Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by Analog Scott (A) on November 22, 2007 at 06:25:17

In Reply to: RE: What a great example of a guy in denial. Read the quote, again. posted by tinear on November 20, 2007 at 08:45:50

>>The point is Scott preferred the "producers' cut.">>

No I didn't. I vastly preffered Cameron's cut.


>> It matters not what's in the original script: is it sacrosanct?>>

Is it sacrosanct? No. Does it matter? Hell yes. As someone who read the script of Aliens, worked on it and saw both the commercial release and Cameron's cut the superiority of Cameron's cut was painfully obvious. The reasons for the commerical cut being what it was also was painfully obvious. They wanted a shorte movie.


>> The discussion is whether or not all these directors' cuts are somehow better, more authentic.>>

Indeed. Cameron's cut was both. as is so often the case.


>> Think of hundreds of great films... now picture them extended almost indefinitely to three, four, five hours.>>

I am sorry if you have too short an attention span.


>> That's why God invented the producer.>.

If ever i needed proof positive that you have absolutely no connection with the inner workings of film making that was it.

>> You may also wish to consider what the work of an editor is at a publishing house.>>

Why? I am already quite intimately familiar with how things work in film.