Not only for times when Director’s Cuts are the inferior version, but in general when a movie studio goes behind a director/producers backs and alters the movie due to test screenings and you actually think they were right in the end.
**Kelly’s Heroes ** is my favorite “classic” war movie for a number of reasons but most of all the good balance between comedy and seriousness. Apparently both the director Brian G. Hutton and star Clint Eastwood were against the studio cutting over 20 minutes of footage mainly consisting of character scenes from the film as well as adding the song “Burning Bridges” as the main theme as opposed to an original instrumental planned.
However I really think the studio was right in the end, the film itself is 2 hours and 26 minutes and adding in 20 more minutes would just make it feel completely bloated, and “Burning Bridges” is an excellent song to start the film with since it establishes right off the bat what kind of war film this movie is.
I agree, any movie over 2 hours long better have a damn good reason to be that long. So many movies back then (even some today) waste so much time on establishing shots or walking across the screen.
Jacques Tourneur didn’t want to show the demon in Night/Curse of the Demon, but they put one in anyway. The presence of the demon makes the threat Karswell presents real, even if his intended target never actually sees it.
The director’s cut of Blade Runner (without all of the voice-over narration) is a magnificent Work Of Art, far superior to the narrated studio version that originally played in the theaters.
But if I had not already seen the studio version, I am not sure I would have understood anything that was going on in the director’s cut.
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen it and I’m not even sure which version I saw, but I’ve heard that the director’s cut of Blade Runner makes it unambiguous that Deckard was a replicant. Which is just wrong, because the ambiguity was essential to the movie.
And I’m not sure at what level the studio got involved, but Luc Besson wanted a sex scene between Leon and Matilda in The Professional/Leon. But Natalie Portman’s parents very wisely and correctly put their foot down and insisted otherwise.
There are other ways to interpret the dream sequence. It’s still ambiguous. Ridley Scott did not jump onto the “Deckard is a replicant” bandwagon until after the director’s cut was out.
I couldn’t disagree more. In the hands of a talented director, a film is a work of visual art. Also, pacing is important with moments of action interspersed with context and build up. Films shouldn’t be made for ADHD sufferers.
Danny Peary talks about this in one of his Cult Movies books. Some horror film sachem complained bitterly about this interference, saying that the film would have been much stronger if the “real vs. imagined” concept were left intact without the demon visual.
Said horror film sachem then included a picture of the demon on his book’s cover. :smack:
You do realize he had no control over what the art department chose for the cover?
Not quite what you’re asking for, but Gore Vidal credited the success for the film The Best Man because they fired Frank Capra as the director. Capra wanted the star to be walking around the convention floor in Abraham Lincoln makeup. The producers said “no thanks” and hired Franklin J. Schaffner.
Clerks was of course not a studio movie, but the adults in the room were producer friends of Smith who talked to him after it appeared at a film festival. They suggested a major change that greatly improved the movie:
Get rid of the final scene where Dante gets killed.
Peter Jackson wanted to make three Lord of the Rings movies, but could only get studios to agree to two. An executive at New Line paused and famously said, “This is three movies.” Saved the entire series.
American History X was changed so much, the director wanted his name removes. It is, apparently, a great movie saved by the studio.
Star Wars was saved in part by the editing team, I think. Studio was at least willing to pay for it to get finished.
Joss Whedon stated that the “suits” were right to make him re-film the Dollhouse pilot. His original pilot was unfollowable.
I believe Whedon also got along and praised the executives who helped him shape the Serenity movie. Suits are not always wrong, I’ve seen him say.
It’s gone up in my estimation the last year. It really is a great movie and I kind of believe Disney was successful in fixing what was a lesser movie. The real question is if they can save the Han Solo movie.
It is ambiguous, but is strongly hinted he is a replicant.
Are you speaking of the ‘Redux’ cut? I agree with you. The additional material in the French Plantation is interesting and the scenes with Kilgore’s AirCav beseeching Willard and Johnson to return the surfboard are funny, but the film is better without them. That’s the point of “murder your darlings” - sometimes you have to cut *good *material to make the whole work stronger.
I could have done without the fanservice in the extended scenes with the Playmates either way. Creepy. I realize that the protagonists are morally ambiguous at best, but sexual extortion is a whole 'nother level of squick.
All that said, was this a case of studio interference in the first place? Coppola agonized over the release cut for two years - I was under the impression that the 2:33 cut was essentially the cut he wanted. I know he made the decision to cut the plantation scenes himself.