When DVDs Have More Than One Version Of A Movie On Them, Which One Do You Watch?

i know, it depends. if it's some classic thing, and there are different cuts, maybe you'll watch all of them.

but what if its just the theatrical version and the extra-long director's dream of a cut.

or what if it says that one version has an alternate ending??? i get confused with those. how do i know the alternate ending is better??

the other night i watched that julianne moore movie where nobody could remember her kid who died and everyone told her she was crazy. i decided to watch the longer version with a different ending. then, just to see, i played the end of the theatrical release. the alternate version was WAAAYYY better. the ending they had play in the theatres was obviously test-marketed to appeal to ten year old slack-jawed yokels. so, i was glad i watched that one first.

usually i'll always watch the version that is billed as "the most uncut extra slice of american pie that they WOULDN'T let you see at the movies". and usually this means 3 extra seconds of boobage.

does anyone actually look stuff up online before watching? cuz it seems like every other dvd has two versions of the same movie on it.

and has anyone seen a version of a movie - a recent movie - that was radically different from the theatrical release?

I saw two movies that had different titles that were mostly the same movie:

Exorcist: The Beginning
and
Dominion

I'm pretty much across the board anti-director's cut, so unless I have reliable info that the director's cut is really, really awesome (and I am so anti-director's cut that I almost never consider pro-director's cut recommendations to be reliable, just on principle), I always watch the theatrical release, and usually don't bother with the director's cut/alternate endings at all.

The exception is that I will watch alternative endings/directors' cuts when the movie in question is much beloved and often watched to the point where I will find all that extra info interesting on a "behind the scenes of a much beloved and often watched movie" level, but that's pretty much it. So like when they finally release the director's cut/additional footage/director's cut of Beastmaster, I'll be all over it.

I usually go director's cut, unless it's a much-loved film in which case I'll watch all versions I can. But what Julianne Moore movie is this you talk about? I want to see it!

The Forgotten although Bunny Lake is Missing is the best film in the "you never really had a child, lady" genre.

As for the thread question, yeah, it depends on the flick. With someone like Welles, multiple versions are simply part of the appeal (or frustration). So I'll roll around in several different Mr. Arkadins. But please lord gawd not another nanosecond more of Lord of the Rings.

I still don't know which Miami Vice is which. But I loved whichever one I saw on DVD.

does anyone actually look stuff up online before watching?

Yes, which is why I STILL haven't watched "Killing of a Chinese Bookie"--there is no consensus of which version is better. But other than that I always watch the director intended to be his final cut (which ended up being the Theatrical Version on some of the Alien films)

I'm on a strict case-by-case basis- stuff like Welles I'll watch everything, often back to back (the Arkadin and Touch of Evil dvd sets are wonderful ways to waste an afternoon). Most of the time I'll watch the theatrical cut first, unless it's an older film where the director's cut has supplanted the original (like Blade Runner) or a recent film where the theatrical cut is an obvious butchering of the original (drawing a blank for an example atm).

Director's cuts are always a dicey proposition- for every Blade Runner (or a less radical recut, Brazil), there are a dozen Donnie Darkos or Apocalypse Now Reduxes.

Speaking of Brazil, any alternate version as bastardized as the infamous "Love Conquers All" cut is usually worth watching for laughs/slackjawed disbelief. And the bowdlerized TV version of Repo Man is a melonfarming classic (see also The Big Lebowski).

The "final cut" of Blade Runner is kind of a waste, though- it adds a few shots but it's shorter than the original DC, which gives it a weirdly zippy pace that doesn't suit it very well.

i never got used to any of the "new" blade runners. how many versions are there, anyway? like, four? or is it just three. wasn't there an "anniversary" edition different from the final final director's cut?

okay, i looked, seven versions? oy.

"Seven versions of the film have been shown, for various markets, and as a result of controversial changes made by film executives. A rushed Director's Cut was released in 1992 after a strong response to workprint screenings. This, in conjunction with its popularity as a video rental, made it one of the first films released on DVD, resulting in a basic disc with mediocre video and audio quality.[8] In 2007, Warner Bros. released in select theaters and DVD/HD DVD/Blu-ray, the 25th anniversary digitally remastered definitive Final Cut by Scott.[9]"

there are things i end up loving forever. years ago i bought a bootlegged long version of dawn of the dead (from laserdisc) and it's sooooo much greater than the theatrical version or argento's euro-cut. it's definitely MY definitive version. it's on dvd now of course.

this question always drives me NUTS and it is probably the main reason i have never seen carnival of souls

"Yes, which is why I STILL haven't watched "Killing of a Chinese Bookie"--there is no consensus of which version is better."

i had the theatrical version on vhs and i have the longer 135 minute version with the box set and i think the longer version is better cuz longer means more gazzara. always a good thing.

this question always drives me NUTS and it is probably the main reason i have never seen carnival of souls

Dude, give in. Great film, no matter the version.

i'd say ANY version of carnival of souls is worth watching! the crappiest 99 cent public domain vhs drug store copy of this movie looks BEAUTIFUL. it can't help but be beautiful.

raggett-post

ya but which one do i watch first

Doesn't matter.

"The Abyss" - Director's Cut if there's time, Theatrical Cut otherwise. Both work equally well. James Cameron explained in an interview that the way to reduce the length of a film is to edit out sub plots rather than trim/cut scenes.

apocalypse now redux is pretty interesting though, especially after reading this book: http://www.amazon.com/Conversations-Walter-Murch-Editing-Film/dp/0375413863

i once again watched the twin peaks pilot and sent it back without watching the international/stand-alone version

you mean the original two hour pilot movie? i always liked that a bunch. i taped it off of t.v. when it was on and i watch it every couple of years. or, wait, there was a different version of the pilot movie that went to europe, right? my memory is so shot.

i bought the apocalypse redux dvd and i don't know how i feel about it. i know the old version so well, so it does seem a little weird watching it. but, on the other hand, i've seen the old one so many times that having new stuff to watch is kinda cool.

the abyss is another good example of me loving the long version. that movie could never be too long. i wish there were a six hour version.

yeah, apparently the european version wraps up that whole 'who killed laura palmer?' thing.

i should give the abyss another shot. i haven't seen it since i was like 10 and thought it was the most boring movie in the world.

i try to find out which version is regarded as definitive or an improvement. those 'lord of the rings' extended cuts improve on the originals a lot, the 25th anniversary 'blade runner' cut is an improvement, and the 200 min(!) 'kingdom of heaven' is dope.

on the other hand, the theatrical version of 'miami vice' is better than the unrated director's cut or whatever was released more widely on dvd, 'jfk' is only available in the director's cut and it's got some incredibly amazing scenes that are hilarious but make it significantly dumbed (like the scene where they try to set garrison up with what appears to be a larry craig-style bathroom sting...ok maybe it's an improvement), and i hear the 'touch of evil' recut just doesn't quite work.

apocalypse now redux sux

i like touch of evil recut except for the freakin' music cue at the beginning being taken out

i don't have mulitple versions of anything but might buy a different version of Time Bandits, since I just ordered the Criterion because it was on sale, but then discovered there is an Anchor Bay version that people say is much better.

is the original 'touch of evil' cut even available?

that walter murch book is amazing btw.

3 seconds of boobage, no contest

is the original 'touch of evil' cut even available?

that walter murch book is amazing btw.

― Ømår Littel (Jordan), Tuesday, August 4, 2009 1:55 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

yes. the new 50th anniversary or whatever edition has both

apocalypse now redux is the biggest piece of shit i've ever seen

guys it's not that different

(like the scene where they try to set garrison up with what appears to be a larry craig-style bathroom sting...ok maybe it's an improvement),

I loved that scene!

How different is that Murch book linked to upthread with his book "In the Blink of an Eye" (I think is the title - it's on the shelf in the other room)? Because that one is really good.

i haven't read that, but in "the conversations" he's interviewed by michael ondaatje and it focuses on specific examples from the films he edited. a lot of it is about "why" more than "what" or "how", which i liked.

"In the Blink of an Eye" is a lot about the why and theories about editing, but less specific examples.

disappointingly he does not discuss his work on Captain Eo much

The Good the Bad and the Ugly and Days of Heaven...in both cases they just came out with a newer better transfer, though the Good the Band and the Ugly had that one extra scene. Get rid of the old ones.

the rerelease/box set of Jodorowsky is way better than previous versions.

a big one for me was finally being able to see the uncut once upon a time in america. you really have to thank the heavens for that. that incomprehensible crap american version was the only way i could ever see it previously. has to be one of the top ten worst hatchet jobs ever done on a movie.

The term "director's cut," as Jonathan Rosenbaum has pointed out, has now achieved the meaninglessness of "independent."

is the original 'touch of evil' cut even available?

But the film was never edited acc to "the Welles memo" until the late '90s!

"a big one for me was finally being able to see the uncut once upon a time in america. you really have to thank the heavens for that. that incomprehensible crap american version was the only way i could ever see it previously. has to be one of the top ten worst hatchet jobs ever done on a movie."

But the original European cut was released at the time. . . in EUROPE (I don't remember if the even longer extended cut which is now the DVD version is significantly different from that.) And I think they eventually released the European version in theaters (and then on VHS) in the states didn't they?

I guess I'm surprised that for anyone the cut version of that movie would be the lone one they could find, since it was so universally panned and then the full version followed so quickly after.

maybe i didn't look hard enough. i never saw the version i have on dvd on vhs years ago. for sale anywhere, anyway.