Without rancor, lousy proof


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Neil at 205.163.142.226 on October 27, 1999 at 17:35:57:

In Reply to: No, you're wrong, here's proof. posted by Johnboy on October 27, 1999 at 17:22:35:

: Without rancor, I'd like to point out that you're wrong in your definition. Director's cut does indeed mean the cut that the director intended. If you doubt me, go here to look at Director's Cuts of various films:

: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/002-6648063-1004254

Firstly, that link didn't work for me.1

It still doesn't work as proof though. I did a search for movies with "Director's Cut" and Amazon labels many films incorrectly. If you look at the actual covers of ALIENS, JFK and WOODSTOCK clearly state that they are special editions. Anchor Bay incorrectly labels DAWN OF THE DEAD as a "director's cut", when it is a rough cut never intended to be final. The rest of the ones I'm familiar with are proper director's cuts.

: And I'm with cnaughton37: I can't wait to see the Director's Cut DVD of Dogma with all the deleted scenes.

As am I.





Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

E-Mail/Userid:
Password:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


  


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The View Askew WWWBoard ] [ FAQ ]