Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by sjb (A) on November 18, 2007 at 09:01:40

In Reply to: RE: A word on "Director's cut," in general: posted by tinear on November 18, 2007 at 06:32:42

One, is that yes, they are often bloated attempts to get more revenue out of a film and/or appease an over-inflated ego but the way the movie industry works is that after a film is shot the director gets 10 weeks (give or take) with the editor (or editors) to make the director's cut. Then the studio steps in to shape it into their cut (meaning what's going to sell). If the director has clout he or she will still be very invloved at this point and have varying degrees of influence on the final cut but it's not uncommon for the studio to take more and more control of a movie until the director feels that his or her original cut was the best version and they fight to have that version released down the line.

Some directors simply fight to have and maintain creative control and believe that the movie they put out IS the best use of the footage/best way to tell the story and don't even include things like deleted scenes on DVD's.

The same is true even in commercials but usually in reverse. The ad agency will oversee the for air version and then the director will come and try to get the most out of the footage so that the air version'll be 30 seconds but the directors cut will be 46 seconds and will be what the director puts on his or her reel. And, as with movies, sometimes it's the better version and sometimes it's a bloated ego stroke.

"You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."