this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
35 points (87.2% liked)
movies
1687 readers
145 users here now
Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.
A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome
- Discussion threads to discuss about a specific movie or show
- Weekly threads: what have you been watching lately?
- Trailers
- Posters
- Retrospectives
- Should I watch?
Related communities:
Show communities:
Discussion communities:
RULES
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.
2024 discussion threads
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It’s one thing to have a director’s cut because of studio meddling of the theatrical release, and it’s another to have one despite the director having creative control of both versions. What’s the point? Cash grab? A way to make an excuse if the film bombs? It’s not like his director’s cuts are any better. They’re meh at best.
Take Villenueve’s films. They don’t have director’s cuts because per him, the theatrical version IS the director’s cut and his vision of the film.
The original versions of Rebel Moon were a 4 hour snooze fest. I’m not wasting my time watching yet another 4 hours (or longer) of the same film that likely is the same quality.
In this case he wanted to do an R rated film but the studio wanted PG13. They agreed that the first release would be PG13 he would also get to make his R rated cut for later release.