Theatrical, Extended, Unrated or Director's Cut - what version to watch? - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
  • 1 Post By vygnyr
  • 1 Post By Tack
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 20 Old 04-25-2016, 05:00 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
vygnyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 40
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Theatrical, Extended, Unrated or Director's Cut - what version to watch?

"Do you want to watch the Theatrical or Unrated/Extended/Director's Cut?" is a question most of us have encountered when playing a Blu-ray or a DVD.

I always find it hard to choose because I want to know what edition the director wants me to watch and enjoy. So, simply out of frustration I began to compile information about various editions by listening to commentaries, worked through interviews, and by asking the director what's his preferred version. And now I want to share my discoveries with other cinephiles so I've launched a website named This or That Edition

Directors like Judd Apatow, Paul Feig, Joe Carnahan, Greg Mottola, Joe Johnston, Francis Lawrence, Brett Ratner, Josh Boone, Paul Haggis, Etan Cohen, Nicholas Stroller and Richard Kelly have confirmed with This or That Edition which editions they prefer of their movies. The database currently has 45 registered films and many more to come.

I hope that many of you can use the database for future viewings.
Tack likes this.
vygnyr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 09:52 AM
Bass Enabler
 
Scott Simonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clovis, CA
Posts: 21,499
Mentioned: 183 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5972 Post(s)
Liked: 5025
I usually prefer the theatrical cut of movies. Every once in a while, a DC or extended cut is "better" but not commonly. Usually they either have crappy deleted scenes integrated or there is genuinely good content that fleshes out characters or more backstory. Either way, these extended cuts completely destroy the pacing of the movie and bore me to death.

One of my absolute most hated things about home video releases is when the ONLY version of the movie is the extended cut. I hate that so much.
Scott Simonian is offline  
post #3 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 12:09 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
shivaji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: So. California
Posts: 1,871
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 739 Post(s)
Liked: 617
No complaints with the extended versions of the Lord of the Rings trilogy series. Far better than the theatrical, I think. Its the only version I bought as well. I also have the extended versions of Chronicles of Roddick, The Watchmen and Avatar. all seem better for it, though that is the extent of it. Quite a few as has been said have crappy scenes not worth watching. Who here as seen the extended version of the old movie Dune, they didn't help that movie, that is for sure.
shivaji is online now  
 
post #4 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 01:39 PM
Senior Member
 
LineWalker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salem, MA
Posts: 415
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 50
I usually prefer longer versions of certain movies, but only if I think that they provide some enrichment to the story, in bringing new material to the plate. The Lord of the Rings Extended Editions are a good example of this, as is the Director's Cut of Watchmen. In some cases, an extended cut changes the whole composition of a movie, such as with the DC of The Chronicles of Riddick, or even the DC of Daredevil, which are vastly different from their theatrical versions.

For me, it's not often that I will actually prefer a shorter theatrical version to a later extended cut, or even an alternate version. I once saw the Director's Cut of Alien, and I found I actually liked the original cut of that film instead, especially since some of the concepts in the later films of that series were based on the ideas in the original cut.

In general, I prefer the longer editions more, but only if they're actually worth watching for the extra material.

LineWalker is offline  
post #5 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 03:46 PM
Senior Member
 
breezy2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 242 Post(s)
Liked: 97
If you have a choice


1) theatrical


2) extended


3) director's cut


any other order doesn't really make sense.


Edit - one HUGE exception: the US theatrical cut of Dark City (the one that decides audiences are so shallow and stupid and devoid of mystery and wonder that it is better to "explain" the twist up front) is a stroke-inducing abomination.

Last edited by breezy2012; 04-26-2016 at 03:50 PM.
breezy2012 is offline  
post #6 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 04:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Tack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Valencia, Ca
Posts: 7,759
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2964 Post(s)
Liked: 4112
"Payback" and "Payback: Straight Up" are very different versions of the same film. I like both of them almost equally.
Morpheo likes this.
Tack is online now  
post #7 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 05:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 7,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1054 Post(s)
Liked: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by breezy2012 View Post
If you have a choice


1) theatrical


2) extended


3) director's cut


any other order doesn't really make sense.
Well...I'm not sure I'm making much sense right now BUT:
1-director's cut
2-theatrical
3-extended

...if I have a choice

__________
Nicolas.

"Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent."- Victor Hugo.
Morpheo is offline  
post #8 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 06:00 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 7,421
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1054 Post(s)
Liked: 897
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tack View Post
"Payback" and "Payback: Straight Up" are very different versions of the same film. I like both of them almost equally.
I think I have a preference for the Straight Up cut.

Sucker Punch is another exemple of a superior extended cut - too bad we'll never see the director's cut though.

__________
Nicolas.

"Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent."- Victor Hugo.
Morpheo is offline  
post #9 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 07:43 PM
Senior Member
 
breezy2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 242 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post
Well...I'm not sure I'm making much sense right now BUT:
1-director's cut
2-theatrical
3-extended

...if I have a choice

Sure, if you want to do that it's your prerogative. For me personally - I don't see a point in watching the theatrical after the extended cut.


It's the same movie minus the extended material. As far as I know (I could be wrong) extended cuts don't alter the order of scenes or change the story.


I like to save the director's cut for last.

Last edited by breezy2012; 04-27-2016 at 12:28 AM.
breezy2012 is offline  
post #10 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 07:47 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
kucharsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 5,982
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1436 Post(s)
Liked: 781
Almost always the Director's Cut, but the Extended Cut is usually fun to see whether you agree or disagree with the decision to excise the footage.

That having been said, there are a number of films I prefer the theatrical cut on, most notably Stripes; the extended material just always feels "wrong" to me, perhaps because I saw the theatrical cut too many times.
kucharsk is offline  
post #11 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 07:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,376
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1728 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
Most directors are hired to do a job, being flexible to do, at least partially, what other people, representatives of investors, tell them to do. What is considered to be directors/extended cut are often left overs thrown in to make a extra buck. Those few directors who have a great deal of control, Kubrick being the best example, offer the directors cut from day one. Or am i wrong?
8mile13 is offline  
post #12 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 07:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
kucharsk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Louisville, CO
Posts: 5,982
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1436 Post(s)
Liked: 781
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
Most directors are hired to do a job, being flexible to do, at least partially, what other people, representatives of investors, tell them to do. What is considered to be director's/extended cut are often left overs thrown in to make a extra buck. Those few directors who have a great deal of control, Kubrick being the best example, offer the directors cut from day one. Or am i wrong?
Wrong.

The Director's Cut is most often the story the way the director wanted to present it, rather than with cuts imposed by studio hacks or others, and in some cases featuring effects they couldn't quite get right.

The director is the person who takes the story from the script to the screen, and I want to see their vision, not the compromised studio version where the studio told them to cut say fifteen minutes so they could get more screenings a day in.

Very few directors have the clout to present what they want; even Spielberg couldn't present a true Director's Cut of Close Encounters of the Third Kind for decades after its release because, frankly, it takes time, effort and big $$$$.

You can see this most notably in films by David Fincher; as an example, the audio time passage sequence behind a black screen in Zodiac was brilliant, but the studio forced him to remove it.
kucharsk is offline  
post #13 of 20 Old 04-26-2016, 08:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,376
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1728 Post(s)
Liked: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by kucharsk View Post
Wrong.

The Director's Cut is most often the story the way the director wanted to present it, rather than with cuts imposed by studio hacks or others, and in some cases featuring effects they couldn't quite get right.

The director is the person who takes the story from the script to the screen, and I want to see their vision, not the compromised studio version where the studio told them to cut say fifteen minutes so they could get more screenings a day in.

Very few directors have the clout to present what they want; even Spielberg couldn't present a true Director's Cut of Close Encounters of the Third Kind for decades after its release because, frankly, it takes time, effort and big $$$$.

You can see this most notably in films by David Fincher; as an example, the audio time passage sequence behind a black screen in Zodiac was brilliant, but he studio forced him to remove it.
Took a closer look. The movie industry seems such a mess that one needs to check out history of each and every movie cut. When directors start to cut their own directors cut its getting messy
Blade Runner:
A US theatrical cut
B international cut
C US TV version
D directors cut (without Ridley Scotts approval)
F directors cut (Ridley Scott in total control..) <- definitive directors cut
G final cut (Ridley Scott in total control..)
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayli...sions-20140402

Last edited by 8mile13; 04-26-2016 at 08:30 PM.
8mile13 is offline  
post #14 of 20 Old 04-27-2016, 08:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,669
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 664
Quote:
Originally Posted by vygnyr
"Do you want to watch the Theatrical or Unrated/Extended/Director's Cut?"
 
Well I prefer an UNRATED one if there IS one as I dont like censorship..........

When I got the movies CAGED FURY (1989) and CLASS OF 1999 (1989) -- I was quite happy to get UNRATED as thats what I saw on TV and the R rated versions of both suck compared to the full UNRATED versions...
Dude111 is offline  
post #15 of 20 Old 04-28-2016, 06:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 87
It depends on the movie, but as a general rule:

More scenes doesn't make a movie better.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #16 of 20 Old 04-29-2016, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,669
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Liked: 664
No it doesnt!!!!!

Shorter versions of THE SHINING make it even better!!!! (It is more suspenseful not seeing jack pull the wires off the distributer for example)
Dude111 is offline  
post #17 of 20 Old 05-01-2016, 11:44 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
iamian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by movieswede View Post
it depends on the movie, but as a general rule:

More scenes doesn't always make a movie better.
fify


iamian is offline  
post #18 of 20 Old 05-01-2016, 12:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamian View Post
fify
I would say its almost nonexistent that an extended edition delivers a better movie.

The Abyss maybe, but that's it.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #19 of 20 Old 05-02-2016, 07:40 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 22,663
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
Liked: 1589
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post
I would say its almost nonexistent that an extended edition delivers a better movie.

The Abyss maybe, but that's it.
The extended version of Kingdom of Heaven takes a bad movie and makes it watchable.

The 5-hour extended version of Until the End of the World is far better than the truncated and largely incoherent theatrical version.

The Director's Cut of Terry Gilliam's Brazil is better than the compromised theatrical version.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #20 of 20 Old 05-21-2016, 02:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 0
That depends on what version is the best. If the movie is good i'll watch 'em all and deice. Like Blade Runner for instance. The director's cut is not the best imo.
alienmem is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off