Versons released at the theatre are always preferred for me as they do come through the divine timing and order, in other words it is not a product of an ego, that is why we have people and circumstances come to us to restrict us or teach us, through these limitations come real miracles. Many people have not transcended ego enough not to attract any restrictions, that is why what gets released is meant to be, that's just my perspective on it.
But sometimes I am curious about director's cut too, however it is not something that is meant to happen more, it just doesn't come through these filters that allow the film to be seen by wider audience at a theatre and allows me to feel the social climate within which the film was made in that original form. TC of Blade Runner allows me to feel the year 1982 a lot more, DC doesn't, it would have never been released that year in that particular form.
Anytime producers come in to interefere turns out to be a work of collaboration, and at the end of the day the director is always collaborating anyway, they're not in control of everything, all circumstances, you can't control the unwanted weather or accidents during the shoot, just like any intereferences from the studio during its making. Director's job very often also includes the compromising and measuring of how far they can go or what the audience is ready for. There are many factors, and perhaps if you go too far as a director, studios can take it away from you. Director's cut basically overrides all that.
There's only one DC version that I tend to watch or remember more often, that is Alexander: Revisited (2004). Maybe also the 2000's cut for Pat Garret and Billy The Kid from Peckinpah is better, I just don't remember the original one though. What can bother me more is the censoring of the released film, so seeking out and seeing the original uncut form turns out to be always better experience.
reply
share
mobocracy (891)
5 years ago
Probably in most cases the theatrical cut is a better viewing because of studio test audiences and other interested parties shaping the product.
While there are examples of theatrical cuts getting badly butchered, it's usually a byproduct of a troubled production process that wouldn't have had a very good director's cut, either. In a lot of cases, the director's or some original cut would probably only be interesting to fans of the film or director and not a giant game changer.
Probably only a handful of directors have the influence to get enough meaningful footage in the can to make a truly interesting director's cut to begin with, and if these directors have the influence to shoot a lot of extra footage they probably have enough influence to cut the film to their liking anyway.
reply
share
Starman (412)
5 years ago
Agreed on that. There are indeed always exceptions when some DC versions become more satisfying experience, even though they're less likely to become trend setters, they could perhaps only enhance the quality of the original version that was already big enough with the audience.
reply
share