• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

10 Director’s Cuts That Change The Plot (Spoilers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. Blade Runner

Blade Runner has actually gone through many iterations. There was the theatrical cut released in 1982 with a “happy ending” shoehorned in by the studio. Both director Ridley Scott and star Harrison Ford hated it, and Ford has even confessed that he wasn’t giving it his all when recording a voiceover that he called “not an organic part of the film.” Then came the “directors cut” in 1992 that Scott also disowned.

Finally, Warner Brothers worked with Scott in 2007 to release the Final Cut of Blade Runner, the only version which Scott had complete control over. It contained several changes (particularly to the score) and new scenes, but perhaps the most significant was the confirmation (or close to it) that Ford’s character Deckard actually was a replicant. Instead of the “happy ending” that shows Deckard and Rachel driving through a beautiful landscape, Scott’s ending is more ambiguous and simply shows them leaving Deckard’s apartment. Plus the appearance of an origami unicorn in front of Deckard’s door hints that he is, in fact, a replicant (a similar calling card had been used earlier in the film to denote replicants). In interviews about the new release, Scott confirmed that Deckard was a replicant in his version, although Ford said he believed the character was human.

2. Donnie Darko

Despite the cult success of the mind-bending film, Donnie Darko director Richard Kelly repeatedly apologized for the theatrical release of the movie, stating it was not his original film. To make up for it, he convinced 20th Century Fox to release a directors cut in 2004 that he felt would be more cohesive and easier for viewers to understand. The most notable change he made was literally adding in text from the fictional The Philosophy of Time Travel, which had previously been a DVD extra. Fans were split: some loved the explanations that filled in previous plot holes, others hated the notion that they needed to be spoon-fed the story.

Of course, some fans never got past the fact that the directors cut replaces Echo & The Bunnymen’s “The Killing Moon” with INXS’s “Never Tear Us Apart” in the opening scene.

3. Metropolis

Although it’s considered a masterpiece of cinema, the plot of Metropolis can still be a bit difficult for some viewers to understand. But a recent extended version that uses footage from prints discovered after some 80 years in Argentina and New Zealand helps remedy that –- by filling in plot details as director Fritz Lang had intended. Film historians had long been looking for the extended footage from Metropolis, which was cut before its original release to ensure a 90-minute running time.

Mostly, the new footage (which is intercut with title cards and still images to fill in for damaged or missing frames) serves to smooth out plot details, including a crucial scene in which the sorcerer Rotwang explains his plan to use robots to stir a labor revolt. But historians said it also helped them learn about how the legendary film was made, including the fact that it had been tinted by hand.

4. Salt

For a movie released just last year, there sure are a lot of different versions floating around. On the DVD release, director Phillip Noyce included an extended version and a director’s cut that adds more intrigue to the film. In the original, a Russian sleeper agent played by Live Liev Schreiber follows the U.S. President to his secure bunker, then knocks him unconscious. But in the director’s cut, Schreiber’s character goes even farther and assassinates the president. In a voiceover on the director’s cut, it is revealed that the new president is also a Russian agent waiting to be activated, which would make a sequel a serious bummer.

5. Payback

In the theatrical release, almost the entire third act differs from director Brian Helgeland’s original vision, which was unresolved until the release of a 2006 director’s cut. The most notable change, however, comes at the very end of the movie. In the theatrical release, Mel Gibson’s character kills two top mob figures, then drives off happily with the female lead, Rosie, and his dog. In Helgeland’s version, Gibson is shot in a train station showdown. Rather than driving off happily with Rosie, she picks him up while he is bleeding and his fate is left up in the air.

6. Leon (The Professional)

In the original film, the relationship between the hitman Leon and his 12-year-old neighbor Mathilda was already a little dicey, what with the two of them collaborating on a series of murders. But the directors cut adds a whole new level of discomfort. In it, Mathilda – played by Natalie Portman in her film debut – is shown to be far more involved in the assassinations of a crew of drug dealers. She also sexually propositions Leon and plays a game of Russian roulette to force Leon to say that he loves her. Those scenes were in the original European release, but were cut because producers were concerned about how American audiences would react.

7. Superman II

Due to a number of disputes between him and the film’s producers, director Richard Donner left the set of Superman II without completing filming (he had been filming both the original and the sequel simultaneously). Notably, the producers refused to include any footage of Marlon Brando as Jor-El in the sequel because of the massive cut of the box office gross he was requesting. The studio then brought in Richard Lester to replace Donner, forcing him to reshoot some scenes, rewrite others and edit out most of Donner’s work. That left a movie with roughly 25 percent of Donner’s footage and 75 percent new work (and 0 percent Brando).

The 2006 “Richard Donner Cut” brought back the director’s original vision, although the editing was choppy and Donner had to use some unfinished test footage to fill in the holes. But fans generally agree it makes more sense. For example, the theatrical release never fully explains how Superman gets his powers back after voluntarily giving them up, but the Donner cut shows that Jor-El “dies” again to restore the powers. The new version of the sequel also ends with Superman flying around the world to undo the damage of the supervillains and purge Lois Lane’s memory of the fact that he is Clark Kent. If that sounds familiar, it’s because that scene was written into the end of the original once it became clear it wouldn’t be used in the sequel.

8. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

A 2003 “special edition” release of the much-lampooned Kevin Costner vehicle doesn’t contain many earth-shattering changes. But it does introduce a new backstory for the Sheriff of Nottingham by revealing that he is, in fact, the son of the evil witch Mortianna (who murdered the real son of the original sheriff and replaced him with her own). Sadly, the special edition doesn’t do anything to fix Costner’s uneven English accent.

9. Kingdom of Heaven

By adding some 50 minutes of footage, director Ridley Scott said his new cut of Kingdom of Heaven also adds a whole heap of context for the violence in his Crusades epic. For example, a priest that the blacksmith Balian kills at the beginning is revealed to be his half-brother, making their feud more about family relations than religion. The new cut also introduces an entirely new character, Baldwin V, who even becomes king before his family discovers that he has leprosy. Although the director’s cut was widely praised (unlike the theatrical release), at 3-and-a-half hours, it never really took off with viewers who already hated the original release.

10. Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist and Exorcist: The Beginning

These aren’t directors cuts per se, so much as two directors using the same script and lead actor to make the different movies. Paul Schrader was hired to direct Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist and managed to finish a final cut of the film. But producers at Morgan Creek weren’t happy with the result -– too much religion, not enough blood –- and decided to scrap that cut. But rather than get rid of the investment, they hired on Renny Harlin to retool the script and film a new version with star Stellan Skarsgård staying on board as Father Merrin.

Harlin’s version was released in theaters as Exorcist: The Beginning. But Schrader soon won the rights to release his own version, leaving audiences with two Exorcist prequels that both starred Stellan Skarsgard. Neither was well-received and both followed the same basic plot. But critics looked slightly more favorably on Schrader’s, which includes a love interest (that does not get possessed by a demon) and deals more with Merrin’s loss of faith.



Source : http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/90132
 

el jacko

Member
No mention of Brazil? The "Love Conquers All" version actually completely changes the meaning of the film, and is so bad that Terry Gilliam had to take an ad out in Variety demanding final cut.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
Donnie Darko was an example of when the studio version is superior to the director's cut. I appreciated the Director's Cut but i honestly believe the theatrical version is superior and perfect in every way.

the director's cut is only a "supplement" in my mind since it fills in some plot holes but i appreciated the disjointedness of the theatrical version.
 

iirate

Member
davepoobond said:
Donnie Darko was an example of when the studio version is superior to the director's cut. I appreciated the Director's Cut but i honestly believe the theatrical version is superior and perfect in every way.

the director's cut is only a "supplement" in my mind since it fills in some plot holes but i appreciated the disjointedness of the theatrical version.

Agreed. I appreciated that the plot wasn't completely spoon-fed to the audience. I haven't seen the director's cut, but I doubt I'd like it more than the original.
 

wenis

Registered for GAF on September 11, 2001.
I want to see this "The Professional" directors cut now...damn, that sounds awesome.
 

Steamlord

Member
Fuck the Donnie Darko director's cut. I think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version, because his "explanation" is pure nonsensical shit. Also fuck him for replacing The Killing Moon.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
Gigglepoo said:
I might say the same thing about Blade Runner. Maybe.

I definitely say that. Blade Runner and the final scenes have much more meaning if Deckard is human.
 

SmZA

Member
Dark City. The director's cut took out the introduction which pointlessly gave away the mystery of the city.
 

Salsa

Member
Steamlord said:
Fuck the Donnie Darko director's cut. I think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version, because his "explanation" is pure nonsensical shit. Also fuck him for replacing The Killing Moon.

I dont think he got lucky, but i agree that he made the right choice by leaving most of the stuff up to people's imagination/guessing/gatherin what happened instead of going for the explanation.

But yeah stupid of him to push the cut so much when the theatrical release was so much better, but he's an average director who got one big cult hit.

Its kinda like James Cameron's alternative Titanic ending, only in that case he is indeed an asshole.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
I had no idea Baldwin V was not in the theatrical release of Kingdom of Heaven. Holy shit, that changes everything.
 

Spire

Subconscious Brolonging
Scullibundo said:
The Abyss.

And yet it's still garbage.



Fuck the Donnie Darko director's cut. I think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version, because his "explanation" is pure nonsensical shit. Also fuck him for replacing The Killing Moon.

I like Richard Kelly, but yeah. The Donnie Darko theatrical cut is the only good thing he's directed.


I had no idea Baldwin V was not in the theatrical release of Kingdom of Heaven. Holy shit, that changes everything.

The theatrical cut is so bad, you just wouldn't believe. Eva Green refused to do press for the movie because without her character's son in it, her story is completely nonsensical.
 

Bit-Bit

Member
SalsaShark said:
I dont think he got lucky, but i agree that he made the right choice by leaving most of the stuff up to people's imagination/guessing/gatherin what happened instead of going for the explanation.

But yeah stupid of him to push the cut so much when the theatrical release was so much better, but he's an average director who got one big cult hit.

Its kinda like James Cameron's alternative Titanic ending, only in that case he is indeed an asshole.
Omg, Cameron's alt ending for Titanic is too fucking funny. The old lady actually is crazy!
 

Kevtones

Member
Paulathon said:
Dark City. The director's cut took out the introduction which pointlessly gave away the mystery of the city.


Seriously. Who the fuck did development on that movie? Such a no-brainer.
 
Paulathon said:
Dark City. The director's cut took out the introduction which pointlessly gave away the mystery of the city.
So interesting how such a minor addition (the VoiceOver on the theatrical cut) can radically alter the rest of the movie. Directors cut is superior for simply removing that voice over
 

ampere

Member
I love Donnie Darko and this thread reminds me that I forgot to watch the Director's Cut. I'm pretty sure it's on the Blu-ray I have too.
 

Slavik81

Member
The new version of the sequel also ends with Superman flying around the world to undo the damage of the supervillains and purge Lois Lane’s memory of the fact that he is Clark Kent. If that sounds familiar, it’s because that scene was written into the end of the original once it became clear it wouldn’t be used in the sequel.
They liked that idea so much that they had to salvage it? Really?
 

iirate

Member
HK-47 said:
I definitely say that. Blade Runner and the final scenes have much more meaning if Deckard is human.

The main reason that I can't appreciate the theatrical cut over the director's here is the narration. I saw the theatrical cut first, and before I even found out that the director's cut took it out, it became my biggest complaint.
 

Steamlord

Member
ciaossu said:
I love Donnie Darko and this thread reminds me that I forgot to watch the Director's Cut. I'm pretty sure it's on the Blu-ray I have too.
I'm not sure if I would recommend it. Some of the added scenes are just character development, which is good, but Kelly's explanation nearly ruined the movie for me.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Metropolis doesn't belong anywhere near this list. It's basically the opposite of a so-called director's cut. The whole pursuit has been to recapture the original theatrical cut that was lost for decades.
 

AMUSIX

Member
The list does have some good entries, but also has a few that have no business being there. The payback edit does not change the plot in any way, nor does the Robin Hood one, really.

Also, as Sculli and el jacko pointed out, The Abyss and Brazil should have been the first to mind of anyone reading the topic of the list. Brazil, especially.
 

xbhaskarx

Member
Donnie Darko director Richard Kelly repeatedly apologized for the theatrical release of the movie, stating it was not his original film. To make up for it, he convinced 20th Century Fox to release a directors cut in 2004 that he felt would be more cohesive and easier for viewers to understand.

The director's cut made me lose respect for Richard Kelly, he didn't even understand his own film. Obviously it was dumb luck and not talent, I doubt he'll make anything worthwhile again.


Steamlord said:
Fuck the Donnie Darko director's cut. I think Kelly got lucky with the theatrical version, because his "explanation" is pure nonsensical shit. Also fuck him for replacing The Killing Moon.

.
 

Jonm1010

Banned
It just perplexes me to no end how some of these movies get butchered the way they do.

The one that first came to mind was kingdom of heaven - probably cause I just watched it again a week ago.

The theatrical cut was so bad, so nonsensical at times, so flat. The directors cut on the other hand is brilliant, an epic film worthy of being in Scott's top 5 films of his career.

It just boggles my mind how a studio can see the directors cut and then somehow think that the studio version actually flows better. I know there are exceptions like Donnie darko(d.c. was crap) but come on, on films like kingdom of heaven it just seems so obvious which version is superior that it baffles me how they allow it to get so butchered and actually stand by that butchering that it gets released in that state.

Kingdom of heaven directors cut was Oscar worthy, kingdom of heaven theatrical cut was competing with Troy for failed big budget epic crown. How hard is it to fucking see that? Truly baffling.
 

shintoki

sparkle this bitch
reilo said:
I had no idea Baldwin V was not in the theatrical release of Kingdom of Heaven. Holy shit, that changes everything.
To sum it up, every single character is butchered in it other than Bloom.

To use Green's character for example
In the TC, she seems like a nice girl, who is married an asshole. After her brother dies, she runs away... or something, and wants to restart. No real reason. Maybe a princess complex.

In the DC, you learn that she had a son, who was going to be the next ruler of Jerusalem after Baldwin IV died. Over the course, she discovers that he also has leprosy. Baldwin IV dies and he ascends the thrown. And after seeing her brother decay through most his life. She decides it is better to poison her son and allowing Guy to ascend the thrown.
 
dawn of the dead 1978 has some serious edits compared to the european and 'extended' versions. they don't change anything super drastically, but i definitely prefer the longer versions since it fleshes out (no pun?) the characters and the world a little more.

hate the european soundtrack though.
 
HK-47 said:
I definitely say that. Blade Runner and the final scenes have much more meaning if Deckard is human.

I'd argue that there is enough uncertainty and metaphor in even the final cut that you can easily make a compelling case for deckard's humanity. Meaning-wise, the movie is much better if he is human, but i almost would argue that, thematically, its better if its left ambiguous.
 
icarus-daedelus said:
Cut it down from 142 minutes to 94 and gave it a happy ending.

Butchers.
This was the most oiangoaenvsdovncv I can't even type what I want to because it boils my blood so bad. Its the worst shit I've ever seen put to film. Terrible terrible terrible cut. So many other issues too. Shit its bad.
 

MrHicks

Banned
sometimes shit gets left on the cuttting room floor for a reason

many "extended editions/directors cuts/15 extra minutes of footage!!!!" versions are WORSE
 
MrHicks said:
sometimes shit gets left on the cuttting room floor for a reason

many "extended editions/directors cuts/15 extra minutes of footage!!!!" versions are WORSE

Oh, most definitely. Some do add good things for the characters but completely destroy the pacing of the movie (like T2). The best is when you get multiple cuts and can decide which you prefer (which is why I love the Blade Runner set)
 

ReaperXL7

Member
this may be a dumb question so please forgive my ignorance, but the Metropolis discussed here is not the animated film correct? I remember there being alot of praise around it when it was first released, with many claiming classic status.

If this is not the same metropolis, I apologize I like to consider myself pretty informed in cinema but I admit that I had yet to see many great movies, the quest to see all of them is long and daunting.
 

mojiimbo

Member
ReaperXL07 said:
this may be a dumb question so please forgive my ignorance, but the Metropolis discussed here is not the animated film correct? I remember there being alot of praise around it when it was first released, with many claiming classic status.

If this is not the same metropolis, I apologize I like to consider myself pretty informed in cinema but I admit that I had yet to see many great movies, the quest to see all of them is long and daunting.
No, but the animated film was kind of an adaptation of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(film)
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
Gigglepoo said:
I might say the same thing about Blade Runner. Maybe.


i actually might agree with you. i saw the director's cut first. afterwards i was like "WTF just happened."

I watched the theatrical cut, and i had a sense of closure, but i wasn't exactly sure why i had watched it. It didn't feel like it made any profound statement or anything, but at least i wasn't wondering what the hell was going on.



i really dont get blade runner. i like the world they created or whatever, but that's one of the few movies that went over my head.
 

el jacko

Member
icarus-daedelus said:
Cut it down from 142 minutes to 94 and gave it a happy ending.

Butchers.
Interestingly enough, the Criterion set includes both versions of the film, and the happy-ending version has a commentary explaining the little changes that make the film completely different from the original. Rather than just horrifying, it's actually quite fascinating to see how editing the same material can change the meaning of the final work.
 
ReaperXL07 said:
this may be a dumb question so please forgive my ignorance, but the Metropolis discussed here is not the animated film correct? I remember there being alot of praise around it when it was first released, with many claiming classic status.

If this is not the same metropolis, I apologize I like to consider myself pretty informed in cinema but I admit that I had yet to see many great movies, the quest to see all of them is long and daunting.

that is correct, it's the Fritz Lang movie from 1927.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_(film)

edit: beatn. well while i'm here:

DiscoJer said:
The thing with Robin Hood and Kevin Costner's accent, is that there wasn't an English accent then.

Not to mention, Americans talk more like the old English than the English do now. They stopped saying their Rs, we still say them (except in places that had a lot of contact with England, Boston for instance).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhotic_and_non-rhotic_accents

afaik it's generally accepted that middle english sounded like modern german more than anything else. given that robin hood as a legend is dated pre-14th century (from my understanding) you also have to take the great vowel shift into account.
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Both versions of Blade Runner are good. I like the 'noir' style voice over, I don't find it spoonfeedy at all. Both endings are ambiguous. My main complaint about the directors cut is it allows film snobs to go 'see, he's a replicant too' when that isn't the case at all - we are told nothing.

Leon - the directors cut is the only way it should be watched. The 'sexual' advances from Natalie Portman are not sexual, they're awkward and touching. It adds a lot to the central relationship. Have it on DVD, not sure if its available on bluray?

Kingdom of Heaven. Double edged sword. I can't watch the theatrical version anymore because it almost literally doesn't make sense. But the Directors Cut is so long it requires planning to watch, so it doesn't get watched very often.
 
How can people like the narration in Blade Runner? It's so poorly done and does not sound like it belongs in the movie at all. Even when I was young and didn't know anything about the production, the narration sounded like an afterthought that just didn't mesh with anything else. It's so sparsely scattered throughout the movie that when it does come up again, it's jarring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom