First ten movies --theatrical version or director's cut?

[Hey Missy]

I might be the only person who likes the so-called "Scooby Doo" ending of TUC.

 

[Smellmet]

I might be the only person who likes the so-called "Scooby Doo" ending of TUC.

It's never really bothered me either. To be honest I'm generally a fan of any extended cut of my favourite movies, I can't think of any off hand that actually ruin any film. I guess my view point is I get to see more of my favourite characters in action.

 

[Firebird]

I can't think of any off hand that actually ruin any film.

The extended cut with "763 new jokes" of Anchorman 2 ruined the film. The pacing was wrong, there was far too much movie, and it ambled. Comedies are the perfect example of films not needing to be extended; they must be cut to run fast.

 

[Smellmet]

The extended cut with "763 new jokes" of Anchorman 2 ruined the film. The pacing was wrong, there was far too much movie, and it ambled. Comedies are the perfect example of films not needing to be extended; they must be cut to run fast.

I've not seen that to be fair. It's mainly sci fi films that benefit from the treatment in my view. The abyss is another example of a great extended edition.

 

[eyeresist]

Orson Welles's Touch of Evil was substantially edited by the studio before it was released to theaters.

I forgot that one. Welles was definitely better. (And of course there was The Magnificent Ambersons...)
But I think we need to differentiate between edits made with directors' consent versus without. I've never had the sense with any of the Trek movies that there was a power struggle, that the suits would come in and butcher the 'authentic' version.

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.

But isn't that sequence in the theatrical version too?

 

[Smellmet]

I always thought the sentry gun bit was exclusive to the directors edition. I need to check.

 

[Smellmet]

The sentry gun sequence is exclusive to the special edition.

Link here for all the changes:
http://avp.wikia.com/wiki/Aliens_Special_Edition

 

[eyeresist]

Oh, okay. I think they do refer to the sentries in the theatrical, but I guess I got the versions mixed.

 

[Smellmet]

According to the link I provided apparantly the sentry gun scenes were included in a 1989 CBS broadcast of the film also, so I can see how it's easy to mix up. Not unlike the slightly different TV broadcast of TWOK.

 

[JD]

Is there a Blu-Ray release of the Director's Edition of TMP? The version I found on Amazon doesn't specify, but the run time it lists is shorter than the one for the DVD DE, so I'm assuming it's the original version.

 

[Smellmet]

Is there a Blu-Ray release of the Director's Edition of TMP? The version I found on Amazon doesn't specify, but the run time it lists is shorter than the one for the DVD DE, so I'm assuming it's the original version.

Unfortunately not. Paramount in their infinite wisdom didn't get the extra effects rendered any higher than 480p, so they would need re doing for any higher definition release, which at the moment looks unlikely been as the 50th has come and gone.

 

[JD]

Damn. I wanted to watch it again because I've got the Star Trek novels Ex Machina and Department of Temporal Investigations: Forgotten History which are both TMP era, and I was hoping to watch it again before I read them. Netflix doesn't have the DE so I was thinking about buying a Blu-Ray cop instead. Since my first post I found the DE to rent on Google Play, so I'll just go that route. Last time I watched it years ago, I liked the DE better than the theatrical version, so I'm going to stick to that one.

 

[Smellmet]

The lack of TMP DE on blu ray is pretty much the reason I haven't got the original 10 movies in hi def. My DVD box set has it and the directors cut of TWOK, so I'm sticking with that for the immediate future. Shame because by all accounts I hear the theatrical blu ray of TMP is a stunning transfer.

 

[JD]

Would it be to hard or expensive to just upgrade the new effects to 1080p or 4K for a regular Blu-Rey release?

 

[eyeresist]

You mean upscale? That would look pretty poor.

If you mean somehow reuse the digital assets from the DE, it could maybe be done - if they still exist. If they did exist and were usable, I think they'd still have to replace all the textures with higher resolution ones.

 

[Smellmet]

You mean upscale? That would look pretty poor..

At this point I'd take that. I know it wouldn't be right, but given the rest of the film would look so good, I'd get over it. Ultimately it's no worse than the dreadful matte paintings of the saucer in the theatrical/SLV near the end of the film.

They really should do it properly though. I'm literally waving my money at them ready to buy the movie again. I guess the business case isn't there for them. Shame.

 

[Shalashaska]

Since we're somewhat on the topic of "meaningful director's cuts" vs. "executive cashgrabs with extra fat", I thought I'd post this website. Had it bookmarked because I found it quite helpful.

http://thisorthatedition.com/

For Alien, it has:

British director Ridley Scott, like Stanley Kubrick with 2001, changed the way we looked to space with the nail biting thriller Alien. In 2003 20th Century Fox released the Alien Quadrilogy set on DVD and Scott was approached to digitally restore and remaster Alien.

“In 1979, when Alien was originally released, I felt that the theatrical cut of the film was the best I could possibly make it. I was very pleased with its pace and structure, and although there were several scenes left on the cutting room floor, I didn’t miss any of them. For all intents and purposes, I felt that the original cut of Alien was perfect. I still feel that way. The traditional definition of the term “Director’s Cut” suggests the restoration of a director’s original vision, free of any creative limitations. It suggests that the filmmaker has finally overcome the interference of heavy-handed studio executives, and that the film has been restored to its original, untampered form. Such is not the case with Alien: The Director’s Cut. It’s a completely different beast. When Twentieth Century Fox approached me to digitally restore the original 1979 cut of the film, they also suggested fully restoring many of the film’s deleted scenes to be reincorporated into a proposed expanded DVD version of the film. Following an exhaustive year-long restoration process, Fox then decided to re-release ALIEN theatrically. It was their hope that I would see fit to include several of the deleted scenes we had restored in order to give moviegoers additional incentive to see the film in theaters. Upon viewing the proposed expanded version of the film, I felt that cut was simply too long and the pacing completely thrown off. After all, I cut those extra scenes out for a reason back in 1979. However, in the interest of giving the fans a new experience with Alien, I figured there had to be an appropriate middle ground. I chose to go in and recut that proposed long version into a more streamlined and polished alternate version of the film. For marketing purposes, this version is being called “The Director’s Cut”. To film purists everywhere, rest easy. The original 1979 theatrical version isn’t going anywhere. It remains my version of choice and is presented fully restored and remastered under my personal supervision alongside the new Director’s Cut in this DVD set.”
Source: DVD booklet from Alien Quadrilogy

The director’s preferred edition is: Theatrical

Unfortunately, it doesn't have any of the Star Trek movies on there yet.

 

[Shalashaska]

The lack of TMP DE on blu ray is pretty much the reason I haven't got the original 10 movies in hi def. My DVD box set has it and the directors cut of TWOK, so I'm sticking with that for the immediate future. Shame because by all accounts I hear the theatrical blu ray of TMP is a stunning transfer.

I wouldn't go that far. It certainly fared better than the likes of IV and VI, but compared to other Blu-rays on the market, it still has too much DNR.

In other words, you can tell it's a seven-year-old transfer.

Another problem is, like the rest of the films, they're way too damn bright. Everything's painted more vibrant to make the films look more "modern", but it really just makes them look blown-out and highlighted. It's hard to go back to them when you watch the DVD/HDTV versions or the newest Director's Cut Blu-ray of Wrath of Khan, though they're still our best options outside of II unfortunately.

 

[Smellmet]

I wouldn't go that far. It certainly fared better than the likes of IV and VI, but compared to other Blu-rays on the market, it still has too much DNR.

In other words, you can tell it's a seven-year-old transfer.

Another problem is, like the rest of the films, they're way too damn bright. Everything's painted more vibrant to make the films look more "modern", but it really just makes them look blown-out and highlighted. It's hard to go back to them when you watch the DVD/HDTV versions or the newest Director's Cut Blu-ray of Wrath of Khan, though they're still our best options outside of II unfortunately.

I would imagine it's still streets ahead of my 12 year old DVD box set though. Bar the JJ films I've never seen any of the other trek films in hi def, so I reckon I'd probably be ok with it.

 

[Shalashaska]

I would imagine it's still streets ahead of my 12 year old DVD box set though. Bar the JJ films I've never seen any of the other trek films in hi def, so I reckon I'd probably be ok with it.

They're definitely better than the DVDs, I don't think any would argue that, but they're pretty bad compared to other Blu-rays. The new Wrath of Khan master shows they can do a good transfer when they want to, I hope they give the other original cast films the same treatment.