10-12-2018, 08:19 PM | #81 |
Stone Warrior
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Internet
Posts: 830
|
Whether or not a director has final cut is usually contractual and is often a luxury many directors have to fight for. Barron's work prior mostly consisted of music videos and a handful of episodes for Jim Henson's Storyteller. His only film prior to this was a lesser known film called Electric Dreams. The chances of him getting that luxury were probably slim.
A good director knows to "kill their babies" when they negatively impact the film. Not doing that isn't some overly generalized trait all directors have and there are a number of director's cuts that are better than the theatrical versions, including: Aliens, Blade Runner: The Final Cut, the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy, Dark City, The Abyss, Mimic, and although I'm partial to the 1977 theatrical cut, the general consensus is the director's cut of Close Encounters of the Third Kind is the best version. I'd even make arguments for The Frighteners and Nicholas Meyer's two Star Trek films. Plus, that number gets even larger when you consider the vast amount of films in which the theatrical cut is the director's cut. Also, yes, directors do spend time in the editing room. Yes, the work is done by the editor, but directors do give input and are often involved in the editing of their film in some capacity. EDIT: Of course, there are also a number of occasions in which directors such as Ridley Scott, Walter Hill, and George Lucas have gone back to some of their noteworthy films and delivered inferior versions. Things are very rarely generalized and all across the board as people claim. Sometimes something is good, sometimes it sucks. Last edited by sgtfbomb; 10-12-2018 at 08:53 PM. |
10-12-2018, 10:37 PM | #82 | ||
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,338
|
Quote:
Full throttle until the finish line. I wish there were more hours in the day. Quote:
Golden Harvest just took over post-production on the film at a certain point. I kinda doubt it was anything dramatic. Barron did press for the film. It didn't sound like there was any bad blood at all. |
||
10-18-2018, 03:59 PM | #83 | |
Thug
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 67
|
Quote:
|
|
10-18-2018, 04:38 PM | #84 |
The Franchise
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: nWo Country
Posts: 27,696
|
Seeing as how the entire film is about America's questionable military involvement in various places throughout history, the reinstated subplot in which a group of characters debate that very thing around the dinner table may be a bit slow and talky, but I'd argue that it's far from "wholly unnecessary". I don't know.
Frankly, if it were up to me every movie would be 5 hours long. So we're probably not gonna agree on much about what's "necessary" or not. I like movies, I especially like long movies, and I always appreciate getting as much as possible of something I already like. I've only seen the "Final Cut" of Blade Runner, so I can't speak to it being better or worse than the original cut. My wife thought the movie was stupid, so I probably won't get to see it again anytime soon either way. I liked it; too slow for her. Sigh.
__________________
"I left some words quite far from here to be a short reminder... I laid them out in stone, in case they need to last forever..." "But hey... I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know." nWo Tech: The Official Thread Poison of the Technodrome Forums https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA https://theroxxshow.blogspot.com/ |
10-18-2018, 11:05 PM | #85 | |
Stone Warrior
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Internet
Posts: 830
|
Quote:
I've never watched the International Cut, so I am not sure how that particular version holds up. |
|
10-18-2018, 11:09 PM | #86 |
The Franchise
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: nWo Country
Posts: 27,696
|
Only having seen the Final Cut, and only once, I will say that it's a good movie, but a bit slow. I don't think it lives up to its reputation, necessarily, but then again nothing really does. I can see how some people might be disappointed with it.
Like I've heard a lot of people go into it and come out disappointed due to hearing about it's "masterpiece" status for several decades, and then when they see it it's like, "That's it?". That's why I try to remove myself from the hype before experiencing most things; helps me have more realistic expectations. Haven't seen the recent sequel, since again, my wife didn't care for the original and everything I've heard about the new one suggests that it's the kinda movie I really like, and she really hates. But I'll pick it up one of these days and "force" her to watch it in exchange for me sitting through some junk starring Johnny Depp, or something.
__________________
"I left some words quite far from here to be a short reminder... I laid them out in stone, in case they need to last forever..." "But hey... I'm not telling you anything that you don't already know." nWo Tech: The Official Thread Poison of the Technodrome Forums https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxr...awnHgDz1ceDcfA https://theroxxshow.blogspot.com/ |
10-19-2018, 08:51 AM | #87 | |
Thug
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 67
|
Quote:
I personally agree with you on Apocalypse actually. I have a thing where I critically think something is bad, but personally enjoy it. My favorite Wes Anderson movie is The Life Aquatic and until Moonrise Kingdom, it was his worst film. |
|
10-20-2018, 02:58 PM | #88 | |||||
Foot Elite
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,514
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by pferreira; 10-26-2018 at 03:09 PM. |
|||||
10-22-2018, 07:46 PM | #89 |
Mad Scientist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,338
|
|
10-26-2018, 03:07 PM | #90 |
Foot Elite
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,514
|
|
|
|