What is Digg?95 Comments
- emiliogtz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+20Donnie Darko, IMHO the original release is better.
- r00tus3r, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19Oh wait, maybe not.
- tarheel314, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Donnie Darko is one film where the original was better than the director's cut.
- kushed, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13The Abyss directors cut was much better, and gave more depth (no pun intended) to the story.
- joaob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11This article is full of contradictions.
One moment he says that Donner's version of Superman 2 is almost no better...then at the end he states that it is clearly better.
Thats just one inconsistency. Kinda made it hard to read when the author couldn't make up his mind.
Not to mention he missed the greatest Directors Cut vs. Theatrical Cut argument of them all......"Once Upon A Time in America" - MaynardJK, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8"I think it would be impossible for anyone to edit Star Wars Episodes 1-3 in any way that would make them watchable."
It is possible. For Ep II, just replace all of the sappy love story crap with Anakin and Amidala (or whatever her name is) with a black screen with a caption saying "Anakin and Amidala make sex". The movie is instantly 100 times better and about 45 minutes shorter. - Neiby, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I think it would be impossible for anyone to edit Star Wars Episodes 1-3 in any way that would make them watchable.
- asif5th, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I saw Kingdom of Heaven in the theater and it was a mess. I then decided to give the Director's Cut another try...and the movie is amazing. The characters are amazing....and I thought I would never say this....but Orlando Bloom is the ***** in the movie. The battle scenes are a lot better, and everything makes sense. Oh yeah, make sure to watch the HD Version. :|
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9A common typo. The keys are like, right next to each other.
- notmark, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I have a feeling it was a joke. That's why he said, "roughly." It's an exaggeration.
- Crashwithuhk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7I'd have to say my favorite Directors Cut is "Untitled" the directors cut of "Almost Famous." Saw it once and now I can't sit through the theatrical cut with all that missing footage.
- cthcth, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Not to mention Highlander 2, the two cuts were two completley different movies from what I remember
- yoshihama, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5"Once Upon a Time in America" isn't on the list because there isn't anything to debate. Leone made an awesome film. The studio took it from him and butchered it. Everyone thought it sucked. Then later it was released as a director's cut. Everyone finally found out it was the studio that sucked, not Leone. The only person that would ever defend the studio cut is someone that's had a frontal lobotomy.
- dclowd9901, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6"Furthermore, the unicorn scene distracts from the symbolism of Gaff’s origami unicorn in the first place: when taken as a symbol, the entire point of the origami unicorn is to suggest that all life, even the life of a Replicant like Rachel, is truly precious and must be protected."
I also had a problem with his views on Blade Runner. There's nothing in history or in the movie that indicate that unicorns symbolize "the importance of life." Unicorns symbolize unattainability or purity. I'd like to know how he came to this conclusions, especially after his particularly brazen comment that "the director is 'wrong.'" - nateboom, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5True, however he seems to be more schooled in humor and sarcasm than you
- cculver, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Minor Bladerunner spoilers in this post.
MINOR SPOILERS BEGIN
I have to agree with lordskywalker here. The author of the article complains that the voice-overs "tells the audience what they should be thinking" (paraphrase), but there are a lot of parts in the movie (especially the replicant's decision about what to do with Deckard at the end) where there's just not enough context for the audience to understand what in the world is going on.
MINOR SPOILERS END
It's the same problem I have with all movies and theater productions when compared with books. Movies (and on the stage), you really can't get inside a character's head in the way that you do with a novel. There are plenty of things that tell you what they are thinking in film (in their actions, in their speeches, and so on), but really it's just interpretation and guesswork. In some cases this works out wonderfully (lots of movies get it right, and for theater, think Shakespeare), but in others it's hard to get an idea of the motivations behind the actions of characters. Bladerunner is one of those movies for me. I really didn't understand why Deckard and the replicants were doing certain things in the film when I first saw it (this was the director's cut), but when I went back and watched the original theatrical release, some things made a lot more sense. Mainly because I went back and watched the original, I consider it to be my favorite sci-fi movie of all time.
Now that I've seen the movie with the voice-over, I like the director's cut more, since (as the article points out), it's a much more broody and open plot now that I understand some of the key character insights which just don't come through without them. Now I tell people who have never seen the film to watch the theatrical release first, and if they like it to go back and watch the directors cut at a later date.
I really wonder how this third cut of the movie will turn out... - mjcoury, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4A movie that was missing from his list is Butterfly Effect - good or bad is not really my point but the Directors Version is SUBSTANTIALLY Darker and the average Joe moviegoer would not have been able to handle it
- Kikinou, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6Dune : Theatrical is much better.. much more concise, and the narration by Virginia Madsen is to die for.
Alien : Theatrical cut. D'C includes a scene suggesting the life cycle of the alien which makes "Aliens" impossible.
Aliens : Director's cut includes sentry gun scenes... crucial.
Alien³ : Director's cut is vastly superior, makes it a great movie whereas the TC sucks. - MaynardJK, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sarcasm&x=0&y=0
- LGgeek, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5The Abyss directors cut was like a whole new movie and it made sense. Directors cut always.
- r00tus3r, on 10/11/2007, -6/+10Take it easy on sleepy, I think he just replied to the wrong topic that's all. The fact that digg doesn't allow you to delete your comments doesn't help either.
- hollismb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Agreed. Someone told be to watch the original version first, and I'm SO glad I did. Even viewing the deleted scenes afterwards, you're so glad they're missing, because they remove any sense of thinking for yourself if added back in.
- scabbers, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I'm all for choice. It's really terrible when they "improve" a movie and then try to purge the original version out of existence.
- Kinjiru, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Uncut Leon is a masterpiece... Americanized version is good..but it lacking allot compared to the proper rendition (stupid MPAA / religious right etc)
- monkbot1, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9"Blade Runner is the single best science fiction film ever made. Not Star Wars. Not Serenity"
Does he even have to mention Serenity, I liked it but it's nothing special, certainly not great - JoeCool1986, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@scabbers
:::cough:::star wars :::cough::: - EvilStickMan, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Depends on the cut, and the film. For example, I always liked the theatrical version of Army of Darkness more than the Director's cut. My wife had the same problem with Empire Records. For other movies this wasn't necessarily the case - Anchorman was just as good either way (if you liked it, that is).
- dn11, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3if i remember correctly, in the original Highlander 2 cut the immortals turned out to be aliens from another planet or something - this whole plot was edited out and dropped from all future highlander films/shows
- ArchieAndrews, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4The author actually discusses the part of Redux that bothered me so much, and, it appears, for the same reasons it bothered him. Every additional scene in Redux was welcome except the French plantation scene near the end. I never understood why it was there. It offered only repeated, unnecessary exposition and killed the pace of the film at that point.
Apart from that scene, I liked Redux more than the original. - wolfboyZ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Sentry gun scene crucial? That'd be the last thing in the Aliens SE. The most crucial was more development with the Ripley-mother role.
- dn11, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3he's also wrong about Brazil - there is a "director's cut" that's different from the the original theatrical cut - it's not MUCH different, but it does exist - it was originally released by Criterion as part of the boxed set which also contains the "love conquers all" version
- FnordBob, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3I liked Redux :(
- gnslngr1919, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4What you say about Alien 3 is true. It's unfortunate that not many people give it a try, and therefore I get made fun of when I say I like it.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Exactly. There's no correct answer to this question. It will always depend on the skill of the director, whomever else is doing the editing, the movie itself, and it even depends on the viewer.
- danwilson1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The "Director's cut" version of "Last of the Mohicans" is a major downgrade (long, rambling scenes added, great scenes removed), and you can't buy the theatrical cut on an American DVD.
This is the worst offense I know of; at least with Blade Runner and Apocalypse Now you have a choice. - dgh1973, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I have to say, I disagree with some of his assessments of blade runner. I don't think you necessarily have to read into it what he is if you go with the assumption that Deckard is a replicant.
Roy's monologue is enough to convey that he in fact does not know that Deckard is a replicant and assumes he's human...
"I've seen things you people wouldn't believe..."
Come on, he's lumping him in with "people" there and thus bursting the bubble of his personal interpretation.
You're trying too hard Mr. Burch. - HsoKinees, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2i do not approve of piracy! Yarrrrrr! :P
I want a legit UK/PAL DVD of it +_+ - HouseofEl, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I find it interesting he compared Richard Donner's cut of Superman II. Donner has said many times that it wasn't a directors cut but more of a what if scenario. The film is great, but it does suffer from the lack of footage and quality. However, you can't put blame on Donner for this. Much of the footage had to be recovered and even then it was not in good shape. The film is essentially a message to die hard fans. It gives you an idea of what might have been. It's certainly not supposed to be his definitive vision of the film. The spinning the earth back isn't reused. It was never supposed to be in Superman The Movie. That being said it is still superior. There is no cellophane "S" and that makes me happy.
- newbill123, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Regarding the Donner vs. Lester versions of Superman II. He's right even though it sounds contradictory.
The Donner version of Superman II could not be shown on television or in theaters. It has quality problems, unfinished scenes, footage (like the finale turning back time) that was stolen for other uses in the franchise, and it generally is a pretty bad assemblage. On the other hand, it really does show what an amazingly better film this would have been if Donner had been able to go forward and finish his version. Brando's father saving the son scene is inspired symbolism that's much better than Superman "raising the flag" at the White House in Lester's version. The footage that could have been shot with Margot Kidder and Christopher Reeve would have been incredible. The Gene Hackman footage is really criminal that they cut it out. But in reality, this wasn't finished. The film was cannibalized and the fact that another ending wasn't ever created means this movie can't really be seen by anyone other than movie aficionados.
Definitely one of the few movies worth watching with the Director's commentary track turned on first. - jonnyeh, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I wasn't aware that a DVD version of the TC of Blade Runner was available. Even if it is, it's probably a ***** flipper disc.
I'm hoping the HD DVD version will have all 3 versions of the movie. - Bega, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3kingdom of heaven director's cut I hear was definitely superior. I only saw the DC, so I can't compare them, but it was fantastic I thought, but then mr. scott is a good director.
- notmark, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The Phantom Edit is actually pretty darn good. The Trade Federation is planning on enslaving Naboo, which actually makes more sense than the ridiculous nonreasons given in Phantom Menace.
- candafilm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I wholeheartedly agree with Leon, one of the best films ever (and believe me I watch a LOT of movies), the important subplot (that brilliantly interweaves with the main plot) is lost in the American version. The funny thing is that nowadays, it's not even R material (perhaps not even PG-13), it's so tame now.
- newbill123, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I know you're being humorous, but I do recall having seen a director's commentary track on one of my porn purchases. It included excised footage, and compendium of raw footage for the movie that was excruciatingly funny to watch. I bend the other way so I won't mention it's title, but it was very funny to see a fellow trying to direct naked people. When one of the lead actors burns his leg on one of the lights positioned between his legs and practically knocks over the whole set, it gets extremely funny. I suppose it's erotic to imagine what it's like to actually direct a porn film, but to see the hazards and realities of actually doing it is a very funny thing. I'd love to see more director's cuts or unused footage from porn shoots.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I'd say it really depends on the movie. Some theatrical films are better than the director's cuts, and some of the director's cuts are better than the theatrical films. I for one will say that the Producer's Cut of Halloween 6 is by far better than the theatrical cut of of Halloween 6. Even though that's not a Director's Cut, I still thought I'd throw it out there and say that it's better. Anyone who hasn't seen that cut of the film needs to!
- LordSkywalker, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7Director's Cuts are usually better, but stay away from the D.C. of Blade Runner. The original's better. Also, check out the Phantom Edit of Phantom Menace. I like the idea of user created cuts. By the way, the Director's Cut of Leon is awesome.
- czimmerman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1IMHO, I think that the recut of The Exorcist, the whole "Version You've Never Seen," ruins the pacing of the original. The spider-walk that is in that as opposed to the original cut version is just pretty much for the shock factor and doesn't serve as much of a purpose. The CGI effects that were added in were just dumb. And to make things worse, the DVD release sucked and had one of the worst commentaries ever (William Friedkin just sits there and does like a commentary directed for blind people because he just describes what is on the screen).
- acdcfanbill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1two cuts, both rotten, i still own it :)
- airship, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1While I do tend to believe that theatrical releases are the result of action by a committee of business suits with an eye only on the bottom line, I also remember the rule that writers follow: "Murder your darlings." What this means is that if you have written anything that you are truly in love with, the odds are that it's anathema to the story development, and should be deleted.
I imagine something like it could also be said for film. A story usually works better if it keeps moving along, rather than taking many side trips for little or no good reason. I'll watch a 2-hour film if the story's good, but no way am I sitting through a 3 1/2 hour monstrosity. - cyberfly, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@r00tus3r: yeah.
Also, it's pretty annoying that if you're not logged in to digg, and you open a few stories in multiple tabs, then you decide to login to comment on one of them -- regardless of what story your currently on, when you login it will redirect you to the last story you opened. The side effect of it is that if you end up commenting on the wrong story. -
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is