next »

[Please Support Us!]

Please Support Us!

Please help keep (=WDG=) alive

• Server rules
• Forum rules
• Join us
  
• Clan members
• About the clan
• Server stats
• WDG YouTube Channel
• WDG Downloads
• IRC Webchat

Steam groups:

• WDG community
• WDG clan group
• WDG Battlelog Platoon

Our allies:

• [NuB] TF2 clan
• Velocity Gamers Hub
• Destination Gamer

GoG Links:

• Wix Discord
• Wix IRC channel

TF2 Links:

• Official TF2 Blog
• TF2 Steam Forum
• The Fort 2

October 2025

Mo	Tu	We	Th	Fr	Sa	Su
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31
	Birthdays
Uzz919 (29), FlowingEye (36), Karthus (35)
	Upcoming Events
Upcoming Birthdays: Uzz919 (29), FlowingEye (36), Karthus (35)

[Magathery]

Is it just me, but does any film bearing the words "Director's Cut" hereld shitness?

I've mostly been a good boy last month, so I desided to have a parusal at play dot com. Once there I desided on a copy of "Afro Samuri - Driectors cut". Mainly because it was cheaper than the normal film, and it was in stock. Anyway, nice postman delivers the DVD so happy days. Actually come to watching it and I find myself wondering where a good chunk of the film has gone. Where's the fight with the robotic version of himself? Where's the shoing the empty hand ninja take off him? I know it probably well over a year since I used to watch the series late on Bravo, but still.

Then I remebered. It's the directors cut. Bugger.

Has there ever been a good directors cut?

Bladerunner? Nope. All the naration done by harrison Ford was ditched and you lost a lot of understanding and background for the film and the characters.

T2? Mixed feelings on this on. Some of the extra special effects were good. Liquid boy stabbing the dog gave a sinistar edge. But the drug induced dream sequence between Conner's farther and Sarah? Also the odd "read only" moment for Arnie's CPU?

I'm sure there are loads more examples out there. And maybe it comes down to personal taste. But I think a Director's cut takes away from a film, rather than adds to it.

Disscuss

[PapaFade]

Read the reviews before u buy one m8. It's the only way be sure (apart from Nuking them from orbit of course ).

[Magathery]

Always a great plan

[reaches towards orbital death-ray control pannel and begins to targert employers Bolton office]

MH-HA-HA-HA-HAAR!

[mode_seven]

You could always take DCs as a reminder of why they employ a seperate individual as an editor.

[Guilt is a rope... etc]

"Afro samurai"

theres your problem.

[Carnage]

If your theory is true may i suggest that you stay clear of the directors cut of Alexander, as that was the worst film ever made and the only film i have not watched the whole way through, even Mars Attacks was better than that!!

[Junta]

"Afro samurai"

theres your problem.

ROFL

[LtMama]

Alexander

Lol, coincidentally I think my brother contributed slightly to that movie. Had to stand in a field and shout whilst they recorded the sound so they could put it over the battles. But I think he also agreed it was shit

[PapaFade]

A Great disapointment considering how much I like Colin Farrell and what a good story the life of Alexander makes.

[Finaldeath]

I'd have to wholly disagree on Blade Runner. If you watch it for Harrison Fords forced narrative, and entirely-too-happy ending, then well, you do miss much of the finer detail of the film.

I've not even finished watching them, but the Lord of the Rings extended editions are good from what I've seen - if you enjoy the original films, just adding bits of scenes (and some missing parts which explain just how they suddenly ended up somewhere or with something, heh).

Sin City was also quite good - the extra scenes were short, but filled the blank pages which the novels had, and when they had them as separate episodes many of them work well too. Robert Rodriguez is amazing though.

Not seen honestly too many other director editions, that I remember anyway. I know editing, and how good it can be (making or breaking a production), therefore I always reserve my judgement - also, the best films usually have the best directors cut anyway

[Teatime]

Yes, LOTR is a good example of movies where the additionally material enhances the story (rather than just lenghten it).

But before we continue we have to be careful with the terminology:
Director's Cut: Director re-editing a movie (sometimes even adding new material/SFX). The result often is longer, but not necessarily.
Extended Cut: The studio reinserting material for a second marketing run (usually without the involvement of the director). The result can vary dramatically in quality. The LOTR are refered to as "extended", but still by definition rather D.C.

Blade Runner: Actually I can live with both versions. The old version makes it a lesser film, but kinda works better as a detective/film noir story.
T2: IMHO better, though not dramatically
Aliens: Director's Cut ha better pacing and some story elements are better laid out.
Abyss: A lot better as D.C. The ending of the theatrical version was unsatisfying.
Daredevil: I have yet to see it, but I read reviews saying the D.C. also improved the movie (as hard as this might be to believe)
Leon (aka The professional): Also better as D.C.
Frighteners: Hell yeah!
Alien: An example for a D.C. which is shorter than the original. Have to watch that again some time, if it was better then I don't remember it.
Kingdom Of Heaven: Again, story's better laid out.
Star Trek Movie Picture (the one from '79): Significantly imporved as far as SFX are concerned. IMHO also better as a movie, but I've read reviews saying otherwise.

A good example of a minor movie: Lawnmower Man. The theatrical version was a disaster, but the D.C. made it a far better movie.

So, basically I disagree. Whereas with extended cuts chances are much higher for them being inferior to the theatrical versions, since usually the studio will just reinsert deleted scenes (which usually were deleted for a good reason ... though on occasion I have seen deleted scenes which IMO would have improved the movie).

[Junta]

Yes, LOTR is a good example of movies where the additionally material enhances the story (rather than just lenghten it).

Don't get me started on LOTR.. a clear example of holywood adding in meaningless crap to a film without advancing the story (and I'm talking the regular version not just the director's cut).

(Yes I've read the books, yes I know there was too much to include in the film, no I can't see why they can just make up bits and add it to the film - especially when the bits added don't help tell the story or make it any clearer).

[Brahms]

What's the Donnie Darko director's cut like?

[Ringelbeatz]

19 minutes longer.

It makes things easier to understand.
Also they changed the Sounds a bit.

[Terror]

Oh shit, I just realised that I've only seen the DC version of Blade Runner, might explain why I thought it was so shit (whereas snowman friggin loves that film, all his passwords used to be related to blade runner, until he realised i had found this out).