My Hollywood Video had Payback for release on BR, so I rented it.

The PQ was good, but I find the film a bit grainy. The movie was really sharp and it wasn't a very colorful, but when there was color it looked good.

My main problem with this movie was that it was the Director's Cut and it was horrible. The orignal was SO MUCH better. They cut out a huge chunk of the movie.

Kris Kristofferson wasn't in the movie at all. The whole storyline with his kid was dropped. But during the scenes when they talked to Bronson, it was Mrs. Bronson. And the ending was completely different. It felt like Grand Theft Auto with Porter just killing tons of people. Then he gets shot and leaves with his biddy.

My girlfriend, who never saw the first one, was like "That sucked" and I had to explain to her how the orignal was much better.

Now maybe the orignal cut is on the disc, but I didn't bother to look.

Honestly, if you are a fan of this movie you'll be disapointed by this version.

Is the Hammer to the toe still in?

What?! The director's cut took all that out? Is the original on it at all? Looks like I'm canceling my order, what a waste.

This is the original version that was supposed to be released before it was taken out of the hands of the director. Additional scenes were later shot under Mel Gibson's direction and the movie was changed significantly. So it's not as though the movie is missing a bunch of footage, this is the way it was originally intended. There is some additional stuff and some stuff that was taken out. Personally I always thought the movie was okay and have always wanted to see the original. I'm looking forward to renting it.

Review up at HDD:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/payback_dc.html

Review up at HDD:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/payback_dc.html
Ken is an excellent and thorough reviewer. I'm so glad he's at HDD now.

Yes it sounds like the director's cut isn't as good as the theatrical version. Too bad.

Ken is an excellent and thorough reviewer. I'm so glad he's at HDD now.

Yes it sounds like the director's cut isn't as good as the theatrical version. Too bad.

I liked his review of King Arthur. Far more satisfactory than the other guy's typical reviews.

This is the original version that was supposed to be released before it was taken out of the hands of the director.
Unfortunately, or fortunately I grew to love the theatrical version and that is how I will always remember it. It is a shame that they couldn't just release both versions.

This is the original version that was supposed to be released before it was taken out of the hands of the director. Additional scenes were later shot under Mel Gibson's direction and the movie was changed significantly. So it's not as though the movie is missing a bunch of footage, this is the way it was originally intended. There is some additional stuff and some stuff that was taken out. Personally I always thought the movie was okay and have always wanted to see the original. I'm looking forward to renting it.
Well the director had a horrible vision because the movie sucked.

And ****1/2 stars? No way. I'd give it 4.

http://www.impossiblefunky.com/archives/issue_11/11_parker.asp?IshNum=11

Came across this a week or so ago when looking for info on the directors cut....interesting comparison between the original Gibson film, the new (or old) edit, the previous rendition (Point Blank with Lee Marvin), and the original book The Hunter by Don Westlake.

Ok, I'm with you guys. The original is better. The ENTIRE 3rd Act is completely different. So, gone is the "... its starting to look like roast beef down there" line, along with every bit of comedy. I mean, there is nothing fun or even remotely funny in this the version.

They took out everything I liked (including for the blue tint, which I always hated. So I actually welcomed this change.) and cut an additional 18 minutes out just for good measure. Straight Up is an accurate title for this edit. Cause you take it like a shot. No ice. No frills. No chaser. But unfortunately, you are still left wanting more.

IGN has an interview with Dir. Brian Helgeland:

http://dvd.ign.com/articles/779/779182p1.html

So, gone is the "... its starting to look like roast beef down there" line, along with every bit of comedy. I mean, there is nothing fun or even remotely funny in this the version.

The black comedy is what made this movie memorable.
No sale here.

What? They took the black comedy out? Then i´ll wait for the theaterical to hit HD.
:(

Frys.com has this for $14.99. Shipping kills the deal, but I've had success pricematching Frys.com at Circuit City.

The documentaries on this thing are excellent.

i checked this out the other day and i have to agree, the "original" theatrical version to me seems much better. I had watched it not that long ago on cable, maybe a month or 2 ago, and this version just seems....eh. To me it seems like there was a valid reason to reshoot parts of the movie. I can appreciate that the original director wanted his version to be seen, but i think it falls short of the revisions. Another that comes to mind like that was the two versions of the newest exorcist movie that came out a few years back. Everyone made a big to-do about the original directors version coming out and how it must be much better than Renny Harlin's version, but when i saw it, i preffered the RH version.

I fall into the camp of enjoying both versions. I haven't seen the original in a year or so...so it wasn't fresh in my memory. I watched the Director's version last night and really enjoyed it....a lot. I thought it dragged a little at times....seemingly when Mel's character would interact with the "women in his life", but other than that....I loved the movie. I liked the hard boiled tone of this version.

Ron

Just watched the director's cut and it is as good as I remembered it being, though I was disappointed a couple little things from the workprint I have were not included. Oh well. Blows the stupid family friendly theatrical cut all to hell.

Just watched the director's cut and it is as good as I remembered it being, though I was disappointed a couple little things from the workprint I have were not included. Oh well. Blows the stupid family friendly theatrical cut all to hell.

What did they leave out? It's been over 6 years since I watched the workprint.

As someone who never got around to seeing the theatrical version (and has the director's cut on the way right now,) is there any reason to ever see the theatrical version (other than curiosity?)

As someone who never got aroung to seeing the theatrical version (and has the director's cut on the way right now,) is there any reason to ever see the theatrical version (other than curiosity?)

Yeah, definitely worth seeing. It's almost a different movie and certainly entertaining (one of my favorites). Give it a rent at least. It's also kind of interesting to see how a movie can change rather drastically without all that much work.

Yeah, definitely worth seeing. It's almost a different movie and certainly entertaining (one of my favorites). Give it a rent at least. It's also kind of interesting to see how a movie can change rather drastically without all that much work.
So you've seen both, obviously. Is it kinda like with Daredevil - where the director's cut makes the movie significantly different? If so, it's probably worth a rental just for the comparison.

Could someone please give me a brief summary of how the control left the director's hands ad the theatrical cut came to be? I'd look it up on wikipedia or another site, but I'm afraid I'd see spoilers (I hate having the movie ruined for me - I still haven't forgiven the putz who spoiled Fight Club for me.)

Edit - I guess post number four summarizes it pretty well. That'll teach me to skim a thread before replying... :o

So you've seen both, obviously. Is it kinda like with Daredevil - where the director's cut makes the movie significantly different? If so, it's probably worth a rental just for the comparison.

Could someone please give me a brief summary of how the control left the director's hands ad the theatrical cut came to be? I'd look it up on wikipedia or another site, but I'm afraid I'd see spoilers (I hate having the movie ruined for me - I still haven't forgiven the putz who spoiled Fight Club for me.)

Edit - I guess post number four summarizes it pretty well. That'll teach me to skim a thread before replying... :o

I haven't seen the directors cut of Daredevil (was it any good? the theatrical wasn't great), so I can't compare directly.

The theatrical cut is more of a dark comedy than the Director's cut -- the director's cut is definitely a bit darker and more to the point. I'd say they are both worth watching -- some people like the Director's cut more and some like the theatrical... they are clearly two different views on the same story.

I'm keeping my DVD version just because the BR isn't really a replacement, more just another movie based on the same basic plot.

I haven't seen the directors cut of Daredevil (was it any good? the theatrical wasn't great), so I can't compare directly.
Way different, way better imo. There's actually some character development and plot, as surprising as it may sound. There's also a nice little subplot that shows more of Matt the lawyer as opposed to Dardevil. It's at least worth a rental - though you could probably pick it up for under ten bucks.

The theatrical cut is more of a dark comedy than the Director's cut -- the director's cut is definitely a bit darker and more to the point. I'd say they are both worth watching -- some people like the Director's cut more and some like the theatrical... they are clearly two different views on the same story.

I'm keeping my DVD version just because the BR isn't really a replacement, more just another movie based on the same basic plot.
Good to know. Thanks. My copy is showing up today, but I probably won't have a chance to watch it until tomorrow - tonight's A Scanner Darkly night. :D

Had a chance to watch the movie and the docs on the disc. I liked it. Maybe having never seen the theatrical version helped, but I enjoyed it for what it was. I'll probably eventually see the theatrical version (especially if they release it in HD,) but I'm happy with this version. I'm against distilling a flick to make it more accessible to the masses, so I'm glad that we're able to see what the director intended the film to be.

I just got done watching the Straight Up cut. A little late to the discussion though I guess.

Going into it, I had no idea of the backstory behind the theatrical release and the director's cut. I just assumed it was going to be the standard fare on a "DC" (director's cut) where they add some scenes and remove others.

Right from the start, with the opening credits and missing "blue" tint, I was getting a '70s movie vibe. I didn't really mind the lack of the blue tint, but I thought it made the theatrical stand out against some other movies I have seen, kinda like the green tint to the Matrix. Going through the "DC" I was liking the alternate take. I did notice it was a little darker and less with the black comedy that I remember from the theatrical release, but I haven't watched that version in so long, I probably did not remember all the things that changed. Well untill the third act that is.

I like a few parts of the new third act, but since I kept expecting this to be basically the same movie, I kept wondering when they were going to bring in Kris Kristopherson. Before I knew it the movie was over.

Overall, I am going to have to say I liked the theatrical version better. I do think they probably should have added some scenes from the "DC" to it though. For example, the scene where Porter and his wife get into a fight early on, probably should have stayed in both versions.

One of the good features on this Blu-Ray was the featurette that explained the two different versions. I understand both sides and why they chose to make the decisions they did. Mel Gibson, regardless of some of the craziness he has been involved in recently, does know movies. Like a recent episode of South Park states, and I'll paraphrase, "That Mel Gibson is one crazy son of a bitch, but he knows good story stucture". I guess I kind of have to agree, since I liked his take a bit better.

I guess it will be a while until we see the theatrical version of this on BD... if at all.:confused: