MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Have we missed on great films without di...

Have we missed on great films without director's cuts?


I think about Oliver Stone's Alexander and how the absolute best version of his film came about 10 years after its premiere. Then I thought about the great films of the past, and maybe the best version just never existed because directors didn't have time to create it.

reply

I know another example for this...a franchise,to be exact.

reply

which one?

reply

Resident Evil

reply

what problems did they have?

reply

The main problem with that franchise was...sony didn't let the director to make a good movie,they decide what scenes to be in the movie and what should be cut....the result was the deleting scenes for each movie in the franchise is at least 20 minutes.

reply

Hard to tell. One thing I realized is that director's cuts are always longer than the original, so I'm not sure if these really are director's cuts, or just an alternative extended cut.

reply

I wonder if paul was allowed to make the resident evil movies according with the script,these movies shouldn't get the hate that is today...

reply

It's great when we see the film that the director wanted to create but has had to cut due to length.
Quite often I've noticed we see a more complete version,sometimes it adds understanding to the film and possibly changes a film.

Occasionally a directors cut just means they've made it longer and popped in a few deleted scenes that were deleted for good reason!

reply

Cinema Paradiso is a great example of this.
The directors completely changed the outlook of this movie.
The things you felt for the characters were totally different with the directors cut.
This is one of the few I preferred the theatrical version,.

reply

I have always loved Amadeus. I had no idea of what I had missed until a week ago when I saw the director's cut for the very first time. Scenes that had been cut from the theatrical version suddenly made things in the story clear. Certain things made more sense after all these years. Those extra scenes added a richness to the story!

reply

I agree MissMargo. Most of the time the directors cut's add to the stories and offer explanations.
Once Upon a Time in America offered 3 versions.
The "American" version was horrible. They butchered and destroyed it. Then wondered why It didn't do well
at the box office.
The "European" version was much better .
The Directors cut was a masterpiece. IMO. Brought the whole story together.

reply

I agree MissMargo. Most of the time the directors cut's add to the stories and offer explanations.
Once Upon a Time in America offered 3 versions.
The "American" version was horrible. They butchered and destroyed it. Then wondered why It didn't do well
at the box office.
The "European" version was much better .
The Directors cut was a masterpiece. IMO. Brought the whole story together.

reply

I'd like to see the DC of "Once Upon." I have a filmed from TV version on VHS from waaay back, and I suspect it's the original American. I liked it a lot, but less so as I re-watched. (Elizabeth McGovern never really turned my crank, but I suspect that's a personal thing. Jennifer Connelly was so lovely as the young version.) Something always seemed a little off about it, like too much was brought in and they couldn't control it. I'd love to sit down with the DC and see how much better it works.

reply

The easiest way to know is to check the run time.

The main release in the US was only 139 minutes.
The second version was about 230 minutes
The DC is around 4 hours.

I've seen the 139 minute version still pop up on cable once in awhile.
I feel the second version stand on it's own.
The DC just solidifies that. I think this is one if not Leone's best work.

McGovern never did much for me either. Connelly on the other hand.................


reply

I think they ressurected the idea of director's cut for movies critically panned in theatrical run to save face of the franchise and to nickle and dime gullible fans, e.g. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.

reply

I consider that a different case because with Dawn of Justice and all the garbage DC movies, the directors are not being taken away control, they finish the picture and then they purposefully take out 40 minutes to force people to buy the DVD, so it's not the same case as a director not being able to fully execute his vision for whatever reason.

reply

Were you Ramon on IMDb?

reply

Yes.,

reply

Directors of highly engineered franchise movies like this don't really need vision anyway.

reply

exactly, they are just directors for hire.

reply

I still watch them though. Sigh.

reply

Why?? I don't, I'm being very strict about what movies I do support.

reply

Because I like superhero movies, especially Batman and Superman. On Marvel side, only Hulk that I care but I realized long ago since Ang Lee's Hulk that it's pretty much impossible to make a movie out of that character.

reply

I love Batman too but Suicide Squad was the last straw, I'm out.

reply

Yes, everything from now on needs to be transparent. We, the movie goers and t.v. watchers pay their pay check and if we have to all sit through a 4 hour long movie, with cut outs left in, then we should be able to do that. They could also have two copies of the movie come out, one with a director's cut and the other without.

reply