FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM

LOG IN Forgot Login? Register General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board Search Terms:  Search Within:  topics posts since 2019 2018 posts 2017 posts 2016 posts 2015 posts 2014 posts 2013 posts 2012 posts 2011 posts 2010 posts 2009 posts 2008 posts 2007 posts 2006 posts 2005 posts 2004 posts 2003 posts 2002 posts 2001 posts 2000 posts users  search tips  You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1 2 3      Non-Film Score Discussion: ALIENS, which version do you prefer?    FIRST   PRIOR   1 2 3    NEXT   LAST   Last Post   Posted:   Apr 16, 2019 - 10:21 AM     By:   Nicolai P. Zwar   (Member) The director's cut of KINGDOM OF HEAVEN is spectacular. It ups the quality of that film not only one, but two leagues. I originally saw the theatrical cut of KINGDOM OF HEAVEN and thought it was a good but flawed movie, better than I expected, but still some things just did not work too well. So it was "ok". Then I saw the director's cut and it became a masterpiece, one of the best movies in a long time, so yes, easily not only one but two leagues. I think the worst thing about the movie back then was its odd poster, basically just Orlando Bloom in fighting hero pose, which suggested to me a generic medieval action flick (like there were few at the time, like KING ARTHUR etc.)... when in fact, KINGOM OF HEAVEN is more in league and has more in common with classic Hollywood epics such as EL CID; it needed the length and scope to tell its story properly. It's definitely among the finest and most sincere movies Ridley Scott has made.    Posted:   Jul 5, 2019 - 6:42 PM     By:   danbeck   (Member) ALIENS I prefer the extended cut except for the unnecessary scenes with the parents in the planet. All the other scenes add to the movie IMO.    Posted:   Jul 5, 2019 - 7:32 PM     By:   Last Child   (Member) The Turkish remake. Much better than the Turkish Star Trek.    Posted:   Jul 5, 2019 - 9:32 PM     By:   GoblinScore   (Member) The Turkish remake. Much better than the Turkish Star Trek. E tu??? https://youtu.be/arpH88Mx3z4    Posted:   Jul 6, 2019 - 7:33 AM     By:   Last Child   (Member) Suddenly I'm in the mood for shish kabob. Directors cut was unnecessary....The auto-machine gun sequence was superfluous. Isn't that in both versions? I don't think it's superfluous - just the opposite - but it's my only pet peeve from the movie. You never see the aliens getting shot, like Cameron ran out of money for special effects or didn't want to show the costumes in the bright hallway lighting.    Posted:   Jul 6, 2019 - 8:36 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Suddenly I'm in the mood for shish kabob. Directors cut was unnecessary....The auto-machine gun sequence was superfluous. Isn't that in both versions? I don't think it's superfluous - just the opposite - but it's my only pet peeve from the movie. You never see the aliens getting shot, like Cameron ran out of money for special effects or didn't want to show the costumes in the bright hallway lighting. That's just in the Directors Cut. If I recall we still hadn't gotten a good look at the aliens yet, so it was still building up the tension of the "unseen" terror. If I recall, and again I haven't seen the film in decades, the next scene was when they came busting into the lab and we had our first full frontal attack.    Posted:   Jul 6, 2019 - 9:21 AM     By:   Michael Scorefan   (Member) Theatrical version by several country miles. Of course, I am a bit of a purist when it comes to director's cuts/expanded editions. The extra scenes have to add genuine value, and I did not feel like the director's cut to Aliens really added anything that provided any real value. For the most part, I have found that the producers/editors/directors got it right the first time.    Posted:   Jul 6, 2019 - 9:26 AM     By:   Octoberman   (Member) Director's Cut for me. The theatrical cut sometimes feels like the film version of typing in all caps. I don't always prefer that a film races along at a breathless, breakneck pace. Sometimes there has to be some slower parts to balance out the fast parts--the presence of one enhances the other and vice-versa. I agree that the whole parental prologue bit seemed a weird fit--almost like it was from a different film. But on the other hand, I'd bet that if one looks closely enough, similar instances could be found in all the rest of Cameron's films.    Posted:   Jul 6, 2019 - 1:17 PM     By:   Last Child   (Member) In the 1970s some contemporary movies like JAWS had cut scenes added back in for television. You didn't really notice the expansion because it was a year or two after you'd seen it in the cinema, and there was no home video at the time. By the time home video became mainstream and the theatrical JAWS was available, it now seemed incomplete with some awkward edits compared to the TV version. Similarly, I was accustomed to the vinyl re-recorded soundtrack and hearing the OST on CD took awhile to accept. Without personal copies of a movie or music, I'm not sure how much people would really care about minor changes.    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 10:51 AM     By:   BornOfAJackal   (Member) James Cameron got the whole modern-day "special cut" going with those early-90's LaserDisc-only cuts of The Abyss and Aliens. I both cases, I prefer the original theatrical cuts, while being very glad to have expanded cut options.    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 11:20 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Cut scenes are fine as extra features but shouldn't be reinserted into these films. IMHO.    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 12:04 PM     By:   Last Child   (Member) The adverts for director's cut of STAR TREK:TMP touted added scenes, implying it would be even longer. It's like a doctor telling you to eat a banana when you're constipated.    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 5:02 PM     By:   Jeyl   (Member) Special Edition all the way. I just can't watch any version of the movie that doesn't have the Ripley/Hicks exchange near the end. Plus more scenes with Hudson is always fun.    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 8:28 PM     By:   gmontag451   (Member) I enjoy watching the extended version, although I consider the theatrical version to be far superior. I just like spending more time with the characters. If I were introducing someone to the film for the first time, hands down I’d choose the theatrical cut. The scenes on LV426 prior to the infestation were interesting but a bit cringe-inducing to me. I’m glad that Cameron considers his extended versions (other than The Abyss) to be interesting excercises rather than replacements, and that both versions remain readily available (unlike such films as the Star Wars trilogy or Dances with Wolves).    Posted:   Jul 7, 2019 - 9:23 PM     By:   Solium   (Member) The adverts for director's cut of STAR TREK:TMP touted added scenes, implying it would be even longer. It's like a doctor telling you to eat a banana when you're constipated. It did have "added scenes" both stuff cut from the final film and new CGI. They never implied it would be longer. From my memory it was well known some stuff would be added and other stuff would be omitted. Thus the Directors Cut.    Posted:   Jul 9, 2019 - 7:55 AM     By:   Mr Greg   (Member) Special Edition any day of the week....it feels more epic to me, and despite some (obvious) padding it feels tighter and a more visceral experience all round. I haven't watched the Theatrical edition since the VHS of the SE came out (1993/94 I think?) Slightly OT, anyone else caught up with Dirk Maggs's adaptation of William Gibson's Alien III on Audible? It is superb....and stars Lance Henriksen and Michael Beihn.    Posted:   Jul 9, 2019 - 10:34 AM     By:   Ado   (Member) The adverts for director's cut of STAR TREK:TMP touted added scenes, implying it would be even longer. It's like a doctor telling you to eat a banana when you're constipated. Yeah, Directors cut is actually shorter, and inferior for me. If you can find it, the old ABC TV version was interesting, 2 hours 23 minutes, 11 minutes longer. The most interesting part of this is when Kirk leaves the ship to get Spock, you can see exposed frameworks and unfinished set for the underside part of the Enterprise disc, airlock door area.    Posted:   Jul 9, 2019 - 4:42 PM     By:   gmontag451   (Member) If you can find it, the old ABC TV version was interesting, 2 hours 23 minutes, 11 minutes longer. The most interesting part of this is when Kirk leaves the ship to get Spock, you can see exposed frameworks and unfinished set for the underside part of the Enterprise disc, airlock door area. This is the version I had on VHS and how I first discovered STTMP. Accidentally gave it away with my old VCR. I had always hoped it would come out on DVD or BD but it looks like those days are long gone.    Posted:   Jul 9, 2019 - 5:27 PM     By:   Last Child   (Member) The adverts for director's cut of STAR TREK:TMP touted added scenes, implying it would be even longer. It's like a doctor telling you to eat a banana when you're constipated. It did have "added scenes" both stuff cut from the final film and new CGI. They never implied it would be longer. From my memory it was well known some stuff would be added and other stuff would be omitted. Thus the Directors Cut. Wtf, "Added scenes" by definition implies it's longer. If you knew something the advert didn't say, that's really beside the point. Even more ridiculous is saying you don't like added scenes but coming to the rescue of this well-known boring flick for having added scenes. Maybe the original played better on network TV because there were commercial breaks and you could pretend to walk out of the film, whereas most of us had to sit through it in the theater.    Posted:   Jul 9, 2019 - 8:50 PM     By:   Solium   (Member) The adverts for director's cut of STAR TREK:TMP touted added scenes, implying it would be even longer. It's like a doctor telling you to eat a banana when you're constipated. Yeah, Directors cut is actually shorter, and inferior for me. If you can find it, the old ABC TV version was interesting, 2 hours 23 minutes, 11 minutes longer. The most interesting part of this is when Kirk leaves the ship to get Spock, you can see exposed frameworks and unfinished set for the underside part of the Enterprise disc, airlock door area. I remember that scene and my jaw almost hit the floor. I couldn't believe they put an unfinished scene that obviously needed a matte painting to finish the shot back into the film.     Non-Film Score Discussion: ALIENS, which version do you prefer?    << < 1 2 3  > >>  Go to page:  1 2 3   First Post    General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1 2 3

© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved. Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.