoxious TRL shoutout to Aaron)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-26-2007, 02:39 AM
Re: Re: Theatrical Cuts you enjoy more than the Director's Cut

Quote:
Originally posted by MisterTwister
I disagree. The DC is a much better film. Also Goldsmith's score fits the film much more then Dream's weird (but still good) score. I thought the TC score didn't fit the film, at all.

The TC felt like it was missing stuff and the DC didn't. Although the Lord darkness neon opening was creepy, the film works better without it as were not shown his face till later in the movie. The TC ruins that as we see his face right away. I like the mystery of not seeing his face much better.

But thats my opinion.
All the added scenes had terrible acting in them though (The campfire scene in particular).
I do agree that the TC feels incomplete but better scenes than the ones found in the DC should have been written in.
Goldsmith's score changes the entire feel of the movie. The scene in particular where Jack is leading Lilly to the unicorn and the goblins are stalking them. Tangerine Dream's score made it a tense creepy scene, Goldsmith's made it feel bland.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-26-2007, 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Danger^Cart
Last of the Mohicans.

(Obnoxious TRL shoutout to Aaron)
Word, bitch. As much I love Mann, I wanna punch him for that b.s.

Also, I vastly prefer Cameron's D.C. of Aliens. Makes the movie feel that much more epic.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-27-2007, 09:45 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by dman476
And unlike some people, I think Donnie Darko has a better DC than TC.
Thank god I'm not alone!! I agree with you, I really liked the DD director's cut better than the theatrical version - it added enough additional (and great) footage to make it more interesting and also only HINTED at the explanation without actually blatantly spelling it out. So I actually thought it worked nicely.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump