Amadeus 4K UHD (1984) (40th Anniversary Edition) Feb 25

[Maggot]

Fantastic film! Hopefully Warner Brothers gives us "Dangerous Liaisons" in 4K as well down the road sometime too!

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

wouldn't it technically be a requirement by the DGA to include it or something?

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case

Not likely.

[geomon]

YES! Day one, baby!

[sidetracked1]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

wouldn't it technically be a requirement by the DGA to include it or something?

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case

I'm a DGA member and I'm 99% sure there is no such rule. The studio owns the film, and no director is promised under basic guild rules that their preferred cut will ever be released - in theaters or in any home release version.

That said it's not impossible that Forman - as an extremely successful director - had some version of final cut in his own specific contract, in which case that might extend to home video versions. It would all be in the wording. Contracts for films made in 1984 often didn't address home video controls in much detail, and I know there have been battles about how theatrical artistic contractual control relates to control in later media...

It's also possible the studio would do it even if they didn't have to - both as a selling point, and to look as though they were being respectful of Forman's wishes...

[JohnCarpenterFan]

Originally Posted by sidetracked1

I'm a DGA member and I'm 99% sure there is no such rule. The studio owns the film, and no director is promised under basic guild rules that their preferred cut will ever be released - in theaters or in any home release version.

That said it's not impossible that Forman - as an extremely successful director - had some version of final cut in his own specific contract, in which case that might extend to home video versions. It would all be in the wording. Contracts for films made in 1984 often didn't address home video controls in much detail, and I know there have been battles about how theatrical artistic contractual control relates to control in later media...

It's also possible the studio would do it even if they didn't have to - both as a selling point, and to look as though they were being respectful of Forman's wishes...

Yeah, if there was such a stipulation then that would be a separate agreement with the studio. However I'm not sure if the "Director's Cut" was actually Forman's preferred cut. He stated around the time of the re-release that the theatrical cut wasn't compromised and he only started to think about doing a longer cut when he heard that a remastered DVD release was in the works. This was back in 2002 which was of course when lots of films were being altered and re-released as "director's cuts" even if they weren't so and the directors actually preferred the theatrical cuts.

That said, if the UHD is theatrical only then I wouldn't be surprised if there was an accompanying Blu-ray of the Director's Cut included in the package. I just can't imagine its inclusion being some sort of requirement as per DGA rules.

Link to the Forman interview: https://www.avclub.com/milos-forman-1798208216

[sidetracked1]

Originally Posted by JohnCarpenterFan

Yeah, if there was such a stipulation then that would be a separate agreement with the studio. However I'm not sure if the "Director's Cut" was actually Forman's preferred cut. He stated around the time of the re-release that the theatrical cut wasn't compromised and he only started to think about doing a longer cut when he heard that a remastered DVD release was in the works. This was back in 2002 which was of course when lots of films were being altered and re-released as "director's cuts" even if they weren't so and the directors actually preferred the theatrical cuts.

That said, if the UHD is theatrical only then I wouldn't be surprised if there was an accompanying Blu-ray of the Director's Cut included in the package. I just can't imagine its inclusion being some sort of requirement as per DGA rules.

Link to the Forman interview: https://www.avclub.com/milos-forman-1798208216

Thanks for the interview link. That was pretty interesting!

[heineken]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

wouldn't it technically be a requirement by the DGA to include it or something?

I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case

The Blu-ray better have the theatrical, otherwise no buy. I will pirate the movie instead.

[oh_riginal]

Originally Posted by heineken

The Blu-ray better have the theatrical, otherwise no buy. I will pirate the movie instead.

I only saw this movie for the first time last year, and it was a fanmade preservation of the Theatrical Cut. What is the major difference between the two cuts?

I'm glad I waited to watch it, as I'm pretty sure my younger self may not have appreciated it at all.

[SpacemanDoug]

Originally Posted by sidetracked1

I'm a DGA member and I'm 99% sure there is no such rule. The studio owns the film, and no director is promised under basic guild rules that their preferred cut will ever be released - in theaters or in any home release version.

That said it's not impossible that Forman - as an extremely successful director - had some version of final cut in his own specific contract, in which case that might extend to home video versions. It would all be in the wording. Contracts for films made in 1984 often didn't address home video controls in much detail, and I know there have been battles about how theatrical artistic contractual control relates to control in later media...

It's also possible the studio would do it even if they didn't have to - both as a selling point, and to look as though they were being respectful of Forman's wishes...

I only assumed that because I thought there was some rule where after a director died home video releases would have to include the cut he preferred on future home video releases or something, but I guess I was wrong.

Is there also such a thing as a "do not alter" clause after a director dies?

[sidetracked1]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

I only assumed that because I thought there was some rule where after a director died home video releases would have to include the cut he preferred on future home video releases or something, but I guess I was wrong.

Is there also such a thing as a "do not alter" clause after a director dies?

I've been a director since the 1980s and I've never heard of either of those rules/clauses, so I'd highly doubt it.

But then, I do also have my occasional moments of amazing ignorance, so I'd say I sincerely believe that isn't the case, but nothing's impossible.

[whiteberry]

Originally Posted by oh_riginal

What is the major difference between the two cuts?

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=2234

[SpacemanDoug]

Originally Posted by sidetracked1

I've been a director since the 1980s and I've never heard of either of those rules/clauses, so I'd highly doubt it.

But then, I do also have my occasional moments of amazing ignorance, so I'd say I sincerely believe that isn't the case, but nothing's impossible.

I was mostly asking because I do know powerful directors can block releases of certain cuts of movies and so I was wondering if they'd be able to do anything for after they died

thanks for your info though

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by oh_riginal

I only saw this movie for the first time last year, and it was a fanmade preservation of the Theatrical Cut. What is the major difference between the two cuts?

VERY MILD SPOILERS AHEAD, OBVIOUSLY

The extended cut makes the following changes (all of them through added scenes):

- it adds 20 minutes of new material, which throws off the balance of the film completely, to me.

- it entirely undermines the core thematic of the film. The protagonist isn't Mozart, it's Salieri, and the antagonist isn't Mozart either, it's God - thus the film's title being Mozart's middle name, Amadeus (beloved of God). The core conflict is Salieri's fury with God for bestowing such artistic gifts on a man he sees as a sex-crazed infant, while he's pious and chaste and worshipful, Salieri is cursed to be the only one able to recognize Mozart's gifts, but to be without those gifts himself. Thus, Salieri declares war on God and vows to destroy Mozart as his revenge on God. It's absolutely Shakespearean. In the extended cut, however, there are added scenes where Salieri is lecherous toward both Mozart's wife and the female singer in the opera, totally altering that dynamic, and making his protestations of chastity and moral purity into total lies.

- it undercuts the character of Mozart's wife. In the theatrical cut, she doesn't like Salieri showing up at their house in the final portion because she can subtly sense that he's destroying her husband, when nobody else can, not even Mozart. With the added scene in the extended cut where Salieri tries to seduce her earlier, she's now kicking him out more because of that, and not out of selfless love for her husband.

[vinvanveen]

I don’t think, in that scene, that Salieri was lusting after Constanze; I think he wanted to humiliate her.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by vinvanveen

I don’t think, in that scene, that Salieri was lusting after Constanze; I think he wanted to humiliate her.

Either way, it undercuts his moral purity, which is the core of his reason for being angry with God and setting the plot into motion.

[sidetracked1]

Originally Posted by SpacemanDoug

I was mostly asking because I do know powerful directors can block releases of certain cuts of movies and so I was wondering if they'd be able to do anything for after they died

thanks for your info though

Ah, but your phrase 'powerful director' sort of changes everything.

Because while there is no DGA rule about these things, that doesn't mean a world famous director like Forman (for example) might not be able to individually negotiate exactly the kind of 'forever' clauses you're talking about. The guild rules are just a base minimum every director gets. How much more a specific director can get written in stone is virtually limitless depending on the director and their clout, and how badly the studio wants them and their project.

[gardengirl1331]

Can't wait for this one!! This and Immortal Beloved were two movies my husband and I loved to watch when we were first dating (we were both in orchestras and bands together in HS).

[sheri1983]

Originally Posted by gardengirl1331

Can't wait for this one!! This and Immortal Beloved were two movies my husband and I loved to watch when we were first dating (we were both in orchestras and bands together in HS).

This is a masterpiece though, Immortal Beloved lacked something not sure what although I still like Beethoven more as a composer. Too bad a patriarch like Bach didn't get a film about his extraordinary life.

[vinvanveen]

Originally Posted by sheri1983

This is a masterpiece though, Immortal Beloved lacked something not sure what although I still like Beethoven more as a composer. Too bad a patriarch like Bach didn't get a film about his extraordinary life.

Try The Chronicles of Anna Magdalena Bach, directed by Jean-Marie Straub & Danièle Huillet (1968).

[meremortal]

Pretty sure I only saw this movie once in like 3rd or 4th grade music class on vhs and remember it being an awesome film.