13369 réponses à ce sujet

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

So what you're saying is that you didn't watch the movie but yet you know the story.

And uuum...

LoTR Theatrical Edition, Etended Edition. Difference in all 3 movies is that they come with upto 50 mins of extra footage.

Avatar Director's cut, 15 mins extra footage.

Aliens Director's cut had 17 mins of extra footage.

Robocop Director's Cut had 13 mins of extra footage, mostly gore added in.

What was this about fundementals of story writing?

Can't say I've seen any of them but LotR and myquestion was actually not Wher was Tom Bombadil but Where was Glorfindel and why was Arwen subbed in for him? 

And, met me counter with Kingdom of Heaven (Directors Cut)

Or, better:

Blade Runner (The Final Cut)

Most people would say that these movies (and to a degree LotR were much superior with the extended content then they were without.

And yet nobody complained they had to pay extra to get it nor did anybody think they were cheated because the originals weren't upto par with the later releases. Nobody buying the theatrical editions of LoTR thought they were getting an incomplete story/movie and gladly paid standard price. The fans however loved the idea of 50 mins extra footage and paid much much more then the standard prive for the footage and swag.

Btw, was going mention Bladerunner myself but final cut was released 26 years after original and required extensive digital editing so it did require extra work.

Modifié par ZX12r Ninja, 27 février 2012 - 05:11 .

[Dragoonlordz]

BaronIveagh wrote...

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

So what you're saying is that you didn't watch the movie but yet you know the story.

And uuum...

LoTR Theatrical Edition, Etended Edition. Difference in all 3 movies is that they come with upto 50 mins of extra footage.

Avatar Director's cut, 15 mins extra footage.

Aliens Director's cut had 17 mins of extra footage.

Robocop Director's Cut had 13 mins of extra footage, mostly gore added in.

What was this about fundementals of story writing?

Can't say I've seen any of them but LotR and myquestion was actually not Wher was Tom Bombadil but Where was Glorfindel and why was Arwen subbed in for him? 

And, met me counter with Kingdom of Heaven (Directors Cut)

Or, better:

Blade Runner (The Final Cut)

Most people would say that these movies (and to a degree LotR were much superior with the extended content then they were without.

Maybe, I will say that I have never met someone who felt ripped off personally from seeing the non directors cut or extended versions though. Also personally I am not a big fan on comparing other mediums or formats to each other in general or car analogies.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 février 2012 - 05:17 .

[Raxxman]

A lot of directors cuts (and international cuts for that matter) are changed from theariticals for legal reasons (age ratings), and due to the limitations of getting people to sit down in one place for a single time period (this is the LOTR basic reasoning, they also hadn't finished all the SFX by release).

A lot of TV cuts of movies feel disjointed because action sequences are cut short, I mean just watch the UK release version of Fists of Fury, the entire nunchuks scene is removed, and the whole fight doesn't make sense, one point the badguy is fighting Bruce Lee, he's kicked through a wall and somehow his face (which wasn't hit) is bruised and bloodied and he's holding a Katana, which he didn't have while being kicked through a wall. This happened because the censorship chief had a serious thing about them and wouldn't have them in any movie (which incidently is why Michelangelo doesn't use nunchucks in the turtles movies, they wouldn't of been able to market the film in the UK).

It's not the same, the similarity would be having 2 cuts of the film being shown at the same time in cinemas, which has, to my knowledged never happened.

[BaronIveagh]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Maybe, I will say that I have never
met someone who felt ripped off personally from seeing the non directors
cut or extended versions though. Though also personally I am not a big
fan on comparing other mediums or formats to each other in general or
car analogies.

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

And yet nobody complained they had to pay extra to get it nor did anybody think they were cheated because the originals weren't upto par with the later releases. Nobody buying the theatrical editions of LoTR thought they were getting an incomplete story/movie and gladly paid standard price. The fans however loved the idea of 50 mins extra footage and paid much much more then the standard prive for the footage and swag.

Btw, was going mention Bladerunner myself but final cut was released 26 years after original and required extensive digital editing so it did require extra work.

However, a lot of people complained about Kingdom of Heaven and felt cheated having seen it at theaters and then seen the directors cut.

Mostly because the Directors cut was not only good, but made more sense.

Modifié par BaronIveagh, 27 février 2012 - 05:17 .

[BaronIveagh]

Double Post

Modifié par BaronIveagh, 27 février 2012 - 05:16 .

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

However, a lot of people complained about Kingdom of Heaven and felt cheated having seen it at theaters and then seen the directors cut.

Mostly because the Directors cut was not only good, but made more sense.

Digging deep enough I think you can find enough single cases which disprove anything. The point here being, removing characters or cutting content doesn't necesarilly make it an incomplete story, period.

[shengar]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...


There's nothing wrong with DLC in the first place.  Do you think TF2 or L4D would have had the longevity and success without DLC? 

It's the way DLC is handled that is the problem.

DLC isn't wrong at all. What wrong is first day DLC and they shamelessly announce about it.

[BaronIveagh]

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

Digging deep enough I think you can find enough single cases which disprove anything. The point here being, removing characters or cutting content doesn't necesarilly make it an incomplete story, period.

Edit:  It's a case by case basis there.

Modifié par BaronIveagh, 27 février 2012 - 05:19 .

[fropas]

Raxxman wrote...

A lot of directors cuts (and international cuts for that matter) are changed from theariticals for legal reasons (age ratings), and due to the limitations of getting people to sit down in one place for a single time period (this is the LOTR basic reasoning, they also hadn't finished all the SFX by release).

A lot of TV cuts of movies feel disjointed because action sequences are cut short, I mean just watch the UK release version of Fists of Fury, the entire nunchuks scene is removed, and the whole fight doesn't make sense, one point the badguy is fighting Bruce Lee, he's kicked through a wall and somehow his face (which wasn't hit) is bruised and bloodied and he's holding a Katana, which he didn't have while being kicked through a wall. This happened because the censorship chief had a serious thing about them and wouldn't have them in any movie (which incidently is why Michelangelo doesn't use nunchucks in the turtles movies, they wouldn't of been able to market the film in the UK).

It's not the same, the similarity would be having 2 cuts of the film being shown at the same time in cinemas, which has, to my knowledged never happened.

Sure it has 2D and 3D .

[Aulis Vaara]

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

Are they planning on showing a black screen in the game for the people who didn't buy the DLC? People are talking about content made before release, which gets removed and sold to you later on as an extra. Director's cut is the same thing.

And please, if you're going to reply, reply in context.

Director's Cuts are no less of a dick move on account of the music industry. As are re-releases in 3D and any other special versions. It's just another way to get fans to pay even more for it. People are natural collectors and they want it all, and companies exploit that. Obviously there are people that don't see they're being exploited, but people who see through the bull**** just shake their heads at all the special editions. Especially because you often need to be very attentive to detail to even notice the difference.

Of course, in a videogame the cut content is a little more substantial and in this case it's almost too good to pass up. Which is the whole reason why it's a DLC we have to pay for. They know this. And it's just a slap in the face of the fans. In fact, if you're a long time fan and bought the previous Mass Effect games, and thus really want the Prothean, they expect you to shell out even more money. It's not enough that you've always supported them. No, because you've always been a fan, they think you should shell out even more money.

We helped make this game big. We, the fans, have ensured that there are over a million pre-orders in this latest installment in this series, and we are rewarded with a slap in the face.

"You're a longtime fan? Well, then shell out ten bucks more!" THAT's what they're saying, and I find it somewhat disturbing that so many people seem to be okay with this.

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

Digging deep enough I think you can find enough single cases which disprove anything. The point here being, removing characters or cutting content doesn't necesarilly make it an incomplete story, period.

Didn't say it made the story incomplete, I just said it made it very different.

So you're saying that cutting characters from ME3 doesn't make it incomplete it just gives you a different experience which isn't disappointing and still is worth the money you pay.

Modifié par ZX12r Ninja, 27 février 2012 - 05:21 .

[ArkkAngel007]

shengar wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...


There's nothing wrong with DLC in the first place.  Do you think TF2 or L4D would have had the longevity and success without DLC? 

It's the way DLC is handled that is the problem.

DLC isn't wrong at all. What wrong is first day DLC and they shamelessly announce about it.

First day DLC isn't bad either if the right precedent is behind it and if fans are well aware of it going in if there is any additional cost.  The way it was done here was not that.

But I was just speaking of DLC in general, not this specifically.

[BaronIveagh]

Aulis Vaara wrote...

Director's Cuts are no less of a dick move on account of the music industry. As are re-releases in 3D and any other special versions. It's just another way to get fans to pay even more for it. People are natural collectors and they want it all, and companies exploit that. Obviously there are people that don't see they're being exploited, but people who see through the bull**** just shake their heads at all the special editions. Especially because you often need to be very attentive to detail to even notice the difference.

As far as the movies go, the majority fo the time, sadly, you are correct that the 'cut' content is unnoticable.  But then you have films like Highlander and Blade Runner where the cut content is needed to give other events a deepe meaning and give context to some events in the 'cut' edition.

[Raxxman]

fropas wrote...
Sure it has 2D and 3D .

Not that I've checked this, but aren't they the same cuts on different technology? Same thing goes for IMAX.

[AntenDS]

BaronIveagh, you do know there were like 6 different cuts of Bladerunner not including the TV air cut? Each cut took or added a few scenes. After a while you kinda forget which cut is which, let alone which one is better and I have seen most of them.

Original workprint version (1982)
San Diego Sneak Preview (1982)
US theatrical version (1982)
International Cut (1982)
Director's Cut (1992)
Final Cut (2007)

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

As far as the movies go, the majority fo the time, sadly, you are correct that the 'cut' content is unnoticable.  But then you have films like Highlander and Blade Runner where the cut content is needed to give other events a deepe meaning and give context to some events in the 'cut' edition.

Actually, it's the directors way of saying: "The studio cut it for reasons but this is how I intended it to be". And Bladerunner is a very special case as the uncut footage was released 10 years after the original and only included more voilence. The final cut which was released in 2007 was more of a remake then an uncut version.

[Reptilian Rob]

Deed ya ur? Da new Protian squadmate is gonna be Jamaican mon! Prurty wurd if ya ask me, but I dun car cause me excitment levels are highar dan a green snake in a sugar cane field mon!

Hopefully Garr we be der too in da back o' da Normandy! Dat way we can smoke all da rope we find mon, and get a maja high you know wat me sayin mon?

[ArkkAngel007]

BaronIveagh wrote...

Aulis Vaara wrote...

Director's Cuts are no less of a dick move on account of the music industry. As are re-releases in 3D and any other special versions. It's just another way to get fans to pay even more for it. People are natural collectors and they want it all, and companies exploit that. Obviously there are people that don't see they're being exploited, but people who see through the bull**** just shake their heads at all the special editions. Especially because you often need to be very attentive to detail to even notice the difference.

As far as the movies go, the majority fo the time, sadly, you are correct that the 'cut' content is unnoticable.  But then you have films like Highlander and Blade Runner where the cut content is needed to give other events a deepe meaning and give context to some events in the 'cut' edition.

Then you also have to admit the only way you saw that cut content was due to it being offered separately to you.  If you didn't see that additional footage, you wouldn't have been any of the wiser. 

This part of the Prothean's story was "cut content" and became available as DLC.  If they never revived it as such, we would never know about.

Doesn't make it right, but it's still a perspective you have to consider.

[ArkkAngel007]

Reptilian Rob wrote...

Deed ya ur? Da new Protian squadmate is gonna be Jamaican mon! Prurty wurd if ya ask me, but I dun car cause me excitment levels are highar dan a green snake in a sugar cane field mon!

Hopefully Garr we be der too in da back o' da Normandy! Dat way we can smoke all da rope we find mon, and get a maja high you know wat me sayin mon?

I think my Nigerian friend would be a bit bothered by you calling that accent Jamaican.

[Reptilian Rob]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Reptilian Rob wrote...

Deed ya ur? Da new Protian squadmate is gonna be Jamaican mon! Prurty wurd if ya ask me, but I dun car cause me excitment levels are highar dan a green snake in a sugar cane field mon!

Hopefully Garr we be der too in da back o' da Normandy! Dat way we can smoke all da rope we find mon, and get a maja high you know wat me sayin mon?

I think my Nigerian friend would be a bit bothered by you calling that accent Jamaican.

I know it twas an Eastern African accent! It twas a joke from me humor, mon!

Ya gotta stop been so uptight mon, be limber like a green snake in a sugar cane field!

Modifié par Reptilian Rob, 27 février 2012 - 05:29 .

[BaronIveagh]

AntenDS wrote...

BaronIveagh, you do know there were like 6 different cuts of Bladerunner not including the TV air cut? Each cut took or added a few scenes. After a while you kinda forget which cut is which, let alone which one is better and I have seen most of them.

Original workprint version (1982)
San Diego Sneak Preview (1982)
US theatrical version (1982)
International Cut (1982)
Director's Cut (1992)
Final Cut (2007)

I know, since i have a copy of every last one of them, but I was keeping it simple since it was an example rather then and in depth examination of Bladerunner.

And: Ninja, the directors cut also removed Fords narration with gives a differnt context to things like, say, the ending and raises questions in the viewers mind if Decker is a replicant himself.

[BaronIveagh]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...
Then you also have to admit the only way you saw that cut content was due to it being offered separately to you.  If you didn't see that additional footage, you wouldn't have been any of the wiser. 

This part of the Prothean's story was "cut content" and became available as DLC.  If they never revived it as such, we would never know about.

Doesn't make it right, but it's still a perspective you have to consider.

Sadly, all of this has had absolutly no baring on my original point that characters and events in a story have differing levels of impact for different viewers so the idea that a given character is important to the story or not is very much a personal one, since no two people have exactly the same experiance watching a movie or reading a book.

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

I know, since i have a copy of every last one of them, but I was keeping it simple since it was an example rather then and in depth examination of Bladerunner.

And: Ninja, the directors cut also removed Fords narration with gives a differnt context to things like, say, the ending and raises questions in the viewers mind if Decker is a replicant himself.

/offtopic: I was talking about the actuall official directors cut you are talking about the Ridley Scott approved edition.

But yet again, cutting or removing content doesn't necesarilly make it incomplete, it just gives you a different experience.

[BaronIveagh]

ZX12r Ninja wrote...

But yet again, cutting or removing content doesn't necesarilly make it incomplete, it just gives you a different experience.

I think that differenece of experiane is why people are getting so pissed off.  Becasue different seems to automatically translate as better, even if, in reality, it's not.

[ZX12r Ninja]

BaronIveagh wrote...

Sadly, all of this has had absolutly no baring on my original point that characters and events in a story have differing levels of impact for different viewers so the idea that a given character is important to the story or not is very much a personal one, since no two people have exactly the same experiance watching a movie or reading a book.

And thus we go back around in circles and get back to personal expectations. You want something because you expect something. This does not make what's being delivered bad or not worth the money. They can't go about including infinite characters just to please everybodyand removing character isn't as bad as most people would like you to believe (as demonstrated by my Tom LoTR analogy). If you think you can get the experience you want from the Prothean then you can buy it for 10$ extra. You get the game + the prothean so you get more then everybody else.

Modifié par ZX12r Ninja, 27 février 2012 - 05:44 .