Director's Cuts? dud or mind [and ass] numbingly dull double-dud?

is bladerunner not considered to be an example of a good director's cut? i've never seen the original version...

isn't there a history of studios adding voice overs? ISTR The Killing had one that Kubrick was really pissed off about (this was before he had the god-like power to do what the hell he liked). sad to say the narrations were (crudely) things like "Earlier that day" when the scene starts with the camera pointed out a window and you could clearly see there had been a jump in time frame (previous scene at night), and anyone paying attention could have worked out it wasn't later, etc.

The Thing has not been re-relaesed to cinema because John Carpenter does not want to change any of it, hence he cannot say "Oh no!! Director's Cut!! OH NO!!" as part of the promo hence no rerelease => It is an infinitely better movie than BR or fkn Apocalypse Now in EVERY POSSIBLE RESPECT

also Francis you cokehead halfwite REDUX means SHORTER!!

Most pointless 'Director's Cut' - 'Amadeus'!

I prefer the voice-over version of Blade Runner. The fact the ending is so contradictory to everything we have seen validates it - they are literally trying to escape the film (and as Mark S sez - they end up in The Shining!!!). AT least the directors cut is shorter I suppose.

Worst DC evah! = Dances WIth Wolves DC = 4 hours long!!!!(Each scene is left to run for about 20 secs extra). I generally disapprove of directors cuts, editing is best left to editors once the basic shape of the film is there. I can think of two Steven SPielberg films from the last 14 months which could both have done with half an hour lopped of the end (and already have adequate endings in them).

rickyT what do you think? if i saw it i might like it and then where wd we be?

btw i am still trying to think of a "ts: crash/bangbus" gag/zeitgeist essay => it can also include speed and weekend if you like

naaah. The voiceover is great as it situates the film in that old Chandler-esque private dick genre. the fact that Harrison Ford hated doing it is an added bonus, as it means his voice has a skin-jobby level of detachment and alienation.

Aliens

Quite (and the fact that you have no other option on DVD is annoying). I don't mind those extra scenes per se, but it's true that by seeing the terraforming base first before it gets wiped out makes everything far less unsettling. Although I guess you're supposed to feel 'aw, sad' at the thought of all those little kids being DEVOURED from their INSIDES...

going all it was Donald about Deckard being a replicant was not a good idea. Ambiguity rocks.

it's not like I have actually seen the Director's Cut or watched the original a second time.

dr. bill HAR FORD

AND STOP DISSING THAT MAGICKAL FLIM

only reason to watch vanilla sky dvd: in the their promo tour documentary (?), the cast and director are fielding questions from the press at the paris premiere.

french reporter: mr. tom cruise, are you afraid of the deletion of memories?
cruise: (giant smile, which slowly melts into confusion, then he looks around for help)

Wasn't the director's cut of Blood Simple actually a few minutes SHORTER than the original one? I like that. Also, I can't imagine anyone thinking that the director's cut of Brazil was not infinitely better than the studio-dictated version.

(Nicole Kidman, that is, although I'll give our Nicole five bucks if she kicks Tom Cruise in the nuts at a Hollywood gala.)

A vision.

I'll give our Nicole five bucks if she kicks Tom Cruise in the nuts at a Hollywood gala

A better vision.

A resounding YESH!!! to that one. possibly the best use of the 'it was only a dream' ending cliche EVER.

The DVD version has about 2 minutes' more footage than the video version. That's the longest version I'm aware of.

The plot of "AI" was summarized exactly as filmed by a post-Kubrick death story in the NY Times in '99 (under the assumption it would never be made -- SK had apparently agreed to Spielberg directing it before his death, however). So, wrong.