spookyfish
Member
Scullibundo said:
Dammit! First response.
And yes.
-
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 Directors Cuts That Change The Plot (Spoilers)
- Thread starter spiderman123
- Start date
- Status
Dammit! First response.
And yes.
sixteen-bit
Member
By some happy accident I have only seen the Director's Cut. The American theatrical release sounds lame in comparison, like a ton of stuff later in the film wouldn't make sense.wenis said:
AndyMoogle
Member
No, it's not. Whoever wrote the article sucks. There are way bigger changes to Payback than just a slightly changed ending. Seriously, it really is like it's a completely different movie. Kris Kristoffersson plays a major role in the theatrical cut. He's not even in the DC!JGS said:
It's wrong to call them all Director's Cuts though. Especially when Dominion isn't even the same movie as Exorcist: The Beginning. Hell, the writer even points that out. It's a pretty stupid list, but whatever.
iKeepPlaying
Banned
Explain.cory. said:
AndyMoogle
Member
The director's cut basically tells you everything. I doubt you'll enjoy it if you didn't enjoy the theatrical cut though.dude said:
Mister Wilhelm
Member
The director's cut of Payback is atrocious compared to the theatrical version.
I loved the Professional and felt that Leon just fleshed out the film more. It felt more complete. As far as their relationship is concerned, it didn't really change anything IMO, but rather put to film what the Professional had already done everything but show. It was like hearing a gunshot, hearing a body drop but not seeing a body, but in a second version the camera pans to the corpse, ya know? You've already filled in the blanks.mrklaw said:
I will say the extra training scenes were much appreciated. I think that diverged from the movie more so than the creepy wining and dining scenes they added. The Professional really only paints the picture that Leon is just sort of placating her with this "training", but Leon (the movie) shows that he is a bit more serious in his intentions when they show her actually with him on hits. It also makes her aspirations of knocking off Oldman at the end seem a little more realistic.
I feel lucky to only have seen the director's cut. I feel it's such a good movie the length doesn't couunt against it though.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Woody Allen once wrote and directed a Fellini-esque abstract comedy called Anhedonia, a semi-autobiographical examination of a young Jewish comedian's life and neuroses (surprise) told through a series of bizarre stream-of-consciousness vignettes. The main character has several romantic relationships in the film, including one with a character played by Diane Keaton. The rough cut ran about two-and-a-half hours long.
During editing, Allen cut out nearly all of the comic surrealism, re-shaped the entire film around Keaton's character, titled it Annie Hall at the last minute, and won Best Picture.
During editing, Allen cut out nearly all of the comic surrealism, re-shaped the entire film around Keaton's character, titled it Annie Hall at the last minute, and won Best Picture.
Well, I wasn't just talking about FotR. The additions in that one indeed weren't significant (although I still can't watch the original nowadays, because I feel scenes are missing), but the additions in The Two Towers and especially Return of the King were most definitely significant parts of the plot.jett said:Huh, the EE of FOTR didn't add anything of real interest, if anything it messed with the perfect pace of the film. I'll agree that the sequels are indeed mediocre though.
The EE of Return of the King ruined the scene of the battle where Rohan showed up. Having Eomer audibly screaming as he runs to his sister is kind of a jarring/awkward moment for me compared to the post battle montage from the theatrical version.
Insane Metal
Member
About Blade Runner
I had no idea that Deckard was supposedly a replicant too... wtf?
AndyMoogle
Member
Mister Wilhelm said:
jett said:
Wow... Really? It's so obvious that the theatrical cut butchered the original film that Brian Helgeland directed and wrote. Some scenes in the theatrical cut doesn't even make sense.Ryu said:Agreed. It's too bad the only BD release of the theatrical cut AND Director's Cut is in Europe. US is stuck with the Director's Cut ONLY on BD. Learned that the hard way after I bought it.
Mister Wilhelm
Member
AndyMoogle said:
I'd like you to elaborate.
Insane Metal
Member
No he isn't =(StuBurns said:
Cerebral Assassin
Member
Did the DC of Gangs of New York ever come out anywhere? I remember talk of the studios requesting changes to the first cut as it would have been too long for cinema audiences.
Fucking loved the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven. It was actually kind of funny, because my girlfriend and I had no idea we had purchased the Director's Cut BluRay. So, early on, were were looking over at eachother asking "Do you remember this part?" and finally, we checked the boxed and noticed it was an hour longer than the DVD edition. Movie makes so much more sense - we always wondered why an apparently strong woman like Eva Green would be crying during the invasion.
Great movie.
Great movie.
Jo Shishido's Cheeks
Member
Stop being a rebel and get a damn avatarswoon said:
TheJollyCorner
Member
The director's cut for LEON is superior in every way. So much character development (i.e. Leon's past and why he's in the US)- it's a shame Columbia Pictures was too afraid of how American audiences would perceive things. I mean, there's nothing ambiguous there. Leon is basically a child in a man's body and his intentions to not have any kind of sexual relationship with Matilda are very clear throughout. Stupid ass test audiences.
One I would like to mention:
Another Ridley Scott film (what is with that guy's films getting butchered?)- LEGEND.
His director's cut is awesome. Not just the change of music score, but the further development of Cruise's character. I mean, I got the impression the guy was fairly simple minded- and that changed the whole dynamic of that character.
I actually hated LEGEND until I watched the Director's Cut. Now it's one of my favorite Ridley films.
One I would like to mention:
Another Ridley Scott film (what is with that guy's films getting butchered?)- LEGEND.
His director's cut is awesome. Not just the change of music score, but the further development of Cruise's character. I mean, I got the impression the guy was fairly simple minded- and that changed the whole dynamic of that character.
I actually hated LEGEND until I watched the Director's Cut. Now it's one of my favorite Ridley films.
IAmtheFMan
Member
el jacko said:
Sheinberg's "Love Conquers All" cut wasn't released in theaters. Gilliam fought tooth and nail against it, and even did private screenings of HIS cut which then got praised. Universal then begrudgingly released a cut with still about 10 minutes cut but with Gilliam's approval.
So the version of Brazil we see already is in essence the director's cut.
AndyMoogle
Member
Right from the get go the tone is completely different in the two cuts. It's obvious that the original intention was to make the movie as an homage to old 60s/70s crime movies. The music, the font and the cinematography show this really well.Mister Wilhelm said:
The theatrical cut starts with the operation scene and the monologue, which is pointless and completely ruins the music. It also has some voice added for some reason, and it has a blue filter which ruins the look of the movie.
What the theatrical cut does is that it completely rips the original movie of it's style and homages, and it tries to be a more mainstream action movie. Mel Gibson basically admits this as well. He said that the director's cut was a good movie, but it was the 90s and he wanted a 90s movie. And it shows all the way through the movie.
To make such major changes to a movie after the director/writer already has made the movie is rarely (never?) a good choice. Especially when the director/writer don't even like the changes that are being made.
AndyMoogle
Member
Silly is certainly the perfect word to describe the theatrical cut of Payback.besada said:
AndyMoogle said:
I thought the director's cut had a lot of flaws, but it was a real, coherent movie, unlike the theatrical release, which couldn't decide if it wanted to be a serious crime drama, and action film, or a comedy.
Also, as a huge fan of Richard Stark's(Donald Westlake) Parker novels, it was sad to see such brilliance on the page turned into such sludge on the screen.
lunarworks
Member
I haven't forgotten to watch the Director's Cut. I've actively avoided watching the Director's Cut.ciaossu said:
I was told about how bad it was many years ago, and I really would prefer not to ruin the movie by watching it.
Hmm... speaking of which, the director belongs in that thread of artists who were brilliant but got stuck in mediocrity. He made one amazing movie, and that's it.
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
sn00zer said:
I've hated Alien 3 since I first saw it in the theater. I've mostly avoided it since then, just watching it once more some years later to make sure it sucked it does. I was avoiding it on disc as well but Amazon had an awesome sale on the blu-ray collection last year. So I watched the assembly cut, and it is actually pretty damn good. Definitely holds it's own with the others. Alien Resurrection is still a horrible horrible film though.
Stuggernaut
Grandma's Chippy
Kingdom of Heaven Extended cut is waaaay better than the original, 3+ hours of goodness. Just sayin
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Slavik81 said:
Well, he's travelling back in time, not turning the Earth backwards-- it's not so horrible as a planned conclusion to the 2-part movie as conceived.
- Status