Tag: Theatrical

What editions are available?

• Theatrical Cut (133 min.)
• Unrated Director’s Cut (131 min.)

The 2005 WWII film The Great Raid was released on DVD and Blu-ray in the US as an exclusive unrated director’s cut. The Canadian newspaper Pilipino Express interviewed director John Dahl in 2006 where he states the following:

Pilipino Express: Some of the scenes with Margaret Utinsky and the Filipino underground resistance movement were in the theatrical release but they weren’t included in your Director’s Cut on DVD. (They can still be viewed in the DVD’s supplementary material). Why was that?

John Dahl: I always liked those scenes, but felt like they slowed down the story. The studio liked those scenes because they felt the audience would relate to Margaret. There is nothing really wrong with the theatrical version, I just prefer the Director’s Cut. It feels a little less contrived to me. The shootout in Manila and the Rizal Bridge were kind of “Hollywood Action Movie Scenes,” which I didn’t feel the movie needed. I never really saw it as an action film, more a straight-out drama with some action at the end of the film.

Source: An interview with Great Raid director, John Dahl, Pilipino Express

The director’s preferred edition: Unrated Director’s Cut

What editions are available?

• Theatrical Cut (97 min.)
• Director’s Cut (100 min.)

Two years after 20th Century Fox botched the popular superhero Daredevil with its 2003 outing they made a spin-off starring Jennifer Garner as Elektra. Not unlike the Ben Affleck starrier Daredevil, Elektra was slayed by critics (10% on Rotten Tomatoes). The same year that Elektra was premiered an director’s cut of the film was released on DVD. The director’s cut is widely available on Blu-ray and DVD. IGN interviewed director Rob Bowman about the director’s cut and his approach:

IGN: After readying the theatrical version, it seems like, comparatively, making the Director’s Cut was a low-pressure situation. Was that the case?
Rob Bowman: With the Director’s Cut, there was absolutely no pressure. There was nothing. I didn’t have to consult with anybody. This was sort of a gift from the studio to me, just saying ‘Go make it.’ I was the one who decided to re-do it, and re-create sound-effects and all the music in various parts. I never ever spoke to the studio about anything.

Source: Interview: Rob Bowman, IGN

Earlier in the interview Bowman states:

“And this time we took the time to really get it right. I can say, is the best version we can deliver.”

Source: Interview: Rob Bowman, IGN

The director’s preferred edition: Director’s Cut

What editions are available?

• Theatrical Cut (119 min.)
• Unrated Director’s Cut (134 min.)

The Vin Diesel sci-fi action flick The Chronicles of Riddick was released in an unrated director’s cut on DVD in 2004. Riddick, played by Diesel, has a large fan base and since then all three Riddick films (Pitch Black, The Chronicles of Riddick, Riddick) have been released in alternative cuts on home video. The Blu-ray release of The Chronicles of Riddick includes both the theatrical cut and the unrated director’s cut. IGN interviewed director David Twohy when the unrated director’s cut was released on DVD:

IGN DVD: Ok I’ll ask the silly question: why didn’t you make this the theatrical cut?
David Twohy:  It’s not a silly question, it’s a good question. I think there was a philosophy at the time that if you’re coming out in the summer marketplace that you have to be nimble-
IGN: You had to be PG-13, in other words?
David Twohy: Well no, we had to be PG-13 but that doesn’t necessarily dictate length. We had to be PG-13 from the beginning for the theatrical release. We knew that, I agreed to that, Vin agreed to that. That’s the current post-Columbine climate of the studios. We understood that. But in terms of being under two hours, there was a feeling you had to be nimble in the summer marketplace. There was a feeling that only the quick would survive in a summer marketplace, where attention spans are thought to be short. So right or wrong, that was the philosophy that prevailed. But now we can take our time with things and we can present a fuller, richer experience, and here it is in the unrated version, and I think it’s the stronger version of the movie.

Source: An interview with David Twohy, IGN

The director’s preferred edition: Unrated Director’s Cut

What editions are available?

• Theatrical Cut (88 min.)
• Director’s Cut (100 min.)
• The Final Cut (93 min.)

The British horror classic The Wicker Man (no, not the one with Nicolas Cage) has been released in many different cuts but only three of them have arrived on DVD and Blu-ray. Director Robin Hardy was reportedly forced to cut his original cut of the film which didn’t sit well with the director nor the film most recognizable star Christopher Lee. Hardy then restored those missing scenes and presented them in the director’s cut. But in 2013 Hardy introduced The Wicker Man: The Final Cut which may or may not be the last time we see this cult classic released. Hardy said the following about 2013 cut during an interview with HeyUGuys:

“I could spend the next five minutes telling your all about the versions without being able to name them probably accurately. Well, this version, is the version that I like. It contains all the really important scenes, sequences to make the story work, I think. It contains some afterthoughts which I think most directors have about films they make… it’s the film as we originally intended it.”

Source: Robin Hardy Interview – The Wicker Man, HeyUGuys

The director’s preferred edition: The Final Cut

What editions are available?

• Theatrical Cut (126 min.)
• Director’s Cut / Extended Unrated Version (141 min.)

During mid-production of the intended R-rated King Arthur the producers had a change heart and decided that the movie should aim at the considerably less bloody PG-13 rating. Director Antoine Fuqua is known for his R-rated movies had to change his style and abandon the footage that was already in the can. King Arthur was released When the director’s cut was originally released on DVD Faqua had the following to say about the newly minted cut in an interview with DVDTalk.com in 2004:

DVDTalk: What lead to the decision to release King Arthur as a Director’s Cut?
Antoine Fuqua: Jerry [Bruckheimer] and those guys are trying to stay true to what I signed on for, and they had promised me that early on. When I first signed on to the movie it was to shoot an R movie, and then half way through it – that changed, for all sorts of reasons. Obviously it’s always money…That was very difficult for me and I had a tough time adjusting to that. I had to change a lot of my shooting style that I had set up because it just wouldn’t have been possible to do certain things and get a PG-13 rating, just because it would have been more graphic. Like I said, tonally, I had a whole different mindset. So once that happened, while I was filming, it made it difficult. Jerry Bruckheimer promised me that he’d get a version out on DVD that would be closer to what I wanted.

Source: Antoine Fuqua – King Arthur, DVDTalk

Three years later, in 2007, Capone of Aint It Cool News interviewed Faqua where they talked about the director’s cut where he suddenly changed his mind about the cut:

Capone: One of the most famous instances of conflicts you’ve had with a studio centered on your work on KING ARTHUR, in which the folks at Disney insisted that your pare it back to get a PG-13 rating after you’d prepped for an R-rated blood bath. I guess the promise was that you’d get to put out an unrated “director’s cut” on DVD. Are you satisfied with the “director’s cut” that’s out there?
Antoine Fuqua: No, no, not at all. Because you never really get that chance. Once you’re out of that editing bay, you’re out of there. Everything else is out of your hands. It becomes marketing, selling product. It has nothing to do with you anymore. They’ll sell you and use your name to say “director’s cut.” But not really, hell no.
Capone: Did you have any input into that cut?
Antoine Fuqua: No, barely. And my input was almost impossible because during the finishing of your movie, you’re still supposed to have a director’s cut. How are you going to do that when you’re still finished the movie that you have to put out. If it’s a PG-13 and that’s what you have to cut, when do you find the time–you barely sleep anyway–to do a director’s cut? A director’s cut would have to be something you could do when you step away from the movie for a minute, and get all the material together, and go back and have a full cutting session with your editor. That’s a director’s cut. And being allowed to shoot the damn footage for a director’s cut. When you’re told you can’t even shoot that kind of footage to start with, then what’s the point anyway?

Source: Capone With Antoine Fuqua About SHOOTER, The KING ARTHUR Non Director’s Cut, Casting TRAINING DAY, & Much More!!, Aint It Cool News

The director’s preferred edition: In a way, neither