First ten movies --theatrical version or director's cut?
- Thread starter Oantrek
- Start date
The Director's cut was what seen on Movie screens; so the Theatrical cut is technically the Director's cut. As for extended scenes, its a mixed bag for me, I normally like the theatrical versions and only a few films I've seen made the experience a treat. Like Nick Meyer's The Wrath of Khan was exceptional but the film was exceptional all on its own. I hated the extended stuff on TUC which felt unnecessary; I'll accept an extension of material if it involves the lead or the main villain, but minor characters yapping it up is a giant waste of time for me.
I would've loved to see an extended version of The Voyage Home because the film was very good. I'm not sure I could care less if TNG films implanted extended scenes, those films were like having an overdose of enema. As for the process, I guess it all depends on the film.
I would've loved to see an extended version of The Voyage Home because the film was very good. I'm not sure I could care less if TNG films implanted extended scenes, those films were like having an overdose of enema. As for the process, I guess it all depends on the film.
No, the theatrical cut is technically the Producer's cut.
The director is not the one who determines the final cut of the movie that is approved to be shown theatrically. For various reasons such as budgetary limitations, being obligated to meet the standards of a certain MPAA rating, and various other directives from the producers and the studio that are completely out of the director's control, the movie that gets distributed to theaters is not necessarily quite the movie that the director really envisioned and wanted to make.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture is a case in point. There was also the fiasco of Superman II ditching its director partway through and bringing in somebody else to finish the film. Orson Welles's Touch of Evil was substantially edited by the studio before it was released to theaters. These are just a few examples.
Kor
I preferred the Theatrical cut.
Last edited:
Its only a matter of minutes in most cases. In the case of TMP the DE is only about 6 or 7 mins longer than the theatrical cut.
I usually prefer Director's Cuts to theatrical because, as others have written here, they are the director's intended film as opposed to what the studio wanted to fit running time timeslots (showings per day) or to eliminate minor plot points the producer doesn't understand.
The resolution to the B plot (Spock's journey) in TMP is all the reason you need to pick that director's cut.
The resolution to the B plot (Spock's journey) in TMP is all the reason you need to pick that director's cut.
On the other hand, I have often found myself being swayed by theatrical cuts over director's cuts, because sometimes the cuts/changes made actually benefit the movie. Many has been the time I've watched a DE of a movie and thought to myself, "Yeah, I can see why they cut that in the theatrical version." Sometimes a scene is unnecessary, and sometimes the trims can help make the pace of the thing better.
Even in creative terms sometimes a theatrical edition has changes that are for the better. For example, I am strongly of the viewpoint that the ending of the theatrical version of Army of Darkness is superior to the 'downer' ending of the Director's Cut, largely because it's the difference between showing Ash as a hero versus Ash as a doofus. I like to think after all he'd been through, he finally earned that hero status.
Even in creative terms sometimes a theatrical edition has changes that are for the better. For example, I am strongly of the viewpoint that the ending of the theatrical version of Army of Darkness is superior to the 'downer' ending of the Director's Cut, largely because it's the difference between showing Ash as a hero versus Ash as a doofus. I like to think after all he'd been through, he finally earned that hero status.
TMP is less than 4 minutes longer because they add AND cut material -- so 136 minutes vs. original 132 (as the earlier poster says they add about 6-7 minutes but cut about 3.)
TWOK is 3:28 longer
TUC is 3:26 longer
Oh and D.C.s all the way for me. The SLV is my second choice in the case of TMP
TWOK is 3:28 longer
TUC is 3:26 longer
Oh and D.C.s all the way for me. The SLV is my second choice in the case of TMP
Is there a comparison between the TMP theatrical, "special longer version" and director's cut?
Like how the director's edition keeps Spock weeping for V'Ger or Bones' "crew of ten thousand ten miles tall" line from the special longer version, but removes the awkward "Sulu hides his boner" scene or Kirk floating in front of a sound stage (with no matte painting in the background or at least a green screen, ugh!
)
Like how the director's edition keeps Spock weeping for V'Ger or Bones' "crew of ten thousand ten miles tall" line from the special longer version, but removes the awkward "Sulu hides his boner" scene or Kirk floating in front of a sound stage (with no matte painting in the background or at least a green screen, ugh!
)
Actually, they are often just an earlier cut released as a cash grab.
I can't think of any director's cut I prefer to the theatrical version (I haven't seen the extended cuts of Watchmen or BvS). Kubrick's later 'European cut' is better than the American release of The Shining. The extended cut of Amadeus has a baggy structure and more of Mozart's annoying wife. The added first act of Aliens is boring and saps the sense of mystery from the rest of the film.
I'm mixed on theatrical over extended. If forced, I think I almost always prefer the theatrical version of films. However, some extended versions do add scenes I enjoy - e.g. "Lethal Weapon", "Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves" (though in both those cases the new scenes add pacing problems)
With regards to Star Trek, I think I prefer theatrical across the board.
With regards to Star Trek, I think I prefer theatrical across the board.
Is there a comparison between the TMP theatrical, "special longer version" and director's cut?
Like how the director's edition keeps Spock weeping for V'Ger or Bones' "crew of ten thousand ten miles tall" line from the special longer version, but removes the awkward "Sulu hides his boner" scene or Kirk floating in front of a sound stage (with no matte painting in the background or at least a green screen, ugh!
Theatrical vs. SLV: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=542
Theatrical vs. DE: http://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=2400
Really? I swore it was in there. Then again, there's so many different versions of the movie that they're running together in my head.
The Director's Cut of Apocalypse Now is SUBSTANTIALLY better and more interesting than the original. It would have been a tad long for theatrical release, but, on home video it's fine. The whole Plantation segment, while lengthy, should have been there from the beginning. It brings the whole Vietnam War into much sharper context,
I disagree, and if you'd watched the Hearts of Darkness doco, you'd know that originally Coppola was unhappy with the scene, which was why it was cut. But now he is old and complacent....
I wouldn't say "sharper context". The plantation scene gives historical context, spelling out how French colonialism led to America's war, but it doesn't have anything to do with the journey of the main characters.
I disagree also. Willard's story on the river is the movie's heart, and a lot of the added stuff loses that focus. Instead of being existentially adrift, Willard is made to seem more of a "regular guy," and even gets to spend a night with a woman. The plantation sequence, besides being far too long and indulgent a digression from the main story, seems like a pat and conveniently-packaged sidebar on French colonialism, as if the audience was assumed to be in need of education on that part of the war's background. It should never have been stuck back into the film. Some of the music choices were odd, too. It looked great on the big screen, though.
I can see why you aren't keen on the first act of Aliens, but I love the special edition. Whatever you think maybe is lost in the first act is paid back in spades by the sentry gun sequence among others, which is a tension building scene that has a fantastic use of sound and is utterly thrilling in my view. I would say I prefer the directors edition of T2 also. I've actually got the directors cut of Alien, but I've never got round to watching it, so I'm not sure what the difference is.
There's pros and cons to the directors editions of the Trek movies, some bits jar (the Preston scenes in engineering and Spock's 'fascinating') but mostly I'm a fan of the directors editions of both TMP & TWOK over the theatricals. The only version of TUC I've ever known is the 'Scooby Doo' one, so can't really comment on that.
Last edited:
Similar threads
