The Abyss: Special Edition

[rolfw]

A few added scenes, but what a difference it made, as they were pretty essential scenes to the story line.

I liked the edited version, but wish I'd seen this one first.:

[spiney]

Haven't seen that, but, in my experience, the original cut for commercial distribution is usually "about right", with the later "director's cut" being a more indulgent and less satisfying film. At least, that's what I felt about Close Encounters, Blade Runner, Star Wars, etc ......

[rolfw]

I can honestly say that I preferred the director's cut versions of Close Encounters and Blade Runner, but I can understand why some audiences may not have.

The extra scenes in The Abyss completely changed the story, in my mind, for the better.

[Channel Hopper]

Did the alien ship close up (ala venus fly trap) in the Directors Cut ?

[rolfw]

No, there was a big scene where they sent tidal waves towards the major coastlines of the big cities and a lot more.

[spiney]

Well, that sounds interesting. However, without the added on commentry, Blade Runner was fairly incoherent, and the added bit at the end of Close Encounters - inside the spaceship - was squirmingly embassasingly silly.

[BarMoo]

No, there was a big scene where they sent tidal waves towards the major coastlines of the big cities and a lot more.

Must look into that rolf. Tidal waves, sounds fun.

Only Directors Cut where I saw a total different angle of events was Aliens and Brazil. [read: two different films, not alien vs brazil]

.

[spiney]

The only one I'd really like to see is Private Life Of Sherlock Holmes, a "butchered" masterpiece! Apparently, the recent DVD edition is "partially restored", but still not the complete film.

[Channel Hopper]

The (original ) Wicker Man had some 20 minutes left on the cutting room floor.

[BarMoo]

Well, if you ask me, they released the wrong piece of film. I think I could handle Wicker Man in 20mins.

I saw the Abyss Special Edition in the DVD rental store on Wednesday? and the info didn't give much away as to whether it extended. Mind, I had my eye on 'Running Scared' (which turned out to be the best film I have seen this year.

.

[Saturlight]

A few added scenes, but what a difference it made, as they were pretty essential scenes to the story line.

I liked the edited version, but wish I'd seen this one first.:

Rolfw, do you reckon they DELIBERATELY release movies half-cut (not drunk!) then put the finished film together with the added scenes.

It irritates me to think I am watching a film with so many cuts. I think the one with the most "put back" was the horror flick, The Exorcist...

Can anyone confirm this?

[rolfw]

I've got the Exorcist full version on DVD, but haven't watched it yet, must get around to it.

I think that the main reason for cutting scenes is that the average cinema goer cannot handle sitting in one spot for more than two hours. I have seen many a film which could have been dramatically improved be a few extra plot and character developing scenes.

[Saturlight]

Rolf, I saw the "put back" version of The Exorcist, and whilst it's not my favourite horror - I prefer The Omen (1976) movie, it's certainly a very different film at both ends. There's a good 40 minutes extra at the front, and added bits in the middle and end.

It's an epic when viewed like that and certainly gives weight to your view that some people may get bored in the cinema watching a movie for 4 hours!

[spiney]

A film has lots more footage than you ever see! The job of film editing is then to assemble - somehow - into a coherent story.

The distributors have a big effect on what the final cut looks like! For example, langauge and scenes which might take a film from PG to X certifcate can very significantly affect the financial returns.

[BarMoo]

That, and the Producers of the film who generally poke their noses in (for reasons pretty obvious). [read: its their money]

Test screenings also have a major role too these days.

Distributors? Well, they distribute. Me thinks you mean the censor, for all things clasification: the BBFC in the UK's case.

Classic case of Producers with nose's is ALIENS. Ripping out Ripleys loving mother nonsense and the planet backstory. Mind, I like both versions

.

[Saturlight]

A film has lots more footage than you ever see! The job of film editing is then to assemble - somehow - into a coherent story.

The distributors have a big effect on what the final cut looks like! For example, langauge and scenes which might take a film from PG to X certifcate can very significantly affect the financial returns.

Spiney, you're so logical.

[BarMoo]

spiney is a walking wiki - but we love him for it [insert emoticon here] - but do not include the bracketed text; i.e., just the emoticon.

.

[spiney]

Oh dear!

I woz givin' loadsa Wiki links only cos it seems the best general info source! However, Rolf has given good reasons not to do that, which I understand and entirely accept, so will only do it occasionally (if very important) from now on.

Regarding Wicker Man, they found nearly all the lost stuff, minus about 2 mins I think, and at first showed it on tv with around 10 mins added before what had previously been the credits (ie, plane taking off from water ...). But, this does mess up the film a fair bit, and the latest showings now miss most of this out again, although some new stuff is still retained further in (eg, Chris Lee explaining at length why he prefers slugs to humans ....). I imagine the DVD sets would include everything.

Anyone seen new version yet?

[Saturlight]

Spiney is the nearest person we have known to Mr Spock...I mean that as a compliment.

BTW, it's Mr Spock, not Dr Spock. It was Dr McCoy, and never Mr McCoy. I bet Spiney knew that.