I am a child of the 80’s and as such ‘Directors Cuts’ to me were always cheap marketing gimmicks to sell you the same VHS copy of Commando over again. I’m not a collector, and anyone having any particular edition of anything has never impressed me. Film Editing doesn’t get enough credit, it’s not just what you show that tells a story it’s what you leave out. In the past on TV I have seen Directors Cuts of wonderful films like Aliens and Jaws and the extended scenes actually detract from the story by taking away suspense and mystery. That’s just the way it works, I always thought, if it was good enough for me to see it would have been in the film to start with.
I mean the Directors Cut of that film, I had seen the original 10+ times over my life and know it almost by heart. I had wanted to see it again and thought it perfect background noise for some solo Sunday afternoon puzzle construction. Only available on Prime for purchase I hadn’t even noticed it was the Directors Cut. A half hour later I forgot all about the puzzle and feel in love with a great movie all over again. The added scenes changed the movie I knew for the better, they explained in far greater how Salieri destroyed Mozart, and why he felt guilty about killing him which is the entire plot of the film. It added depth. Even if they were unnecessary (like the flavor scenes of of 18th century Vienna street life) they were still so much fun to watch.
So now I have to find more.
What are some Directors Cuts that greatly improved the original film, not just added extra of what was already there?
The Abyss. The DC adds actual context for everything that happens. I liked the theatrical version just fine, but I still had a ton of WTF questions that the DC answered satisfyingly.
As a child of the '80s, I only remember two films having director’s cuts: Brazil, and Blade Runner, and both existed because the directors had famously fought with the studios about the film’s final version, and lost. I don’t think the devaluation of the term started until the 2000s, with the Lord of the Rings films, where the “Director’s Cut” wasn’t the result of creative differences between the director and studio, and they were creating whole scenes that were never intended for the theatrical release.
Alien has a director’s cut that actually makes the film shorter by three, seconds, but involves a number of alternate scenes that I think improve it quite a bit.
But don’t be fooled: the director’s cut version of its sequel, Aliens, is garbage.
Did you ever want to see Newt’s backstory presented on screen, not just as a few lines of explanatory dialogue, but in a series of scenes making up essentially a new first act, to include footage of her parents going about their work? Yeah, neither did I. And yet you can find it in the director’s cut.
ETA: Actually, I guess Aliens has a “special edition,” not a director’s cut. So even if it weren’t worse, it wouldn’t fit in this thread. My bad.
Tops for me is Until the End of the World. The original European cut was 178 minutes, which was trimmed to 157 minutes for Americans. The version available on Criterion now is the two-parter that runs for about 280 minutes. The 3 hour cut was still really good, and it’s the version I first saw, but the U.S. cut just lurches and stalls. Now, no one has to settle for anything less than the full movie.
Apocalypse Now would be high on my list as well.
Oliver Stone’s films were hit and miss. Nixon is improved by its additions, and Natural Born Killers is just that much truer to the energy with which it was intended. But the scenes added to JFK are awkward and uneditfying, and it was fine as it was.
Funny that you mention Amadeus, as that’s about the only movie where I’ve seen both cuts and vastly prefer the theatrical cut. The added scenes all just seemed unneeded (and, in the case of one involving nudity, gratuitous and uncomfortable).
For the other way around, the director’s cut of Terminator 2 definitely improves it, imho, with John Connor making a tough decision against his mother’s wishes, but it proves to be the correct one. And of course the extended editions of the Lord of the Rings trilogy are all fantastic.
I enjoyed Redux and Final Cut because I just can’t get enough of the film. But if I had to recommend a version to someone who was only going to watch it once, it would have to be the original release. Nothing indispensable was left on the cutting room floor for that one.
I agree. The only two director’s cuts that I recall being controversial were the ones for Aliens, Blade Runner and David Lynch’s Dune, both of which restored a whole lot of footage and scenes that did a better job explaining the story. In the case of Dune, it was something like a 4 hour director’s cut, but it did actually tell the full story, as opposed to the rather disjointed two-ish hour theatrical release.
But… with the possible exception of Blade Runner, I’m not convinced they were better movies. What they were is great versions of the story I’d already seen in the theater. In that sense, they were worthwhile. But if I hadn’t already seen the theatrical versions, I think they’d have seemed overblown and kind of dull.
The LOTR versions were extended versions, not “Director’s Cut” versions. In that sense, they were fantastic expanded versions of the same story that you could choose to go watch on DVD or whatever.
I also think the Das Boot director’s cut is superior to the original- it lets us actually care about the characters and get some sense of their personalities.
I saw that there’s a director’s cut of Kingdom of Heaven, which is a movie I liked in the theater, so I’ll have to give that a shot one of these days.
Dark City - this was the cut the director wanted and the studio required a spoilerific opening narration. Without it, the movie is better and there are a couple brief moments added as well.
Blade Runner is the standout for me. The original theatrical release was IMO a travesty, because of the godawful narration and the conspicuously tacked-on Happily Ever After ending which ruined the entire story. IN MY OPINION.
Alien worked fine in the Original Theatrical release, but I do prefer the Director’s Cut.
Terminator 2 Director’s Cut made a terrific film even better.
Comment: as much as I enjoyed Amadeus, it’s worth mentioning that it is based on a play and should not be considered an accurate portrayal of historic events.
I thought the theatrical version was… weak. A lot of the interactions between characters didn’t make sense. Like a “connect the dots” picture with too many dots removed to yield a discernible picture in the end.
I felt the director’s cut greatly improved upon that, and so would highly recommend it, particularly if you liked the theatrical version.
TYhe play shouldn’t be considered an accurate portrayal of historical events, either. I prefer the play to either the theatrical release or the director’s cut of Amadeus, but the film (either version) gives you those lovely restagings of the operas, often in th original theate.
Most of Peter Shaffer’s plays are inspired by historical events, but they’re all about Man and God. Don’t go to see Equus to find out why a real UK teenager blinded some horses, or The Royal Hunt of the Sun to learn about Pizzaro and Atahuallpa, and definitely don’t see Amadeus to learn the truth about Mozart and Sslieri. Why do you think they called it “Amadeus”, and not “Mozart” or, better still, “Salieri”?
Do see the Peter Jackson “Director’s cuts” of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And the Terminator 2director’s cut definitely adds to the film. I liked the Director’s cut of Bladerunner. And people here might not like it, but I liked the director’s cut of Aliens.
My first thought was about Donnie Darko. IMHO, the DC version makes things clearer, has more of the music that the director originally intended, and has a couple scenes that contribute to the movie, but the theatrical release is better as a viewing experience.
I’m not sure if it counts as a “director’s cut,” but there’s a DVD/Blu-Ray version of Frank Darabont’s The Mist (based on Stephen King’s novella) which is in black-and-white (the original theatrical release was in color). As far as I know, the B&W version is identical to the color version, as far as content goes (i.e., no additional or deleted footage)
Darabont has said that he had wanted to film it in B&W, but the producers insisted on color; he has also stated that he feels the B&W version of the film is his preferred one, as it’s what his original vision for the project was.
I’ve seen the black-and-white version – not only is it evocative of old monster movies (intentionally so), but the lack of color also adds to the tension and dread, IMO.
I’ve only seen the DC ever since it came out on DVD, so I can barely remember the original cut, which I saw once in the theater and probably once before the director’s cut came out.
Kind of interesting you mention Dune as a director’s cut while differentiating Lord of the Rings’ Extended Versions from being Director’s Cuts. The Extended Cut of Dune was created for TV and was disowned by David Lynch. He removed his name, replacing the director with Alan Smithee and the screenplay with “Judas Booth”. Definitely not a Director’s Cut.
…
Cinema Paradiso (1988) has a director’s cut that isn’t necessarily better, but it fundamentally changes your perception of the story. It’s hard to be specific without spoilers, but good or bad, you will walk away with two completely different feelings about the film and characters depending upon which version you watch. If you haven’t seen it, then I’d suggest the shorter version first as you can’t unsee the longer version.
Your explanation works for me, where I guess I thought the point of the title was suggesting (fictional) Salieri’s feeling that God blessed some people at the expense of others. Not that I gave it that much thought- I was just irritated by the movie’s being such a very well made, gross misrepresentation of the history it was “inspired” by.
I still think the original ALIEN (either cut) is a stand-alone masterpiece that needed no sequel, and though I never cared much for Aliens I do agree that the extended DC is a better film.