In Reply to: A word on "Director's cut," in general: posted by tinear on November 18, 2007 at 06:32:42:
...When I saw its theatrical release, it came in around the ~2 or so hour range, and although I appreciated Cosner's vision, I didn't enjoy the film until missing footage was included years later.
Happens to other films as well -- an seemingly unfinished rush to release, then proper tidying up later after some time to mull has passed.
Time viewing a film seems to pass quickly when a long story is well told, rather than a shorter rush to print that leaves an audience confused.
Perhaps that is why I generally seek out the "director's, or "restored" cut when available -- the whole shebang so to speak.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Brings to mind "Waterworld"... - mpathus 21:02:42 11/20/07 (2)
- RE: Brings to mind "Waterworld"... - rico 02:09:50 11/21/07 (1)
- Perfect. ~t - mpathus 15:48:52 11/21/07 (0)