 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.91.201.174
In Reply to: Yes. posted by Analog Scott on January 4, 2007 at 12:11:56:
What if the directr approves of the "revision"? Do you refuse to watch the Scott Director's cut of "Blade Runner? Or the Coen director's cut of "Blood Simple", How about Kubrick's excising of 19 minutes of ""2001..." AFTER it opened?
Follow Ups:
It really depends on the circumstances. Genuine directors cuts are the real original work as it was made at that time. I am all for these things being released. But when we are talking about directors going back and revising things years after the fact I find it tends to get a bit dodgey. Just look at what Lucas did to his own work with Star Wars. I thought the new version of the Exorcist was interesting along with the discussion of the revisions by Friedkin and Blatty. I found their discussions very enlightning and their revisions to be very thoughtful. In the end I liked the original better. In fact I gained a new and greater appreciation for it. I think studios coming in and modernizing sound tracks for the sake of sales is not much different than colorizing black and white films for the same reason. I'd rather see the original intent. In many cases that would be the revised director's cut. Rarely is it the new surround sound version of a vintage movie.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
