Thread: TMP on Blu-Ray
View Single Post
Old November 24 2013, 02:15 PM   #112
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: TMP on Blu-Ray

Warped9 wrote: View Post
It's enough for me the DE is a so much more enjoyable experience than any other version I've seen before.
While I do respect your opinion (and even understand it, I know how much TMP in particular does mean to you ), it is an entirely subjective stance. There are always going to be other people out there who feel that the DE has short-changed 'their' favorite moment or scene, which means it clearly isn't a more enjoyable experience for them. You can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

Myself, I take a clear middle road in these discussions, avoiding liking or disliking any particular version of TMP over another. In my view, there is nothing in the DE of The Motion Picture which is inherently superior or inferior to the theatrical edition..... it's simply a different presentation of what is at brass tacks the same basic product from 1979. The DE is an alternative but *not* a replacement, if you will.

LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
Lance wrote: View Post
I dispute the contention that the Director's Cut of anything is 'superior'. Certainly in the case of TWOK there's nothing IMO in the so-called 'Director's Edition' which puts it above the theatrical cut. Quite the reverse, I think the additions are entirely superfluous. I'm glad the theatrical cut is the only one on Blu Ray.
Agreed.

All the Trek DC's are inferior to the theatrical releases, particularly TMP and TWOK.

In the age of the home video re-release, there seems to be a prevailing "oh, it's longer, it must be better" attitude. It's almost like collectors feel they're getting shortchanged in some way if they don't own every second of available footage. Pacing for the sake of the movie's best artistic intent is forgotten.

This isn't always the case of course, the extended version of The Abyss is significantly superior for instance. But I've found in general, extended versions at best add a few minutes of fluff, but more often than not, needlessly sour the final product to varying degrees.
As I say, it's entertaining to see alternative takes on things. What bugs me is when discussions on the internet go down the road of "Oh, this version of the movie is better than that version", when to my mind the differences are often.... negligable.

Certainly I feel the theatrical cut of any movie should always be the canon text. Whatever misgivings a director might have had about it, the mentality of going 'back in time' (as Bob Wise himself put it in 2002) is unhelpful, in that one's opinions change over time. The Bob Wise who worked on the DE is a different Bob Wise to the man who directed it, no doubt he came at it with ideas that his 1970s self may not have presented (putting aside additions made to the DE by people other than Wise himself). Another appropriate (if somewhat obvious) example: the George Lucas who recut the Star Wars trilogy in the mid-1990s was not the same man who birthed them in the 1970s. Many of his decisions overstepped the mark from being restorations of an original 'vision', to being something he intended to replace the originals with.

That's the mentality which disturbs me the most. This gut reaction people have to instantly accept the additions to the DE as being somehow a more 'pure' version of the movie, when to my mind they're the exact opposite of that.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote