stagirite: All 3 LOTR films are vastly improved with the expanded versions. PJ deliberately shot more than he knew would be acceptable for in-theater, but it was material that needed to be in there. What TFA says about the Two Towers is right, but similar improvements in all 3.

PJ really farked up in the theatrical cut in The Two Towers by not showing the flashback in Osgilith as it explained why both Boromir and Faramir acted the way that they did.

And twice in the theatrical cut of ROTK by cutting the final showdown between Gandalf and Saruman and not trimming down the last half hour. Fans of the book know that there is still much of the story after the ring is destroyed so they expected it. For newcomers, it made the movie for them a crashing bore. There wasn't a screen and the multiple viewings I went to in the theater that didn't have a few people leaving early. On the midnight opening, the guy behind me shouted "fark this shiat" and muttered loudly as he was storming out.

PainInTheASP: Kingdom of Heaven should be on that list....

DamnYankees: If number one isn't Kingdom of Heaven, the list is meaningless.

GOD WILLS IT.

gunga galunga: J really farked up in the theatrical cut in The Two Towers by not showing the flashback in Osgilith as it explained why both Boromir and Faramir acted the way that they did.

Not to mention having it introduces Denethor and establishes his favoritism among his two sons earlier on

Mugato: skepticultist: List should include the Ben Affleck Daredevil. The theater release was absolute crap, while the director's cut is one of the best superhero movies I've ever seen. Just a phenomenal lesson in the power of editing and studio interference. They are literally two different movies.

I've heard people say that before. Maybe I should get off my ass and rent it. How is it different? I actually didn't think the theatrical version was that bad. The character himself is kind of boring but that's not the movie's fault. The playground scene was pretty ridiculous I guess. But overall I don't get the hate.

I hated how Kingpin got taken down so easily. Hope that's fixed.

I need to agree with above posters that The Abyss belongs on this list and right near the top.

I'm also glad Aliens made the list as that is some of the best 15 mins or so ever added to a film. Commentary on that extended version is also excellent!

gunga galunga: stagirite: All 3 LOTR films are vastly improved with the expanded versions. PJ deliberately shot more than he knew would be acceptable for in-theater, but it was material that needed to be in there. What TFA says about the Two Towers is right, but similar improvements in all 3.

PJ really farked up in the theatrical cut in The Two Towers by not showing the flashback in Osgilith as it explained why both Boromir and Faramir acted the way that they did.

And twice in the theatrical cut of ROTK by cutting the final showdown between Gandalf and Saruman and not trimming down the last half hour. Fans of the book know that there is still much of the story after the ring is destroyed so they expected it. For newcomers, it made the movie for them a crashing bore. There wasn't a screen and the multiple viewings I went to in the theater that didn't have a few people leaving early. On the midnight opening, the guy behind me shouted "fark this shiat" and muttered loudly as he was storming out.

I'm with you on Osgiliath and Saruman (although then he'd have had to cut something else). I'm not bothered by how much happens after the ring is destroyed. That's the way the story is. Indeed, _more_ happens in the book after that than in the movie. I don't get the hate for that. As someone upthread said, I cannot watch the theatrical versions anymore. Like if I'm flipping channels and land on it, I'll stay and watch for a while, then they'll come to a part where something is missing and it will make me mad.

Also, to quibble with some other suggestions that have been made here, "restored version" and "director's cut" are not the same thing. When the rereleased Lawrence of Arabia in the late 80s, it was restored, but it wasn't a differenty edited film. Restoration is almost always sure to be a plus; DCs not always.

Just here to make sure Kingdom of Heaven wasn't missed.

Carry on.

skoobx: DamnYankees: If number one isn't Kingdom of Heaven, the list is meaningless.

Yeah, no kidding. I hated the theatrical release. The directors cut is fantastic though.

Agreed

I see a lot of Kingdom of Heaven mentions above...I may have to check it out (the Director's cut from what I hear...), haven't seen it...

List is useless without the directors cut of Raw Deal where Arnold kills even more people and effortlessly dodges even more bullets. It's like a totally different movie.

gunga galunga: stagirite: All 3 LOTR films are vastly improved with the expanded versions. PJ deliberately shot more than he knew would be acceptable for in-theater, but it was material that needed to be in there. What TFA says about the Two Towers is right, but similar improvements in all 3.

PJ really farked up in the theatrical cut in The Two Towers by not showing the flashback in Osgilith as it explained why both Boromir and Faramir acted the way that they did.

And twice in the theatrical cut of ROTK by cutting the final showdown between Gandalf and Saruman

Seriously...how do you cut Christopher Lee's death scene when he was the primary villain of the first two movies? An how can you cut the mouth of Sauron scene, for that matter? I understand the dude had tough choices to make but the theatrical cut was weak. The extended version is the only version.

TNT a few months ago put on the extended version of Watchmen WITH the Black Freighter animated bits.

I thought the theatrical version is great but the fully uncut version is like a love letter to the comic book, it's great.

Lunchlady: TNT a few months ago put on the extended version of Watchmen WITH the Black Freighter animated bits.

I thought the theatrical version is great but the fully uncut version is like a love letter to the comic book, it's great.

This.

bukketmaster: An how can you cut the mouth of Sauron scene, for that matter? I understand the dude had tough choices to make but the theatrical cut was weak.

Here it is for those curious (new window)

Leader O'Cola: movieman_1979: Absolute list FAIL without

[i104.photobucket.com image 300x300]

this is one of my 10 favorite movies of all time, and I love how much better it is, I think any movie fan should own it, but I would really hesitate to call it a director's cut.

I agree, It shouldn't be called called complete either since 2 scenes (1 of them critical to the plot) were left off due to the physical film being unusable.

rickycal78: Leader O'Cola: Apocalypse Now :Redux

Sorry, but that movie was plodding around slowly to begin with. I thought Redux actually made it worse.

I sort of concur. Apocalypse Now is one of my favorite movies, but I hated Redux.

/side note, check out "Hearts of Darkness," the documentary about the making of Apocalypse Now by Coppola's wife. Very entertaining.

Last year, I went to special extended showings of all three Lord of the Rings films and I was taken back how much better all three extended films were.

PainInTheASP: Kingdom of Heaven should be on that list....

I see my work here is done... several hours ago.

Lunchlady: TNT a few months ago put on the extended version of Watchmen WITH the Black Freighter animated bits.

I thought the theatrical version is great but the fully uncut version is like a love letter to the comic book, it's great.

Are there any plans to release this?

Mugato: gunga galunga: and not trimming down the last half hour. Fans of the book know that there is still much of the story after the ring is destroyed so they expected it. For newcomers, it made the movie for them a crashing bore

That's the thing, films should not have required reading. I still have no idea what the "gray havens" are and I never will, because the movie never explained it. Everyone who isn't a human or Liv Tyler gets on a boat to... somewhere. Peter Jackson is an excellent filmmaker but he could use an editor. It's like how King Kong took 20 minutes to die.

/is there a deleted scene that explained why they couldn't have just taken an eagle to Mount Doom?

To be fair, Tolkien needed an editor. Jackson cut out large pieces from the books just to get down to an 11 hour version. But I don't think you are supposed to "get" every reference. Tolkien created a long, long history and even in the books you won't understand all of the people or places being named without cross referencing other books. Those references are really there just for you to get the sense of that long history.

/the Eye of Sauron would have blasted an eagle carrying the ring out of the sky

Mega Steve: bukketmaster: An how can you cut the mouth of Sauron scene, for that matter? I understand the dude had tough choices to make but the theatrical cut was weak.

Here it is for those curious (new window)

That reminds me of the cut scene from Vader's death. Have a look! (new window)

Dwight_Yeast: Lunchlady: TNT a few months ago put on the extended version of Watchmen WITH the Black Freighter animated bits.

I thought the theatrical version is great but the fully uncut version is like a love letter to the comic book, it's great.

Are there any plans to release this?

Ta-Da!


They also have a Blu-ray copy, which is obviously prettier. The important thing is this "Ultimate Cut" is the only one with the Black Freighter, the "Director's Cut" is all the live-action stuff but leaves out the animated comic book portions.

Warning, it's about 3.5 hours long so order a pizza.

Link (new window)

shiat I swore that linked properly, apologies.

Can we give the Lord of the Rings people a separate thread?

Lunchlady: Link (new window)

shiat I swore that linked properly, apologies.

And a good price, too.

Mugato: Did they actually explain what happened to Sauroman in the LOTR director's cut? I can't imagine there are actually longer versions of those movies.

And yes, the Blade Runner version without the voiceover and the happy ending with b-roll footage from The Shining was better, even though it suggested that Deckard was a replicant, which is stupid.

Deckhard *is* a replicant. He's been implanted with Gaff's memories.

Superman II, anyone? Not *exactly* a director's cut, but the Richard Donner cut was like a totally separate movie. They did a lot with test footage, and though it was still nowhere near as good as the first, at least it made *sense*, something the theatrical version of II can't say.

Mulchpuppy: BalugaJoe: Ice Pirates Directors Cut.

Bastard, I wasted four seconds looking for that.

Thanks for saving me four seconds to look for that.

//love Ice Pirates
//the ship's got . . . herpes.

runcible spork: Can we give the Lord of the Rings people a separate thread?

One does not simply separate threads in FARK. Its servers are guarded by more than just modmins, and the great Drew is ever watchful

rickycal78: Leader O'Cola: Apocalypse Now :Redux

Sorry, but that movie was plodding around slowly to begin with. I thought Redux actually made it worse.

Going to have to disagree. It actually seemed to go by more quickly and did a much better job showing the insanity.

No Daredevil?

Does the Superman II count? Yeah there were incomplete scenes but still.

DarkCat: Star Trek The Motion Picture is far better in it's director's cut.

Unfortunately Paramount was cheap-ass about it and all the digital work was rendered only at standard definition for DVD. The theatrical cut is the only version available in HD and now if they wanted an HD version of the Director's Edition they'd basically have to do it over.

bukketmaster: runcible spork: Can we give the Lord of the Rings people a separate thread?

One does not simply separate threads in FARK. Its servers are guarded by more than just modmins, and the great Drew is ever watchful

With ten-thousand liters you could not do this.

SharkTrager: rickycal78: Leader O'Cola: Apocalypse Now :Redux

Sorry, but that movie was plodding around slowly to begin with. I thought Redux actually made it worse.

Going to have to disagree. It actually seemed to go by more quickly and did a much better job showing the insanity.

not to mention having far improved color saturation

Highlander II makes sense with the Director's Cut. Not saying it's great, but at least is intelligible.

tarkus1980: FeedTheCollapse: Also, the extended version of Aliens just felt redundant.

Wow, I've rarely disagreed with a post more. The extended Aliens is my favorite movie ever; I'm not sure the regular one would make my top 20, though it might.



honestly, I'm a little surprised at how much love that cut gets. I think it slows down an already slow paced film (I don't mean to imply that as a negative) by delaying the main story coming together and all the additions feel really redundant. I would agree with keeping the scenes involving Ripley's daughter, but all the other scenes don't really add much: Newt's family being the ones who first introduce the alien to the colony is interesting, but ultimately pointless (see also: C3PO and R2D2 being invented by Darth Vader in the SW prequels); Burke being revealed as the one who sent newt's family to look for the space jockey ship is makes his later revelation redundant and doesn't tell us anything we already know; the rest are just expanded scenes that are interesting but just padding.


The Aliens extended cut is basically just your main film with all of its deleted scenes left intact, not some kind of reimagining of the main film as it doesn't drastically change the tone or plot of the film. Though kind of falling in that same description, I would say Alien 3's working cut was much more interesting, if still flawed.

Lunchlady: the "Director's Cut" is all the live-action stuff but leaves out the animated comic book portions.

Thanks!

I've seen the director's cut, and I've seen the Black Freighter when it was up on Nnetflix, but I'm curious how the two pieces fit together in the film.

bukketmaster: runcible spork: Can we give the Lord of the Rings people a separate thread?

One does not simply separate threads in FARK. Its servers are guarded by more than just modmins, and the great Drew is ever watchful



Well done, small one.

SharkTrager: Going to have to disagree. It actually seemed to go by more quickly and did a much better job showing the insanity.

Redux was obviously a cash-in, double-dip - get the fans who already own the DVD to buy another version. I have it and I really don't like it. It's like the Star Wars special editions - lots of stuff added that really does nothing but slow down the pacing.

FeedTheCollapse: tarkus1980: FeedTheCollapse: Also, the extended version of Aliens just felt redundant.

Wow, I've rarely disagreed with a post more. The extended Aliens is my favorite movie ever; I'm not sure the regular one would make my top 20, though it might.

honestly, I'm a little surprised at how much love that cut gets. I think it slows down an already slow paced film (I don't mean to imply that as a negative) by delaying the main story coming together and all the additions feel really redundant. I would agree with keeping the scenes involving Ripley's daughter, but all the other scenes don't really add much: Newt's family being the ones who first introduce the alien to the colony is interesting, but ultimately pointless (see also: C3PO and R2D2 being invented by Darth Vader in the SW prequels); Burke being revealed as the one who sent newt's family to look for the space jockey ship is makes his later revelation redundant and doesn't tell us anything we already know; the rest are just expanded scenes that are interesting but just padding.

The Aliens extended cut is basically just your main film with all of its deleted scenes left intact, not some kind of reimagining of the main film as it doesn't drastically change the tone or plot of the film. Though kind of falling in that same description, I would say Alien 3's working cut was much more interesting, if still flawed.


I agree with both points. I went back and watched these recently, and I don't think they should have included the scene with Newt's family. And the automated guns, while a cool concept, make the Alien species appear rather stupid.

Also, I don't know if it was the cut or what but Alien 3 seemed like a decent film to me. Nothing special like the first two, but hardly the atrocity it gets labeled as so often.

Resurrection however...

Benjamin Stone: Also, I don't know if it was the cut or what but Alien 3 seemed like a decent film to me. Nothing special like the first two, but hardly the atrocity it gets labeled as so often.

I do think the criticism of Alien 3 has been a bit harsh, but it is a rather steep drop in quality from the first 2 films.

LOTR? They should make a 3 hour cliff notes version of all 3 combined.

PizzaJedi81: Blade Runner? Check. Pretentious foreign film that you've never heard of? Double check. Phrase in anotyher language to show how smart the author is? Check and done!

What twaffle.

Snarky, presumptuous twatwaffle spouting off about a movie he's never seen? Check. Who posts without reviewing what he typed to make sure he doesn't misspell a word and comes off looking like an even bigger ass? Check.

rickycal78: Leader O'Cola: Apocalypse Now :Redux

Sorry, but that movie was plodding around slowly to begin with. I thought Redux actually made it worse.



More Colleen Camp boobies can't be all bad.