In Reply to: he actually couldn't be more wrong posted by Analog Scott on November 19, 2007 at 05:07:07:
from wikipedia which nicely mentions, as you do, "Alien."
"from wiki, notice it specifically mentions your example of "Alien."
The article, of course, doesn't mention the fact that many directors throw up a lot of mud on the wall, knowing cuts to shorten definitely will be made. They never expect or want all that muck ever to be seen.
Anyhow, I felt your misinformation had to be corrected, nothing personal:
Traditionally, the "director's cut" is not, by definition, the director's ideal or preferred cut. The editing process of a film is broken into three basic stages: First is the editor's cut ("rough cut"), which matches the script without any reductions. Second, the director's cut, which is reduced from the rough cut, according to the director's tastes. Third is the final cut, which actually gets released or broadcast. It is often the case that a director approves of the final cut, and even prefers it to the so-called earlier "director's cut." The director's cut may include unsatisfactory takes, a preliminary soundtrack, a lack of desired pick-up shots etc, which the director wouldn't like to be shown.
For example, the director's cut of Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid was 122 minutes long. It was then trimmed to the final/released cut of 105 minutes. Although not complete or refined to his satisfaction, director Sam Peckinpah still preferred the director's cut, as it was more inclusive and thorough than the 105-minute cut. The restored cut, at 115 minutes, is thus not the traditional "director's cut," but is closest to the director's preferred version, as it was reconstructed based on Pekinpah's notes, and according to his style in general. In this case, the director's cut and the director's ideal preferred cut are distinctly separate versions.
Considering this definition, "Alien: The Director's Cut," for example, is simply a misuse of the phrase. As Ridley Scott explains in the DVD insert, the 2003 cut of Alien was created at the request of 20th Century Fox, who wanted to re-release Alien in a form that was somehow altered or enhanced. Scott agreed, and settled on making an alternate cut of the film. He describes it simply as a second version that he is also satisfied with, even though the original released cut is still his preferred version."
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Not so fast... - tinear 12:06:15 11/19/07 (31)
- Um I said Aliens not Alien. - Analog Scott 17:57:03 11/19/07 (30)
- What a great example of a guy in denial. Read the quote, again. - tinear 08:45:50 11/20/07 (29)
- dude you aren't even making sense - Analog Scott 06:25:17 11/22/07 (2)
- RIDLEY Scott, analog. Jeesh. Do you understand context? nnt - tinear 15:30:25 11/23/07 (1)
- Yes. I said akiens was an example. James Cameron directed Aliens - Analog Scott 09:35:29 11/24/07 (0)
- RE: What a great example of a guy in denial. Read the quote, again. - jamesgarvin 12:35:36 11/20/07 (25)
- RE: Reeve's footage - rico 02:12:49 11/21/07 (0)
- Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - tinear 13:09:22 11/20/07 (23)
- man you really are clueless - Analog Scott 06:31:20 11/22/07 (0)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - jamesgarvin 14:19:39 11/20/07 (21)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Peter H-son 22:05:58 11/21/07 (20)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - jamesgarvin 09:10:46 11/24/07 (12)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Peter H-son 13:56:13 11/24/07 (10)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Analog Scott 14:08:48 11/24/07 (9)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Peter H-son 15:42:40 11/24/07 (8)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Analog Scott 16:34:43 11/24/07 (7)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Peter H-son 16:55:27 11/24/07 (6)
- God yet another idiot - Analog Scott 18:07:47 11/24/07 (5)
- RE: God yet another idiot - Peter H-son 18:50:07 11/24/07 (4)
- i have no problem with people disagreeing with me - Analog Scott 18:57:31 11/24/07 (3)
- RE: i have no problem with people disagreeing with me - Peter H-son 06:59:52 11/25/07 (2)
- RE: i have no problem with people disagreeing with me - Analog Scott 08:23:51 11/25/07 (1)
- RE: i have no problem with people disagreeing with me - Peter H-son 10:06:59 11/25/07 (0)
- RE: Perhaps it doesn't occur to you and the other guy that - Analog Scott 09:43:31 11/24/07 (0)
- I'm pretty sure Kubrick did - Analog Scott 06:38:26 11/22/07 (6)
- Blockbusters "suck" because of the general subject matter: no - tinear 15:36:59 11/23/07 (4)
- RE: Blockbusters "suck" because of the general subject matter: no - Analog Scott 09:55:01 11/24/07 (3)
- Directors' cuts of Larry of A or Godfather? They also had - tinear 14:35:38 11/24/07 (1)
- RE: Directors' cuts of Larry of A or Godfather? They also had - Analog Scott 16:37:11 11/24/07 (0)
- The guys sits on the beach, does not work, lives off his wife's dime, and you are only on "pulp?" Idiot.nt - jamesgarvin 10:22:30 11/24/07 (0)
- RE: I'm pretty sure Kubrick did - Peter H-son 07:15:22 11/22/07 (0)