![]() This interview is missing in the TC and so are any clues to it. In the DC Anne listens to one of her radio interviews, which was mentioned in the scene before, while she's driving. Furthermore the order of the scenes is different. The scene with Anne, her collegue and a technican in her working area appears much ealier in the TC. The actual opening credits are completely different in both versions: Running Time Director's Cut: 1:55:30 min (1:52:35 min credits excluded) (NTSC)ħ0 Extended / Alternate, extended scenes in the Director's Cut: 25 min 57 sec (NTSC)ģ7 Extended / Alternate, extended scenes in the Theatrical Cut: 8 min 45 sec (PAL)ĭifferent logos in each version, slightly extended in the TC. Running Time Theatrical Cut: 1:34:58 min (1:31:44 min credits excluded) (PAL) Furthermore irrelevant extensions/cuts below 1 sec aren't considered. The remaining difference is due to the NTSC/PAL difference, more logos at the beginning of the DC and the rounding of the running time of the scenes. It's too conventional for experimental cinema and too experimental for a conventional thriller because there isn't much suspense & thrill in it. As a result of that, the film doesn't have any particular direction. The parts of the story of the police men and the mafia become almost meaningless and don't support the rest of the film. It can't matched with a genre but it's what the focus is on (in the DC even more than in the TC). ![]() The weird love story of the killer and the victim is still the same. The details are more suitable to the rest of the story plus less plotholes are the main reasons for this version (not to mention that Jodie Foster looks hotter in the DC).īut nevertheless none of the versions makes the film itself really good because the story remains unchanged and that's the thing. But which version is finally the better one? The answer's simple: the Director's Cut is the version which should be preferred. He removed a lot of scenes from the first one, added new scenes, replaced some scenes by alternate footage, changed the order of some scenes etc. like an early workprint (which is actually true). A further version doesn't exist.ĭennis Hopper considered the first version as sth. Even though he hadn't agreed with his producers, he decided to release another shorter version (running time almost 2 hrs.). It was released as Director's Cut in the US and Dennis Hopper was mentioned as director. Only 2 years later the director and leading actor Dennis Hopper tried to save the film and came up with another version. Alex Cox' & Tod Davies's names, those guys wrote the screenplay, were scretched as well. Joe Pesci didn't wangt to be more connected with this film anymore, so his name was scretched in the credits (Theatrical Cut + Director's Cut). That's the reason why Dennis Hopper didn't want to be in charge for this film anymore, so his name in the credits was replaced by the very busy "Alan Smithee". to reach an acceptable running time for theaters. The final result of this vision makes one feel blue: the film was roughly cut, from a running time of 3 hrs. Despite the fact that only a few people had the pleasure to watch this version as a preview, not accepting this version was probably the right decision, especially if you consider the other versions. He was really proud when he presented his epos with a running time of approx. Very ambitioned and with an impressive cast (young Jodie Foster, Joe Pesci, Vincent Price, Charlie Sheen, Fred Ward & John Turturro) Hopper filmed his own vision of a killer who falls in love with his victim and is finally chased by the cops and the crooks. This attempt to establish as a director finally became the most tremendous annoyance for Dennis Hopper in his career. The editing, the acting, the filming, everything is just bad! You've been warned.Compared are the Theatrical Cut (German Tape, released by Concorde and rated FSK 16) and the Director's Cut by Dennis Hopper (US Tape, released by Avid Home Entertainment). Nothing! There are some really bad scenes where people shoot at each other and then the film ends. Stallone appears at the beginning and at the end. There is an old amnesiac guy (Modine) to whom some people give an experimental drug to in order to remember where he hid some money. It's criminal and every person watching is a victim. This is not a movie so bad it is funny, this is not a movie that someone tried to make interesting and failed, this is clearly a scam. ![]() It's a beyond low budget production, only meant to get more money that they put in by dangling the cast in front of people. People used to respect these guys! I mean, think about the early Stallone stuff and know this is way worse than that. I am not in the entertainment industry, so I don't know how people like Stallone and even Modine would accept to play in something that is obviously crap.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |