The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966) (50th Anniversary Edition)

[HD Goofnut]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

Nah, the Mann movies have official clearly delineated versions. If you buy the "director's cut" of Last of the Mohicans, it will always be the same cut in any format or region. I am talking about every *single* release, like the 2004 special edition cut of Star Wars is different than the 2010 special edition cut of Star Wars and the 1980 VHS is different than the 1983 one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...rs_re-releases

Well, there are two different director's cuts for The Last of the Mohicans. There is the Director's Expanded Edition (DVD only) and the Director's Definitive Edition (BD and DVD). The theatrical cut exists only on region 2 DVD.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by HD Goofnut

Well, there are two different director's cuts for The Last of the Mohicans. There is the Director's Expanded Edition (DVD only) and the Director's Definitive Edition (BD and DVD). The theatrical cut exists only on region 2 DVD.

Right. And the "Director's Expanded Edition" is always the same cut and the "Director's Definitive Edition" is a different cut than that but will always be the same cut as any other release called the DDE. They're complete distinct and clearly labelled as different.

Manhunter would be a good example, though, that had several semi-official recuts and a DVD that managed to botch both the theatrical and the then-current director's cut, which was later superceded anyway.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by Grethiwha

Meanwhile the US cut 'fails to replicate' the original theatrical cut, only by minutiae, which I wouldn't notice even if I was looking for them.

To try and get us away from the topic of "who was meaner to whom" and back to the topic of the movie, I want to respond a bit more to this.

Earlier in this thread, somebody posted pretty decent proof that the Sergio Leone was heavily involved in the US theatrical cut, that it was not just some thing which was prepared by censors and producers with no input from the director. I hadn't known about that, and it was interesting to read.

But what that means is that Sergio Leone (and his post-production team) felt that it *did* matter for the random shots to be longer. Or for this fade to black to be replaced with a dissolve. I don't pretend to know the reason that he thought it mattered, but it would've been far easier for him to leave those transitions alone (especially if the negative was already cut for the original theatrical version) rather than having an assistant go digging through the trim bin to find the extra frames. He didn't just do that on a whim. A fade to black tends to read as more time passing than a dissolve, as an example. Even if you don't consciously register the changes, they are still there and you'll react differently (albeit, possibly not differently enough to be measurable).

So, yes, I might not spot the difference off-hand between the proper theatrical cut that Leone did work on and this approximation. And yes, they're trivial changes. But they impact the rhythm of the film. It seems strange to me that a month or two back, people were rabidly defending the US theatrical cut as something that Leone had worked on, that it wasn't just some after-thought on the proper cut... and now that that is settled, it turns out that nobody actually cared about the work Leone put in, all they really wanted is a version which omits the extra scenes, and whatever else is done beyond that doesn't matter at all. Like I said, if that's really all people wanted, it seems like you could just fast forward.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

Longer than that, even the DVD is an approximation.

I've held on to the DVD for all this time thinking I was getting the US cut, so if the Kino ends up close to that then I'm good. Ignorance, bliss, etc.

[MassiveMovieBuff]

Originally Posted by Chumpster99

I'm willing to bet that's exactly what was said whenever Universal did one of their numerous DNR jobs.

We need to encourage Kino to do their very best here. Not be too confrontational, mind you, but hold them to a standard.

Very well put!

[joenostalgia23]

Originally Posted by BNex99

As a picture editor who has also dabbled in sound design, I certainly do. Knowing how much thought and effort goes into every little decision during production and post-production (whether to use a fade, dissolve, or hard cut, choosing a specific sound effect, etc.), it would frustrate me if years after the fact, someone undid some of that and presented the film to the general public as my work.

This is why things like the incorrect shots in Beauty and the Beast, the weird remixes for An American Tail or Escape From New York (or TGTBATU, to keep on topic), the extra dialogue in The Dark Crystal, or the missing music cue in The Last Starfighter are annoying. They're either the result of misguided decisions by people who had no connection to the original production or someone just flat not paying attention to what they were doing. And it becomes part of the version of the movie that most in the general public will see going forward.

So of course, it's not the end of the world. But it is an unnecessary misrepresentation of someone else's work.

That said, I may or may not get this new TGTBATU. Seeing how MGM looks after its catalog these days, we may not get anything better for a long time, if ever.

I don't want to take this too far off topic, but which Escape From New York release had the audio issues? And does BATB still have incorrect shots?

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by Chumpster99

I'm willing to bet that's exactly what was said whenever Universal did one of their numerous DNR jobs.

We need to encourage Kino to do their very best here. Not be too confrontational, mind you, but hold them to a standard.

Yes, exactly. I have never heard any serious complaint about the fact that Lawrence of Arabia is only an approximation of the original theatrical cut, because people generally accept it on good faith that Robert Harris and his team put in the work and did the absolute best they could. This film desperately needs that sort of attention-to-detail restoration work to be done by somebody. If Kino is not interested in details, they shouldn't take on a project of this scale, they should've left the license on the table.

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

Yes, exactly. I have never heard any serious complaint about the fact that Lawrence of Arabia is only an approximation of the original theatrical cut, because people generally accept it on good faith that Robert Harris and his team put in the work and did the absolute best they could. This film desperately needs that sort of attention-to-detail restoration work to be done by somebody. If Kino is not interested in details, they shouldn't take on a project of this scale, they should've left the license on the table.

In addition to that, didn't David Lean actually participate and sign off on the LoA restoration? (I think I remember reading that he specifically made some slight tweaks to the cut himself.)

[Grethiwha]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

Nobody is saying that they are the same degree of wrong, people are saying that they are all wronger than they need to be. The reconstructed US theatrical cut is a better approximation than the extended cut, sure, no argument there; but it is a worse approximation than any fan cut version already available on-line, so basically you are paying for Kino to do less work than people have already done for free, all to save yourself the effort of hitting "skip" three times during the movie.

There are fan cuts that seamlessly restore all these little changes and transitions? Is that possible using only the extended cut master? If so, that's impressive, and I'm not sure why we're assuming Kino won't make that effort. But I'm not sure it is possible within the limitations Kino has to work with: isn't the whole premise under which these differences were pointed out, that they can't be fixed just using the extended cut master?

Also obviously, even if they don't make the effort, it'll still be a much closer approximation than 'hitting skip three times' – I don't think all the added stuff in the extended cut is lined up to the chapter breaks, and hitting skip is a much more distracting transition than a dissolve... (Also I'd be paying for the PQ upgrade... I didn't buy the previous 4K restored blu-ray, because I am at least principled enough to avoid an intermediate upgrade that I don't think is worthwhile.)

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

To try and get us away from the topic of "who was meaner to whom" and back to the topic of the movie, I want to respond a bit more to this.

[Show spoiler]
Earlier in this thread, somebody posted pretty decent proof that the Sergio Leone was heavily involved in the US theatrical cut, that it was not just some thing which was prepared by censors and producers with no input from the director. I hadn't known about that, and it was interesting to read.

But what that means is that Sergio Leone (and his post-production team) felt that it *did* matter for the random shots to be longer. Or for this fade to black to be replaced with a dissolve. I don't pretend to know the reason that he thought it mattered, but it would've been far easier for him to leave those transitions alone (especially if the negative was already cut for the original theatrical version) rather than having an assistant go digging through the trim bin to find the extra frames. He didn't just do that on a whim. A fade to black tends to read as more time passing than a dissolve, as an example. Even if you don't consciously register the changes, they are still there and you'll react differently (albeit, possibly not differently enough to be measurable).

So, yes, I might not spot the difference off-hand between the proper theatrical cut that Leone did work on and this approximation. And yes, they're trivial changes. But they impact the rhythm of the film. It seems strange to me that a month or two back, people were rabidly defending the US theatrical cut as something that Leone had worked on, that it wasn't just some after-thought on the proper cut... and now that that is settled, it turns out that nobody actually cared about the work Leone put in, all they really wanted is a version which omits the extra scenes, and whatever else is done beyond that doesn't matter at all. Like I said, if that's really all people wanted, it seems like you could just fast forward.

You know, I basically agree with everything you're saying (except the last line, again, the "you can just fast forward [the yellow version], it's basically the same thing" argument is dumb), and I'm glad people are bringing these things to Kino's attention, but my feeling remains, this is a reasonable concession given what Kino has to work with, and nowhere near a deal-breaker for me (or most people I would think).

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by joenostalgia23

I don't want to take this too far off topic, but which Escape From New York release had the audio issues? And does BATB still have incorrect shots?

The 5.1 remix for EFNY that's been used on basically all Blu-rays and most DVDs is missing a brief bit of music in one scene, has music added in another, has one or two alternate takes of dialogue, is missing a handful of sound FX, and overall has the music dialed up significantly hotter in relation to the dialogue and FX compared to the original mix. The MGM Blu-ray also has the original stereo audio, but Shout Factory's 2.0 track is a fold-down of the remix. This is a matter of personal taste, of course, but to me the remix actually sounds cheaper and less-finessed than the original mix.

As for BATB, the 25h Anniversary Edition still has the misplaced shots in both versions, so there's a shot from the original version in the Special Edition and vice versa. What's weird is that in the Sing-Along version, which is ostensibly the original cut, both of the shots in question are the ones from the Special Edition. The only HD versions I know of with both shots in the right place are the 3D Blu-ray of the theatrical cut and the digital release of the Special Edition.

Hope that helps!

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by BNex99

In addition to that, didn't David Lean actually participate and sign off on the LoA restoration? (I think I remember reading that he specifically made some slight tweaks to the cut himself.)

I (wrongly) thought he died before they finished. Probably not the best example, I was just trying to think of another high-profile classic film which will always be missing footage but it at least seems like they tried.

[ThisKid]

Originally Posted by BNex99

As a picture editor who has also dabbled in sound design, I certainly do. Knowing how much thought and effort goes into every little decision during production and post-production (whether to use a fade, dissolve, or hard cut, choosing a specific sound effect, etc.), it would frustrate me if years after the fact, someone undid some of that and presented the film to the general public as my work.

This is why things like the incorrect shots in Beauty and the Beast, the weird remixes for An American Tail or Escape From New York (or TGTBATU, to keep on topic), the extra dialogue in The Dark Crystal, or the missing music cue in The Last Starfighter are annoying. They're either the result of misguided decisions by people who had no connection to the original production or someone just flat not paying attention to what they were doing. And it becomes part of the version of the movie that most in the general public will see going forward.

So of course, it's not the end of the world. But it is an unnecessary misrepresentation of someone else's work.

That said, I may or may not get this new TGTBATU. Seeing how MGM looks after its catalog these days, we may not get anything better for a long time, if ever.

Ok then, I can understand it from your view. But, the main differences between the US and Italian cut is various scenes in whole being cut out. The little transitions, as well as a few frames extra or less in a few shots, isn't as important. Sure, I can see being true to the US cut, but if those parts are going to be the same as the Italian cut, does it matter? The rhythm and effect of the film is still the same in the Italian cut, so it shouldn't be as annoying if it is like that. The overall tone of the scenes is still there. The above examples from other films are annoying because there has been some improper handling on the studio's behalf there. The tone of various scenes have been disrupted due to an error. With TGTBATU, the Italian version has been fully edited, so if those small bits from the US cut is still like the Italian cut, it wouldn't have that big of an effect, because it's still properly edited. Besides, with all the little things that would have to be done, it may be too much hard work, and may take too long. There's also a chance that if Kino does go and edit those little parts like the US cut, they could possibly get something wrong along the way. One thing could lead to another, and people may not buy this release because "It's not the true US cut, because they screwed up a transition.". The regular customer could be strayed away from this release because they heard something bad about it, even though it's one little thing they may not know if they weren't paying attention.

Personally, I'm excited for this release, and I'm wishing Kino the best of luck on it. I think it's great they are reducing the yellow tinting on this release, that is a problem that could be noticeable by anyone.

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by Grethiwha

There are fan cuts that seamlessly restore all these little changes and transitions? Is that possible using only the extended cut master?

I wouldn't say all, but more than none, which is what Kino is currently claiming needs to be done. Sources vary, but what seems to be most common general solution for that sort of thing is that they will kickstarter together the money to get an HD transfer of a print or multiple prints, and I believe that was done for GBU more than once. And they put a lot of effort into getting the color right. These are the same people who found footage MGM didn't even think existed anymore. I'm honestly a little scared of the level some people will go to, but in this case I'm glad they did.

I'm not sure why we're assuming Kino won't make that effort.

Well, they indicated that they don't know and didn't seem to care much about it. Plus, they're now doing a color correction on the master. It would be far easier and more cost effective to do that once and then cut the theatrical cut together, rather than having to do it twice. So I do think it's fair to assume they haven't started doing any work on the theatrical cut yet, and they're already a year late on the 50th anniversary. I don't get the sense they're going to put much time in, let's put it that way.

and hitting skip is a much more distracting transition than a dissolve...

I am being slightly hyperbolic there, sure, and of course it is more distracting, but is it $15 more distracting?

(Also I'd be paying for the PQ upgrade... I didn't buy the previous 4K restored blu-ray, because I am at least principled enough to avoid an intermediate upgrade that I don't think is worthwhile.)

That makes sense, as I said somewhere, if you don't have the MGM blus, this seems like the version to get. To me, and partially because I prefer the extended cut to the US theatrical overall, *this* is the intermediate upgrade that I don't think is worth it.

I did think of maybe a decent example, I have the original "Blood Simple" theatrical cut on VHS (*and* the stupid copy-protection still works), it's one of the last VHSes I have that I can't upgrade, and when I heard there was a British DVD with the theatrical cut, I thought "Oh, even with PAL speedup, that would be cool." Then I read that they messed it up. It has some parts but not other parts. After that, it didn't seem worth it. In both cases, I prefer the other cut, so having the theatrical cut for me is more about for posterity, I'm likely to only watch it for reference. [Dammit, I just remembered that the end credits music is changed on the VHS.]

[Bates_Motel]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

My understanding is that Kino doesn't make any decisions about subtitles. Subtitles prepared for DVD don't work the same for Blu-ray, they require significant adjustment for whatever technical reason. So if the deliverables include Blu-ray standard subtitles, Kino includes them, but if the owner doesn't have those and doesn't want to pay to get the subtitles they have up to that standard, Kino can't afford to eat the cost to prep them.

100% incorrect. I have personally added DVD subtitles to the blu-rays that do not have them, and most synch up perfectly. other need slight timecode adjustments, but you can do that with freeware. Anyone saying DVD subs aren't usable on a blu is wrong. I personally have 20+ Kino blus (and probably 30+ other studios titles) that I've added DVD subs to that they said "couldn't be done."

[Chumpster99]

Now, I have a theory here about the international version's extra minute differences here:

The US and French releases, both of which Leone supervised, took at least a year more than the Italian version to make it to theatres. It seems likely to me that Leone had some second thoughts about the film's editing and decided to redo some transitions and cut out some chunks to quicken the pace.

If this is true, it's quite likely that Leone would've preferred the international cut to the Italian as his director's cut, seeing as he went out of his way not to dub those extra scenes - He clearly states that all distributor cuts were done AFTER his dubbing. Quite interesting really.

( On a sidenote, I figure he may have had a hand in preparing the French release's TRAILER as well, possibly explaining why they had had access to the now-lost scenes, since they took them from the same place they took the trims added to the international version )

[BNex99]

Originally Posted by ThisKid

Ok then, I can understand it from your view. But, the main differences between the US and Italian cut is various scenes in whole being cut out. The little transitions, as well as a few frames extra or less in a few shots, isn't as important. Sure, I can see being true to the US cut, but if those parts are going to be the same as the Italian cut, does it matter? The rhythm and effect of the film is still the same in the Italian cut, so it shouldn't be as annoying if it is like that. The overall tone of the scenes is still there. The above examples from other films are annoying because there has been some improper handling on the studio's behalf there. The tone of various scenes have been disrupted due to an error. With TGTBATU, the Italian version has been fully edited, so if those small bits from the US cut is still like the Italian cut, it wouldn't have that big of an effect, because it's still properly edited. Besides, with all the little things that would have to be done, it may be too much hard work, and may take too long. There's also a chance that if Kino does go and edit those little parts like the US cut, they could possibly get something wrong along the way. One thing could lead to another, and people may not buy this release because "It's not the true US cut, because they screwed up a transition.". The regular customer could be strayed away from this release because they heard something bad about it, even though it's one little thing they may not know if they weren't paying attention.

Personally, I'm excited for this release, and I'm wishing Kino the best of luck on it. I think it's great they are reducing the yellow tinting on this release, that is a problem that could be noticeable by anyone.

I'm actually not quite sure what you're getting at here. I'm not as familiar with the minute differences as some here are, but from what I understand (mainly from thatguamguy's posts), the 2003 "restored version" primarily used the Italian cut as its base. The 1967 US/International cut not only removed whole scenes that were in the Italian cut, but also featured a handful of alternate shots and transitions that are not part of either the original Italian cut or the 2003 cut.

So if those alternate takes from the Italian cut are part of the approximation of the US/International that Kino is presumably preparing, than it will give the film a different flow and rhythm, at least in those spots.

Editing a film is not just about excising or restoring scenes; it's also about giving it the right rhythm, which was likely on Leone's mind when he was supervising the international version. If that was the case, those alternate transitions and takes are not incidental; they were specific decisions made by the director to finesse the re-edited film to his liking.

[BNex99]

Also, to give an example of how a minor change can affect a scene, in the 2002 Special Edition of E.T., the sound of E.T. exhaling as he died was removed. It's a minor, subtle thing, and it of course didn't ruin the movie (plenty of other changes did that ), but the impact of that scene was lessened a bit.

[MisterLime]

Here's some answers to the questions posted by someone at HTF

1. Original 1967 production company credit is altered
Our release will include the "altered" credit.
2. There is supposed to be a “flip cut” transition/optical wipe from Tuco talking to Blondie (and taking a bite of his cigar) to being hung. The extended version simply cuts instead of doing the flip wipe (most likely because the flip cut was an optical not present in the original negative).
This will most likely be the same as the extended cut
3. There is not supposed to be a fade out on the gun shop owner with the sign in his mouth in the US theatrical cut. It is supposed to cut directly to the shot of the mass exodus of Sibley and his soldiers. Currently the extended cut fades out early to black, meaning it won’t be possible to use the tail end of the gun shop owner shot.
This scene will be as it appeared in the original U.S. theatrical cut
4. The MGM 4K fades out earlier when Blondie passes out and Tuco is bringing him water in the desert. The fade out in the desert scene is supposed to happen approximately 2 to 3 seconds later.
This will most likely be the same as the extended cut
5. The MGM 4K has a dissolve from the night mission scene to the scene of the coach arriving to the mission. In the US theatrical cut, this shot is supposed to fade up from black, but now the dissolve is part of the beginning of the shot.
This scene will be as it appeared in the original U.S. theatrical cut
6. The shot of the train leaving the station (with Tuco and Wallace on it) is longer in the US theatrical cut, before cutting directly to Tuco in the train and not dissolving out earlier to the early morning camp scene like the 4K.
This will most likely be the same as the extended cut

We'll do everything possible to release the best version of The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. I'll notify everyone of any further revisions (if any), so please drop these attacks and wait for the release before criticizing an upcoming release no one has seen yet.

[thatguamguy]

That is awesome to hear and now I feel even more confused about how there could be a source for some of the shots but not others, but a lot us do appreciate the work.

[MisterLime]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

That is awesome to hear and now I feel even more confused about how there could be a source for some of the shots but not others, but a lot us do appreciate the work.

It all depends on what's available to us and what's not, all the film elements are in Italy and it all depends on which scans are available to us. We've paid a very large sum to acquire this classic and will be spending almost as much to get this released. We'll be releasing a 2-disc special edition of both cuts loaded with extras at our usual SRP, like we dd with the Sicilian Clan, One Million Years BC, The Wanderers and others.

.