Donnie Darko: The Director's Cut.

Sep 13, 2004 quarter past one pm

Oh...my...god (small G).  A few nights ago, I went and saw the Director's Cut of Donnie Darko.  I would have written about this sooner, but it's taken a few days for the shock to wear off.  This post is not going to serve as a review of Donnie Darko, for that go to google.com and enter donnie darko review, or something like that.  I'm tried of creating links.

The original theatrical and DVD release ( note the word original ) of Donnie Darko is without a doubt, one of the one-hundred films in my top 10 list.  It is brilliantly surreal, pointedly metaphorical, and diabolically bewildering.  The whole movie exists in this dream like state that keeps you wondering what the hell is happening.  Donnie Darko (the original) is genius for the way it creates this bazar confusion, then quickly pulls it all together at the end of the film.  You are overcome with with sense of "ahhh" as the last few scenes play out, yet, enough is left to explore that you're never quite sure what you had just seen.

Now... If you're one of those people that likes everything spoon-feed to them, with no sense of mystery or after-viewing conversations... if you're one of those people who thinks movies should be wrapped up in a nice little ball, every question answered... if you're one of those people who likes movies where every ounce of joy and creativity is mercilessly sucked out as it screams for it's life just to be ended... if you're one of those people... please, go see the Director's Cut of Donnie Darko... you'll love it.

The box-office success of the original release of Donnie Darko was a disaster, grossing only $500,000.  It got limited distribution due to it coming out right after 9/11 and a movie about a jet engine falling off a plane into someone's bedroom was not something audiences were told they wanted to see.  The movie attracted a small cult following on DVD and then a few years later (I might have time-line wrong -- I'm just making this shit up), some European radio stations started playing the Tears-for-Fears cover song that ends the film, and a new interest in the movie started to grow.

The studio responded with a re-release, but not just any re-release, a re-release of the Director's Cut.  And as we all know, the Director's Cut is always better because it's the true vision of the film the director wanted us to see before the pin-heads in studio marketing made them hack it up so the brain-washed masses would accept it better.

But with Donnie Darko, just the opposite seems to have happened.  Donnie Darko was re-released with a more mass-appeal cut, rather than the more edgier, more artsty, Director's Cut we're used to seeing.  Or are we?  I can really only name a few Director's Cuts of films that I thought were better than the originals.  Most are just different and everyone but the stark-raving movie buff wouldn't even be able to tell the difference.

Has the term Director's Cut become nothing more then a marketing term to sell more DVD's?  Cram a bunch of footage that should have been left out in the first place back into the movie and call it a Director's Cut?  You'd think the Director's artistic conviction would win out.  Maybe... But after all, they are making money off the DVD, so if it helps and doesn't wreak the movie, why not?  Maybe I am just naive and idealistic to think the Director's Cut represents a purer version of the film and Director's will die over defending the artistic integrity of their work.

Stay with me, we're almost done and something vaguely resembling a point is close at hand.

In it's never ending quest to become completely and fully jealous of Hollywood, the gaming industry also releases Director's Cuts of various games.  We'll ignore the fact that games don't traditionally call the creative lead a Director, but hell, it's an easy sell for our pin-heads in marketing.  The term has built up some cache in the consumer world.  Stamped on anything it means more, which we all know means better.  1/3 more fun.

Some of these games include:  Medal of Honor: Director's Cut, Grand Theft Auto: Director's Cut, Resident Evil: The Director's Cut and of course, no list would be complete without Hub Gam 3D the Directors Cut.

Not to be out done, GameSpy has the DOOM 3: The Director's Cut Review, which isn't a review of DOOM 3: The Director's Cut, it's the Director's Cut of the Review of DOOM 3.  Now that's funny.

Maybe Director's Cut is just a fancy word for Patch.

OK, I lied.  There is no point.

Other people's comments:

Posted by DuncanC on Sep 13, 2004 ten past two pm

Wasn't there Worms: The Director's Cut? Maybe that was just on the Amiga.

Posted by Haggis on Sep 13, 2004 quarter past two pm

So, going to a cinema to see a movie is actually beta-testing it for DVD... interesting...

Posted by LeChuckie on Sep 13, 2004 twenty five to three pm

Well Donnie Darko is my favourite all time film. I guess the next thing to look forward to is his next film which sounds absoloutely stunning.

Posted by Edmundo on Sep 13, 2004 twenty five past four pm

I really want to see Donnie Darko Director's Cut at the movie theater because I never got a chance to see it on the big screen... I remember when my friend rented this then-unknown-and-yet-to-be-cult-hit movie on DVD, and we sat down and watched it and thought it was awesome, or artsy, or deep, or whatever your favorite word for wonderful movie is. Still, since I live in the middle of the boondocks, it might take a while for the Director's Cut to get here anyway (if it ever gets here).

Posted by Otinia on Sep 13, 2004 five pm

I love that movie soooo much. I originally saw it on a shitty divx rip three years ago. I was floored. It literally took me hours to snap out of the spell that I was in. Wonderful movie. I can't wait to see it in the theater.

Posted by Smac on Sep 13, 2004 quarter past five pm

There is a different term for "director's cut" with PC games:

Game of the Year edition

Every game that is even mentioned in an awards article is re-released as a Game of the Year edition.  Some of them are actually good (UT did enclude extra content in theirs).  Most, however (like Battlefield 1942 and, I believe, Deus Ex) don't enclude any additional content, but they use the "Game of the Year" edition as a marketing ploy.

Maybe it isn't the same thing, but it is a similar problem.

Posted by Ron Gilbert on Sep 13, 2004 quarter to six pm

Most, however (like Battlefield 1942 and, I believe, Deus Ex) don't include any additional content

Yes, but that's my point.  Throwing additional content into a game or movie is not necessarily better, and I'm willing to bet in most cases it's worse.  Most of the content that is crammed back in is stuff that was cut for a reason (i.e. cutting-room floor).  

DVD's have special "deleted scenes" sections, which are fun to watch, but that's not what I'm referring to.  I'm talking (ok, ranting) about scenes that are integrated back into the film (or game).  It's not the Director's (or Designer/Developers) true vision of the work, it's just crap added for marketing value.

But I guess people like that...

Posted by pumpy jack on Sep 13, 2004 five past seven pm

One difference, of course, is that unless a dev studio is crazy, they don't spend time on stuff that ends up on the cutting room floor.  So what material can possibly be put into a "director's cut"?  New material that never got created for the game.  So a director's cut is probably more like an add-on lite.  Not enough content for a separate boxed product but enough to get the marketing folks excited.

And of course, don't forget the lovely retail market that will happily pull a product off the shelf after a month or two.  At least with a new title, especially one with the ultra-sexy "director's cut" adjective, you can get your product back on the shelves for another month.  And all you have to do is make enough content for an add-on lite.

Genius.

Posted by Purple Penguin on Sep 13, 2004 twenty past eight pm

Back on topic... you are the first person that I have seen that understands what was wrong with Donnie Darko Director's Cut. Its obviousness knew no bounds. According to the director, the new cut more closely reflects the version of the film originally shown at Sundance. Shows how a few months of tweaking can save a project. A lesson for us all, perhaps?

Posted by piyo on Sep 13, 2004 nine pm

Director's edition of Roommate Asami: My wife is a high school student  for the Dreamcast (in Japan). You get more footage that the PS2 version. Sells for 1100 yen used. Woopie.

And what is with the bold, man? Are you trying to out-GRC the GRC?

Posted by Ron Gilbert on Sep 13, 2004 half past nine pm

And what is with the bold, man?

The bold text is used to conceal hidden messages.  Thousands of years from now, scholars will refer to it as the Grumpy Code.

Posted by LeChuckie on Sep 14, 2004 twenty past one am

I don't doubt that the marketing departments use this "directors Cut" phrase to sell more copies, but in some cases I'm sure it is pulled off.... I just can't think of any... except Lord of The Rings which uses the "Extended Edition" suffix.

Posted by Mess on Sep 14, 2004 five to two am

Oh GOD. If there's ANYTHING the Lord Of The Rings movies DIDN'T need it's was EXTRA footage.

But I'm seeing what you're saying. Does anyone remember the Night of the Living Dead DIRECTORS CUT from a few years back, wich had an opening scene IN COLOR?

Posted by omloflump on Sep 14, 2004 five to three am

So you're smitten over Darko too . Donnie Darko, for me at least, is one of those films that people, generally young - who don't know particularily alot about the real classics of cinema, my opinion only, think is the best film ever. It's the sort of film that makes people instantly jump on it's bandwagon and parade around boasting to their friends about it. Again I will state that this just my opinion. Sure, it's not a BAD film, but it's not a GREAT film either. What really bugged me about the film is its incoherent mumblings about time travel and a bunch of other meaningless existentialism cleverly disguised as, well, something that actually MEANS something. Also that scene where Donnie makes fun of the motivational speaker made me cringe, as I invisioned a typical Darko fan quietly cheering from his cosy seat in the cinema. But even worse then that was the half arsed attempt at Kevin Smithian dialogue in that smurfs scene, played out by his incredibly under-developed friends. This seemed to me like a shameful attempt to cement the films "cult" status. Ok Ron, I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself by telling me what other films are in your top 10. Or even better, what your favourite film is, providing that you have one. I pray that American Beauty doesn't find its way there.

Posted by Darkodoesntsuck on Sep 2, 2005 twenty to nine pm

Ok first, if you dont understand donnie darko, it is not the films fault. It is your own ignorence. It MEANS several things,... Second, the motivational speaker is a trumped up evangelical tightarsed prick,..it is human nature to dislike him. You, who cringe when watching that scene, are obviously a bourgeour religious fuck. Also, Meaningless Existentialism? Thats a bit of an oxmoron isn't it? Existentialism is the most important breakthrough in 20th century philosophy. Also American Beauty is another good movie,.... another that you obviously dont understand. Remember, the great films you spurn today are the classics of tommorrow you old fool. Live a little.

Posted by Johnny B Good on Sep 14, 2004 twenty past four am

Posted by jjdeu on Sep 14, 2004 twenty to seven am

Great article, Johnny B. This should go to the mainpage of grumpygamer.

Posted by Haggis on Sep 14, 2004 twenty to seven am

"If there's ANYTHING the Lord Of The Rings movies DIDN'T need it's was EXTRA footage."

Now, this is a different situation. The LOTR movies could have been 10 hours long each if everything from the book was included. Peter Jackson and the crew still tried to put in as much as possible, making the movies about four whopping hours each. This is clearly too long for most casual movie-goers who couldn't care less about Tolkien's story, but many geeks will buy the original version of the movie on the 'Extended' Edition DVDs.

Posted by steve on Sep 14, 2004 ten past nine am

A perfect example of the director's cut being worse than the original film is Apocalypse Now Redux. The full movie is briliant and baffling, but the Redux version added in a lot more of the baffling bits, and an extended sequence set in a French plantation that was transported in from some Merchant/Ivory film.

But at least they used "Redux" instead of "Director's Cut."

Posted by Ron Gilbert on Sep 14, 2004 twenty five past ten am

Ok Ron, I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself by telling me what other films are in your top 10.

Strictly Ballroom

Posted by Joshi on Sep 14, 2004 ten past noon

I don't think a rant conversation about directors cuts can be complete without a look at X-men 1.5. That was sheer tripe. The movie in itself was okay (no, I'm in no way comparing to Donnie Darko) but the "added scenes" if you could even call them that weren't worth it. All that had happened was someone took the deleted scenes that would have been in the "deleted scenes" secition of the DVD anyway and threw them in wherever they were meant to go, even if that meant having to watch the same scene twice, but one of them slightly longer. They weren't even cleaned up to match the feature, it was as if someone had brought along a hand held camera, threw in some cheap effects and threw it in.

I can understand the extended LOTR DVD's, the reason the added stuff wasn't put in the theatrical version was because of 1) pacing, which is established in the cinema, so it doesn't really matter anymore, you don't like it, buy the theatrical version and 2) time, the movies were 3 freakin hours long without the added stuff! Each! But of course, with a DVD, you can stop or pause to go to the lavvy or to sleep and so on. And at least they made an effort with the added stuff, new effects and score and so on.

Oh, and love Donnie Darko, just so my "comment" has something to do with the topic at hand.

Posted by Mess on Sep 14, 2004 quarter to one pm

So how'sabout that Blade Runner?
I only ever saw the director's cut, it'd be a shame if that was the bad version of the movie.
What with the original cut neigh impossible to find.

Posted by Marek on Sep 14, 2004 half past one pm

Blade Runner is one of those rare cases where the "director's cut" label is actually meaningful. It has a better, non-happy, non-studio-approved ending, has some crappy bits cut out, and is better than the original. It's not like it's a completely different movie of course, but it's an improvement to the original cut.

Posted by Hullabaloo on Sep 14, 2004 five to three pm

Director's Cuts That Don't Suck:

Bladerunner - Better ending. No schlocky voiceovers. More mysterious.

Aliens - More background on the main characters and the colony. Some nice additional action sequences.

Saving Private Ryan - The old guy at the end goes on a shooting spree, killing thousands of zombie Nazis which rise up from the ground.

That's all I can think of.

That last one may have never happened.

Posted by Badman on Sep 15, 2004 six am

I guess I'm the only person who preferred the original cut of Blade Runner.  I've got to ask - all you people who thought the Director's Cut was such hot stuff - if you hadn't seen the original first, would you have had any idea what was going on?  And what was so wrong with having a semi-happy ending in the first one?  The DC doesn't end, it just...stops.

I enjoyed this a lot more than the director's cut, and I hope we'll finally get the BR "ultimate edition" so I can watch the original again.

Posted by Mess on Sep 15, 2004 quarter to nine am

Well, to be completely honost; I didn't have any idea what was going on, and a friend of mine who has seen the movie +20 times doesn't really know either.

Posted by Jamie Fristrom on Sep 15, 2004 five past one pm

Liked Darko, watched it again the next day before returning it to Netflix, but also watched the deleted scenes which spoiled some of it for me and didn't have high hopes for the director's cut.

I saw an interview with Ridley Scott that said the hardboiled voice-over was part of his original intention...too bad Harrison Ford phoned it in, I guess.

The Aliens director's cut hits a false note for me when we find out Ripley's first name.

My feeling...don't mess with things people like!

Posted by omloflump on Sep 16, 2004 quarter past one am

Strictly Ballroom.
That WAS a joke right?

Posted by Ron Gilbert on Sep 16, 2004 half past eight am

Strictly Ballroom.
That WAS a joke right?

Nope.  Have you seen it?

Posted by Someone on Sep 17, 2004 ten to three am

Not really. I take your point. But yeah, it's just not the sort of film I'd expect to crop up in someone's list. But I do hate Baz.

Posted by Robert Lacey on Sep 17, 2004 twenty five past two pm

I find it amusing that people rave over the Blade Runner Director's Cut. Whilst I can understand removing the voice-overs, I have to say that I didn't understand half of the plot as a result (until I watched a making-of programme on TV straight afterwards).

I really need to watch Donnie Darko. And, it would appear, Strictly Ballroom. Now go watch Amelie, guys...

Posted by Yufster on Sep 17, 2004 twenty to three pm

Nope.  Have you seen it?  - Ron

Yeah. Baz Luhrmann is awesome. His movies have a vibrant, colourful, flamboyant style that's pretty unique to him.

Moulin Rouge is definitely worth watching. It's cheap and cheerful, but has the most amazing visuals. And not as in special effects (which it does have, aplenty), but moreso in the actual set designs, costume designs, etc... and of course the music. It's complete eye and ear candy from beginning to end, and it's completely crazy.

If you don't know what Ear Candy is, you probably haven't seen Moulin Rouge. Check it out. You'll love it, I promise.

Posted by Yufster on Sep 17, 2004 quarter to three pm

Not really. I take your point. But yeah, it's just not the sort of film I'd expect to crop up in someone's list. But I do hate Baz.

Why? The only thing I reproach him for is having that terrible, terrible actor, Leonardo Dewossname, in Romeo and Juliet.

Although Leonardo Wassname was actually pretty good in Catch Me If You Can, so I don't hate him quite as much any more.

Posted by Jeff on Sep 18, 2004 twenty five to one am

I like seeing the deleted scenes, but as a separate section of the DVD.  It's always interesting to see what they cut out.  Sometimes there's a scene that I think should've been included.  But most of the time they got dropped because they weren't satisfying, told you something you've already been told, or revealed information too early in the movie that they decided was better held back as a surprise for later.

Then there's M. Night "One Trick Pony" Shymalayn and "Unbreakable" -- where he decided the scene that had Bruce Willis showing compassion (by breaking down in the shower) made him too human!  It had to go!  So instead he's totally a robot.

Posted by Mess on Sep 18, 2004 twenty five to nine am

Yeah, but Robots rule.

Posted by Edmundo on Sep 18, 2004 twenty five past six pm

Hey! You guys forgot Army of Darkness Bootleg Director's Cut (a.k.a. the European release of the movie). I believe it has a better (?) ending than the American version... it's a wackier ending! wee!

Posted by kurtisaurus on Sep 18, 2004 ten past seven pm

My least favorite use of the Director's Cut would have to be the Apocalypse Now Redux tack-on where Martin Sheen visits a French family living in the jungles of Vietnam, and Marty has a romantic night with a beautiful member of said French family complete with cheesy synth romance music.  Don't get me completely wrong, there were some really good bits in Redux but this seemed so out of place (and I think it was pretty close to the part of the film when they enter Brandoland) that I'm glad I bought a DVD of the original before this became the de-facto version.

Posted by JasonR on Sep 21, 2004 four pm

Fuck Donnie Darko, Mulholland Drive all the way if you want to wonder wtf is going on.

Posted by Vangelis Karaplios on Sep 27, 2004 ten to eight am

I am going "oh my god" seeing that you have a web site and I can contact you Mr. Gilbert. Donni Darko was a great movie, indeed. Dramatic, intelligent, allegoric. Just amazing and very profound. I like the phrase: every creature on earth dies alone? Or something like that

I am from Greece and I am a huge fan of your games. I would be extremely happy if you could contact me and have a small chat with a faraway friend and fan of your work. I would be very very glad. Hope you are making again a new adventure game sometime!

I'm hoping for an answer! Monkey Island had an influence on me, just so huge!

Farewell sir!


megavag
megavag@hotmail.com

Posted by Chris 'The Tingler' Capel on Oct 26, 2004 twenty to eleven am

The only actual straight proper "Director's Cut" re-release of a game I can think of is Thief Gold, which brushed up the graphics slightly and added a few really cool Thief 2-style levels into the games seamlessly. THAT'S the way to do a Director's Cut. Good ol' Looking Glass. sniff

Posted by Philip Banks on Oct 27, 2004 five past four pm

Actually I'll go on record to say that I prefered the theatrical release of Blade Runner as well. It got closer to the spirit of the hardboiled Philip Chandler esque detective story it clearly wanted to be than the directors cut.

I also think that Aliens(Directors Cut) dropped the ball in one major area - a large part of the tension and ambience in that film is thanks to the unknown. We don't know what the colony was like before the aliens over-ran it so, seeing the devestation as the marines first search it, our imagination did a lot work in filling in and involving us as viewers. To then have the colony shots destroys that tension and further makes it a little too obviously film contrived by showing us Newts father as being the primary vector. The other extensions are great though including the extra history for Ripley and seeing some of the higher tech gear the marines have. (The original film never made much sense as to why the marines felt they even stood a chance at holing up and waiting for a rescue given that the colony had been over-run before and they were short on ammunition.)

As for Donnie Darko it is a film I love and I haven't seen the directors cut. Based on what you outline in the grump I doubt I'll want to see the directors cut. It sounds like it makes precisely the same mistake Aliens DC partially does - destroys the mood by refusing to leave space for the viewer to interpret things for themselves.

Posted by PGJ on Nov 3, 2004 twenty five past noon

The voice overs in the original cut of Blade Runners evoces the spirit of early film noir, and as such they really heightened the mood of the picture! My wife have yet to see the movie, but I won't let her see it until I get my hands on the original version :-)

Posted by Rosalie on May 15, 2005 five past nine am

There's Worms: Directors Cut too.

But seriously, the most insane "Directors Cut" Is Sonic Adventure: Directors CUt.

Apprently, nowadays, Directors cut better chracter models and 8 fun Gamegear games! from action-orientated 3D titles. Am I the only one who sees how little sense this makes?

"Directors cut" would be giving people the removed beta levels that Sonic fans so sorely want (see, Sonic the Hedgehog 2 Beta), but the only thing they from that was retexturing one area with what resmebles a beta version of the texture, and doesn't even look as good.

They could ahve ptu back in the multi-player mode, removed levels, or put in director(Yuki Naka)'s commentry, but apparently not ;/

Posted by Adam on Jul 10, 2005 quarter to six pm

Over here in blighty a mere two days ago i watched the donnie darko directors cut at my local 'artsy' cinema and would have to agree completely. Was a dvd viewer of the original so it was nice to see it on the big screen but whoa was it a little heavy handed... If anyones wondering about changes, it basically revolves mainly around 'grandma deaths' book about time travel having its pages scrolled down the screen so you too can read some of the chapters... sounds magical..excellent...right? but alas no it reads like your being spoon fed the previously 'confusing in a good way' plot developments. They also swapped some songs around which is no bad thing.. and ripped some eyeball shot straight out of requiem for a dream.

But hey! good to see it on the big screen. and still heaps better than the rest of the current crop of BlOCkBuStErS!!

hmm.

Posted by Verwandlung on Jul 11, 2005 twenty five past two am

I highly recommend "Cul de Sac" (Roman Polanski 1966).

Posted by Sveinn Gunnarssoon on Aug 24, 2005 half past eight pm

Over all Directors cut are a mixed bunch. Some make it better. Good example of a Directors cut better than the theatrical version is Daredevil. What a diffrence between them! I urge you to see it. I loved the extended versions of LOTR much more than the theatrical versions. But about Blade Runner. I always loved the voice over version better. Like someone said here, itīs the film noir feel of it. So when Blade Runner finally makes it out again on Dvd in the special Ed. I have been hearing about for a few years I really hope we get both versions :)

Posted by bladerunner on Aug 25, 2005 ten past one am

hm i have seen the directorīs cut of blade runner before the regular cut and did get the story, i canīt understand why one could like the original over the DC :/


Creative Commons License
Hey! Pay attention! Except where otherwise noted, this site is licensed under a Creative Commons License.