Feature Presentation with or without Deleted Scenes?

[djluis2k6]

Now I'm all for viewing the movie as is in theater, but does anyone think that releasing a movie with the deleted scenes back into the feature presentation would be a bad move?

[tacoreed]

If scenes were deleted for length or content and the director wanted the scenes in the movie, I prefer to leave them in, case in point LOTR extended versions.

If the scenes were cut because they are useless and add nothing to the movie they should be left as extras.

I voted to keep them in because I usually prefer the uncut versions of movies over the cut version.

[Ernest Rister]

It depends. Some films are measurably improved by the addition of scenes cut from the film, some films are measurably weakened by their inclusion. Kevin Costner's Dances With Wolves is harmed by the inclusion of the deleted scenes because the audience knows more than Dunbar (we see everything before he does -- the rebellion at the fort, the event leading to the suicide attempt of Stands With a Fist, etc.). The original cut of Dances With Wolves keeps the audience's perspective with Dunbar, and so, the film experience is immesaurably superior. The extended cut is like someone telling you the spoilers to plot moments you haven't been presented with yet. The original cut keeps its mouth shut and lets you try to figure things out yourself.

Then again, you have films that were decimated after early premieres, like The Happiest Millionaire or Once Upon a Time in America -- these really can't survive without their original cuts.

And then you get to the whole Spielberg/Cameron era, where filmmakers continued to fiddle with their films after release.

So, to be obvious, the question you pose has to be addressed film by film. There is no blanket answer.