Do Director's Cuts / Unrated Editions Take Advantage Of Us?

[Marcusarilius]

OK, so every highly sought after movie has to be the Director's cut or Unrated edition. Granted, those are for me too.

My question is this: Is this just a gimmick that studios now use excessively to make us believe we are getting something special and fall into their trap of purchasing a movie we may not have in the first place or double dipping on Director's cut? Do all director's cuts actually get supervised and approved by the directors to give us their unique perspective of the film they made, but were unable to release the version they intended to in theaters due to studio control?

Unrated Editions: Are these also just studio ploys for increased sales. Again, purchasing a movie we may not have in the first place or double dipping on films we already own?

Over blu-ray time, we will see these same business practices come into play. Different movie viewing format, same studios. What do you think? Are these ultimately worth it to you or do you feel we are being manipulated from time to time. What are your thoughts Hobson?

[BirdManJr]

Well one thing i think about is...Do you really buy that movie because it says directors cut...or unrated...I mean if you was already going to buy the movie...and saw the directors cut...Im sure you would just pick that one up over the normal version....But the thing is..I dont walk in a store...see a movie i had no intentions of buying....See it says directors cut...And that make me buy it......I feel like they put that just to add a lil to it...But not to sway your judgement...Your going to buy what you want....Well thats the way i go about it...

And the only way i would buy again would be....if i had the normal dvd and wanted it in blu ray....or for example...if you had the dvd version of i am legend and wanted the alternate ending then you would buy the blu ray version....I wouldnt double dip a movie that i thought was ok....Only a movie that i loved...Then i would feel like even buying twice i got my moneys worth....

[WickyWoo]

My question is this: Is this just a gimmick that studios now use excessively to make us believe we are getting something special and fall into their trap of purchasing a movie we may not have in the first place or double dipping on Director's cut? Do all director's cuts actually get supervised and approved by the directors to give us their unique perspective of the film they made, but were unable to release the version they intended to in theaters due to studio control?

Unrated Editions: Are these also just studio ploys for increased sales. Again, purchasing a movie we may not have in the first place or double dipping on films we already own?

Yes to both

Maybe one in five is an actual restored version

[Marcusarilius]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

Yes to both

Maybe one in five is an actual restored version

Thanks Wicky. I have been more than pleased with Blade Runner: the final cut and LOTRs extended versions, and Jim Cameron's director's cuts always added to his movies like no others before him.

Granted, there are legitimate improved movie re-cuttings to add to the films, but the "gimmick" has worn off a bit with practically every movie at some point being released with an "extended, unrated" version.

[Heart_Collector]

That's exactly why; because some of us are impulsive enough to buy straight off, then double-dip for five minutes of bonus footage.

That reminds me of a question I've had for a little bit: Since many of us are waiting for Star Wars and LOTR BD. Are they going to try the same crap, even though the extended cuts (of LOTR, anyway) are already well established? Bare-Bones initial release, just to see if BD fans are as unsophisticated as DVD consumers?

[Marquoz]

I always wait to see if they will release an extended version if there's not one originally done. Best example is LOTR. A lot of people bought the vanilla version the day it came out, then 2-3 weeks later there was the extended edition, and they went out and bought a 2nd version. I refuse to buy something unless it's extended or uncut if there's any hint of the newer version coming out soon.

[Heart&Soul]

I want what the director made.

[DeathByAsh'aman]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

I always wait to see if they will release an extended version if there's not one originally done. Best example is LOTR. A lot of people bought the vanilla version the day it came out, then 2-3 weeks later there was the extended edition, and they went out and bought a 2nd version. I refuse to buy something unless it's extended or uncut if there's any hint of the newer version coming out soon.

Same here. I waited for a little while even after the extended versions of LOTR came out just to make sure. Although i have to admit that being a fantasy/sci fi fan i did pick up the versions with the different cases. Thats the only time Ive ever double dipped on DVDs.

[Marcusarilius]

Originally Posted by DeathByAsh'aman

Same here. I waited for a little while even after the extended versions of LOTR came out just to make sure. Although i have to admit that being a fantasy/sci fi fan i did pick up the versions with the different cases. Thats the only time Ive ever double dipped on DVDs.

I learned my lesson with the LOTR movies. Double dipped as I had no idea that extended versions were waiting in the wings.

I won't be buying them on BD if they initially release only the theatrical cuttings.

[DeathByAsh'aman]

+1 Marcusarilius.

Im gonna wait for the extened versions with all the extras before i triple dip.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Marcusarilius

I learned my lesson with the LOTR movies. Double dipped as I had no idea that extended versions were waiting in the wings.

I won't be buying them on BD if they initially release only the theatrical cuttings.

You really didn't know? It was all over the web before the release, which is why I was so amused people ended up double dipping.

[Marcusarilius]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

You really didn't know? It was all over the web before the release, which is why I was so amused people ended up double dipping.

When I first purchased the movies, no. I didn't know. I don't check the web for every movie (especially back then) to see if an extended version might be possible in the future. I still don't. Do you? Does any of us know for sure if the movies we buy today on BD will have extended, Director's cuts or Unrated versions coming in the future?

[Blinkman987]

I think the new Harold and Kumar addressed it well- unrated, extended, and remastered. Yeah, they think the whole process is bullshit and therefore made a joke out of it.

When a movie is released and then does interviews years later- like Blade Runner- I can understand. When a movie is not properly released, like Back to the Future, and someone wants to do a remaster and re-release, I understand. When Superbad has 3+ skus at release, I call bullshit.

[LynxFX]

I want what was released in the theaters first and foremost. Very few "director's cuts" actually make the movie better and is just added fluff that was cut out for good reason. Then there are some that completely change the entire movie, like Payback. I can't even watch the director's cut of that, and sadly I can't watch the theatrical either since they never bothered to release that version on Blu-ray.

If the Studios keep insisting on using this marketing ploy then they better make the effort to do it via seemless branching. That way if we don't like the extended or director's cut, we always have the version that is responsible for us purchasing the movie in the first place. I rarely buy movies sight unseen and with some of these cuts, they are making old favorites into questionable purchases.

[DaleDark]

Director's and extended cuts in general seem to be worth the bucks cuz they tend to give you a different experience from the theatrical release (hell, the director's cut of Daredevil was significantly different). Having said that I must call shenanigans on the use of "Unrated". For those of us who remember the video market of the 80s, unrated used to mean something (too gory to get an R rating to be specific). Now a days, they slap it on an otherwise PG-13 rated movie that contains more than 1 f-bomb (I'm looking at you, Dodgeball). Now if a movie is released as both a theatrical and unrated version, I will lean towards the unrated version, but I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm not getting much extra (last one that did the unrated tag justice was The Devil's Rejects).

[Heart_Collector]

Originally Posted by DaleDark

Director's and extended cuts in general seem to be worth the bucks cuz they tend to give you a different experience from the theatrical release (hell, the director's cut of Daredevil was significantly different). Having said that I must call shenanigans on the use of "Unrated". For those of us who remember the video market of the 80s, unrated used to mean something (too gory to get an R rating to be specific). Now a days, they slap it on an otherwise PG-13 rated movie that contains more than 1 f-bomb (I'm looking at you, Dodgeball). Now if a movie is released as both a theatrical and unrated version, I will lean towards the unrated version, but I've resigned myself to the fact that I'm not getting much extra (last one that did the unrated tag justice was The Devil's Rejects).

Daredevil was one instance of the Directors cut being considerably better than the theatrical. I haven't seen the theatrical of RZ's Halloween, but the Directors cut was awesome. My primary hope is studios will take advantage of BD's storage capacity, and, if anything, just put the different versions together. Probably a pipe-dream, though.

[DaleDark]

Originally Posted by Heart_Collector

Daredevil was one instance of the Directors cut being considerably better than the theatrical. I haven't seen the theatrical of RZ's Halloween, but the Directors cut was awesome. My primary hope is studios will take advantage of BD's storage capacity, and, if anything, just put the different versions together. Probably a pipe-dream, though.

The only one I can think of where the theatrical version is better would be Grindhouse, only because the overall experience of watching both films w/ all the trailers is what made Grindhouse so special. Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the extended cuts of both Death Proof and Planet Terror, but its just not the same vibe.

P.S.: I only like the theatrical cut of RZ's Halloween better cuz it has Bill Moseley, Tom Towles, and Leslie Easterbrook in it.

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Marcusarilius

When I first purchased the movies, no. I didn't know. I don't check the web for every movie (especially back then) to see if an extended version might be possible in the future. I still don't. Do you? Does any of us know for sure if the movies we buy today on BD will have extended, Director's cuts or Unrated versions coming in the future?

I usually do a decent check before I purchase a movie, especially one that hopefully will get something like that. I waited on AVP to see if they would release an R rated version since I heard a ton of rumors. Unforunately didn't seem to pan out ... yet. I just hate getting a movie then 2 months later seeing one with extras and having to waste money on it.

[Turnda643]

For me, I like the behind the scenes footage. I like to see the makings and all that "on location" stuff. But I also only double-dip if I truely like/love that film. I have on dvd many SE, DC's, & Unrated versions that I will not re-buy. But then again, I have bought "Black Hawk Down" 4 times. From reg. DVD to DVD Extended Cut to BD to the 3 disc DVD Deluxe Edition just 2 weeks ago. Call me stupid, but if you like it, you want it, ........... BUY IT !!!!

[diamondfoxxx]

Of course it's a gimmick. Money comes first for studios. I thought everybody knew that already?