Imail724

Is there anywhere I can see this or at least read what happens in it? Is it the alternate ending that is on the dvd?

Evil ASh

I always wanted to do a fan cut of Army of Darkness that goes like this:
Everything from the director's cut + music in tiny ash scene (from the soundtrack) + "Good, bad... I'm the guy with the gun" + US theatrical ending

Nick Martin

No, I'm saying a movie is what it is without FANS WHO BITCH ONLINE ABOUT EVERY LITTLE THING changing it to suit their own needs. If a director / studio changes a movie, well, they made the damn thing.

lcnickell

i think filmmaking and editing should be left to the professionals.

there's lots of directors who have control over their films, maybe you're watching the wrong movies.

honestly, i'd like a spiderman cut, that's about a minute long, so Raimi can concentrate on making good films again.

maybe i'm a disbeliever- but i cant imagine watching any fan edit of any film, that is better than an original, doesnt matter if the SUITS got to it or not.

deleted scenes are for the most part, scenes that didn't work. it's not any more artistic to add those back in.

Cheato

It's the alternate ending on the DVD. And the fan edit called "Creasy" had some scenes removed so that the movie focuses more on the main character, so that as he learns things, so do we, the viewers. Why should we know more than he does as the film progresses?

The Monkees

A while back I edited all 3 Back to the Future films on one VHS tape into one movie. I edited out the end credits from parts 1 and 2, as well as the new opening of part 2. It worked very well until the beginning of part 3 because how Doc gets home plays out during the opening credits, so I took out this whole part so it goes from him fainting in the street to Howdy Doody playing on the TV, so it's an odd jump. Also having Elisabeth Shue replace Jennifer with no explanation is odd too.

Cheato

In an ideal world, that might be a nice sentiment. But we don't live in one. Sometimes Hollywood gives us masterpieces, sometimes they give us good movies, and sometimes we pay our hard-earned money for something that SHOULD be good, but isn't, because of some bad decision by someone along the line. "The professionals" is a joke. You mean the guy that inherited a bunch of money from his dad and now has some "control" and "something to prove?" Or maybe the committee that decided a movie should be less than two hours because the American public doesn't want to sit in a movie theater for longer than that and the movie can make more money if it can fit into the movie schedule 6 times a day instead of 5 times? Or the accountant that decided against recutting and selling the full release of a movie because the DVD wouldn't sell enough copies to justify the production costs? Or some producer who decided that because another movie did well at the box office last weekend that "her" movie needs to have the tone changed to "capitalize on that?"

OK, dismiss my opinion with sweeping general rhetoric that sounds so innocent. Maybe I AM watching the wrong movies. And maybe you are, too, but don't know it, or haven't realized it yet. Maybe the wrong movie is the one on the DVD, and the right one is still in the creator's head, unable to have been made because of studio decisions.

Now I see where you're coming from. Good films like Evil Dead? The Journey to the Center of the Earth TV remake? I know its heresy to some people to say so, but I think the Evil Dead movies are garbage. But that's the beauty of the world we live in. I get to love Spider-Man (but wish it had been edited better), like Spider-Man 2 (but wish the writer(s) had had more respect for the characters instead of trying to make a dumbed-down version), hate Spider-Man 3 (for being horribly written, acted in, and possibly directed--my personal jury's still out on that one), and dismiss Evil Dead (for just about every aspect of it). (Just for the record: a big thank-you to Sam Raimi for providing me MANY hours of entertainment; I have purchased many DVDs of your movies and TV shows.)

Well, that's displaying a pretty limited imagination and keeping a nice closed mind. (You said it, not me. I'm just responding to your opinion.)

It's good thing you said "for the most part," because I would agree with you there. But if it's not "for the most part," then that would imply that SOME deleted scenes DO "work" and it COULD BE "more artistic [if they were] add[ed] back in." So wouldn't you like to watch an alternate version of a movie where someone did that? As Nick Martin said, some things like a chronological Pulp Fiction are more of a curiosity than a version that you'd want to show your friends, but as I say, some, like an edit of The Crow to much more closely match the original source material (you know, the stuff created by the "professional" creator of the character and story, James O'Barr) are MUCH better. Did you know The Maxx was edited down so it would fit on a standard videotape because the distributors (or MTV or whoever) didn't want to spend a few extra cents to release the full version? And how about the aforementioned (by mrhan) Kill Bill, which was cut into two movies because of some "professionals" who were far more concerned about the bottom line that about the "art" of the movie? And Superman II that was hacked and spliced together for the theater, and then patched and re-edited for a "Donner Cut"--imagine a world where Donner and Lester had worked together for a final edit that would have taken the best of both and made a better movie than either version was by itself. Or how about music licensing (or other) issues that prevent the original version of something from being released? Is that preserving someone's artistic vision?


Basically, I have a tough time with anyone who uses absolutes when discussing something like movies. One person with a camera has an artistic vision. Sit through 10 minutes of credits rolling by after seeing some major-Hollywood-studio produced movie that cost $100 million and two years to make, and tell me that what you just watched was somebody's artistic vision, and I laugh at you. (Always exceptions, of course--if the Lord of the Rings movies had been the Extended versions, people wouldn't have wanted to watch them in the theaters, so we get the best of both worlds in this case, with a great theatrical experience, and a great at-home experience.) Again, I'm talking about choice. Closing your mind off to the possibility that somebody out there actually IS more creative (ADigitalMan, The CBB Group, Boon23, Father Merrin, Doctor M, Jorge, Voodl, MagnoliaFan, Spence, Suicidal Wombat, Green Capt, and others, sorry if I didn't mention you) than the same "professionals" who decided that you don't need a widescreen (or OAR) version of a DVD is just limiting yourself for no reason.

BobSolo

As much as I adore Natalie Portman, I've always wanted to recut HEAT and remove the entire subplot about her, along with the prostitute murders. They add little to the film IMHO.

lcnickell

there's plenty of indie movies that directors have full control over -when i say you're watching the wrongs ones- look at your choices, maybe it's too much hollywood, cookie cutter films.

in the REAL WORLD- " DIRECTOR's vision, CUT" etc, is a bunch of BS.
directors for the most part aren't in control of the film, Producers/ Studios have a say, lots of times directors are just hired hands. They can serve little or no purpose in the overall product. ( You think Hooper had any vision into Poltergiest?, hell no, spielberg controlled the entire production, Same with Lucas in Empire and Jedi, which he didn't direct.- you think you're ever gonna see a Jedi- directors cut?)

so the whole BS of Directors, and vision, is just that BS. your example of Donner and Superman II is weak. Puzo and Newmans wrote the screenplay- are you telling me donner, wrote new scenes and shot those? no the directors vision, is based on the screenplay at hand, among other things. Why isn't it the writers vision? they wrote the scenes. Directors get too much credit. the whole " directors cut" was invented for DVD, as it wasn't that common with LD.- it's just to sell films, like the over use " UNRATED" now too.

you want a directors vision, find a film, where The Writer & director& maybe even the producer are all one and the same.



again, as someone who has made a few films, i think deleted scenes serve no purpose other than novelty at best. lots of things look good on paper, but when incorporated into a film, don't fit for whatever reason. again, they are DELETED for a reason.



I love the Evil Dead films, but they're campy. I was thinking more of the Gift, Simple Plan. both of which i'd watch any day over Spiderman.

again, leave it to the Pros.

glad this isn't a sports forum, or i'd hear about how, fans could do a better job of playing first base, or playing quarterback for their favorite team.

lcnickell

i think cheato runs one of these websites.

which honestly all jokes aside. should be illegal.

everything you're working with is Copyrighted Material. you wanna play editor, why don't you make/shoot a film.


i'm sure the people who pertake in this consider themselves creative. but you're working with a product that is already put together.


guess if i add wiper blades on my car, i should be considered an Auto-maker as well.

Cameron

this reminds me that I had been looking for a copy of the Episode 1 phantom edit that everyone seemed to rave about. Anybody who has a copy feel free to pm

i have seen some fan edits that i think are fun, but rarely have i seen one thats better than the original. more footage of course does not make a better film. However it is nice for novelty

Cheato

No, but if you look for my name in the registered users of the forums, you'll find me. Any more postulating you'd care to do?

And so should those damn VCRs. How dare they let us record things that OTHER people made--people clearly with more artistic talent than everybody else because, well, there they are, making movies!

Because I have another career.

Would it surprise you to know that George Lucas has visited one of the sites and that Lucasfilms has been in touch with the admins and that they have an agreement about content and treatment of the copyrighted material? I think a lot of things would surprise you about the fan edit community because (a) you don't know anything about it, and (b) you have a lot of preconceived opinions about it.

Wow, you're awfully sure of a lot of things about the fan editing community, considering you've never seen a fan edit, and have closed your mind off to the possibilities fan edits might present. Creativity is in the heart of the person who made it and in the eye of the beholder. Just because you don't think something is creative doesn't make it not so just because you said it.

If you get a chance to see "Superman Redeemed," you might take a look at someone's creative attempt to salvage a reasonable movie from the disasters of Superman III and IV.

Or how about the unbelievably creative work that went into restoring "The Thief and the Cobbler?" Personally, I don't care for the movie, but if you can't appreciate the creativity of the fan editor and the work he put into it, I don't know what's wrong with you.

In a final example, I think Voodl's version of Starship Troopers is so far superior to the theatrical version that the people who made the theatrical one should be embarassed. They took a respected property from a respected writer and twisted it around to suit their own pathetic social agenda and used a 10-pound mallet to beat the audience over the head with it.

No, you should be considered a car-owner, and you should have the right to change your wiper blades or upgrade your engine, or remove your back seats, or whatever the heck else you want to do with it as long as it doesn't endanger the safety of anyone else. Any more clever rhetoric you want to spout?

You wanna repair your car yourself, or you think you can even IMPROVE on it by upgrading parts? Who the hell do you think you are? You wanna do that, become an engineer, or at least a mechanic. Don't you dare touch the sacred design of your car that people much more creative and intelligent than you sweated to create. Besides, you're just working with parts that are already there, so what you do doesn't matter, anyway. In fact, you should be legally barred from modifying your car in any way. And you shouldn't be allowed to drive anyone else anywhere in your car. They have to own their own cars.


As for all your "in my experience" comments about deleted scenes, if you think fan edits are just about re-inserting deleted scenes, you're just displaying your ignorance once again. At this point I'm wondering why I'm even bothering to respond to you, since you're clearly not reading what I have written, and you're expressing opinions about things that are based on theory and speculation instead of fact.

You claim movies shouldn't be touched out of some kind of sacredness of the "original" version, and then you dismiss the original by saying that producers/studios have full control and the directors or whoever don't matter.

If you think the Lester cut and the Donner cut of Superman II are the same because they were working from the same screenplay, then I have to ask if you've seen them--because you seem to have an opinion about them that holds no water.

As for the creator's vision, I do believe that I gave a specific example of James O'Barr's "The Crow," and the fan edit of the movie that very closely follows the original source material, in contrast to the theatrical release which does not.

In fact, most of the examples I gave of fan edits were not of the extended variety, but were actual re-edits of the movies. So again, are you even reading what is written before you respond, or are you just feeling the need to start typing?

VERY few fan edits out there are just extended editions that re-insert deleted scenes. The vast majority of them have been made by people who were unsatisfied by the final product released by the studio and want to try their hand at improving it. Crap all over that if you want to, but I don't care what your hobby is, either.

@Cameron: There have been many fan edits of the SW prequel trilogies since The Phantom Editor's edit of Episode I (including his own version 1.2 of his original edit). If you're really interested, use your favorite search engine for fan edits, find a fan edit community, get into the forum, and then read up on how and where you can get the edits. Some people are STILL revisiting those movies and re-editing them. One last note about fan edits: NEVER PAY FOR ONE.


I'm worn out writing about this. When it comes down to it, I don't particularly care if people want to keep a closed mind about fan edits.

An4h0ny

wow, i don't know why people are hating so much!

fan editing is a pretty well established and generally harmless, (although sometimes annoying to directors and a.c.e.s) activity. but really now, directors and editors are usually too busy being annoyed at each other to notice fan edits...

films aren't sacred, in the sense that they can't be pulled apart and toyed with. it's all just digital bits anyway. not like people are re-slicing the master cell. copy.

i say people SHOULD go farther and re-shoot, but that's totally impractical for most... although shrinking size/price tech is changing that quickly.

what i wouldn't give for a complete do over on Ca$h Wars I-III.

i would stick to a budget of around $10M for each and dirty that mis en scene up to the point that if there WAS some CGI floating around, it wouldn't be obvious - but it would have to be 99% models and perspective tricks anyway to make it look 'right'

phantom, clone and sith done with a 70's, evil, hardcore style... like a retro-futuristic biker/noir/exploitation kind of thing.. and Bruce Campbell would be Qui Jon...

it would rule.

then i would start on re-doing all the Marvel titles that have been violated so unmerciful by teh hollywood.

caligulathegod

There's always someone who wants to take the fun out of everything (it's the equivalent of yelling, "I'm telling," on the schoolyard for nothing more than changing the rules of a game). When you buy a living room suit, do you put it together exactly like it is in the showroom, or do you arrange it as you like? Do you only listen to albums straight through from beginning to end, or do you shuffle? Ever compile your own mix tape? As far as the sports analogy, isn't it the same thing with the fantasy leagues? Users aren't interjecting themselves as much as picking and choosing the best players that are available to field a custom team and experience sports in a unique and personal way rather than simply betting the spread on a whole team. Fan edits are the same thing. It's a fun way to interact with films and does involve some creativity and skill. I'm sure if we all had a $100 million to spare, they would all love to shoot their own films. A fan edit requires a computer, some software and a bit of creativity. Yeah, some are real hack jobs. Some are just experiments to see what the deleted scenes look like in context. Regardless of opinions of the film itself, I found the Rob Zombie Halloween interesting when watching the leaked workprint and the released theatrical cut. With a few editing choices, each version of the film has a completely different tone, underlining how much of what we see as a film is created by the editor. Although director's cuts were brought up, this is really just fans taking the role of editor. While some films are just adding deleted scenes and reordering chronologies, there's some that are quite creative and drastically alter the original films. As much as we pay for films or are expected to buy them multiple times, as long as no money is being made and the value of the original is not diminished, there's nothing wrong with honing one's skills by re-editing an existing film just for fun.

Rogue588

Yeah, it bored the hell outta me.

(not your rearranging, but what someone else did )

Swahili

BlueCC

I don't think I could take the time to edit a full movie, and then have any interest in ever watching it again. If I could retain interest, I would edit out most of the Cameron Diaz/Jude Law scenes from The Holiday.

MrDs10e

I've thought about trying to do this with a couple of movies that I love, but absolutely hate the endings of: The Devil's Advocate and The Game. For The Devil's Advocate, i could easily do what I'd want to do, just haven't taken the time to do it. With The Game, the footage that I would need to make the ending I want isn't in the movie, so not much I can do about that.

And LOL at the idea that every movie has to be left the way the "professionals" intended or not watched at all. That is so silly. Does that mean if you only like PART of a movie, say the first half, that you shouldn't JUST watch that part, you should always have to watch the whole thing? I am a (small-time) filmmaker, and I have my artistic vision, but if a fan wants to customize something in a way that it brings them more personal enjoyment, as long as they don't start selling or distributing it without permission, I'm all for it. It's not different than ordering a dish at a restaurant and taking out the carrots because you don't like them.

lcnickell

swahili, my point precisely,

have no problem with different cuts of a film, i have all the dawn of the dead versions.

numerous other movies i have more than 1 cut,

but like i said, leave it to the professionals.

lcnickell

i made a short film, that had 4 different versions for a 12 minute film, so i thank you for the post. u see my point

but i'd definitly have offense with someone taking my product and doing what they wanted with it.


how is this any different than the custom covers sites that were around, but had to be taken down, because studios objected to them.

what;s to say u trim an opening credit off a film, then post it under your edit, and upload, that should be illegal.

not sure why a thread promoting the alteration of copyrighted material , would stir such debate, should be open and shut case.

SterlingBen

Now you are attacking custom covers? You're crazy guy.

You really prefer this dvd cover



to this one?


To Cheato: Thanks I would have never thought about Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, there was a movie that I was meh about with deleted scenes that I loved.

Boba Fett

I've wanted to do the following just for fun.

1.) An extended cut of Jay and Silent Bob. Smith says right off the bat on the disc he expects someone would do it. Some of the scenes were so great and funny, that when I watch the film as is, I kinda miss them not being in.

2.) A shorter version of Transformers that cuts out the entire hacker subplot. That went nowhere, and the only purpose it served was to give Jon Voight something to do.

3.) A recut of Death Proof, with the second set of girls first, cut the infamous kick to the head at the end, and then the last half would be the set of girls at the bar. It would make Stuntman Mike a truly terrifying villain and the ending would be more satisfying.

Cheato

"Leave it to the professionals."

What a joke. How many hacks are going around calling themselves professionals these days? "Hey, I made an MTV video! I'm a professional! Look, I have a business card and everything!"

Dave Sim, the comic writer/artist/creator of Cerebus, once said that he didn't trademark his character because he thought that if other people wrote a better comic featuring his character, then they deserved to be successful and maybe he should stop. And if people made t-shirts featuring his character, it was just more advertising for his comic. He had courage and didn't fear that fans would support bad quality over good quality. Nobody took his comic pages, crossed his name out, and put their own on them and published them. If they had, nobody would have bought it, except accidentally, even if it was only for a penny. Cerebus was the longest running independent comic book in American history. At around issue 25, Sim mapped out a future publishing plan, and decided he was going to tell one 300-issue story, and isue 300 was published a few years ago and the comic ended.

Have some courage about your work, let the public have access to use it how they see fit. Don't be a coward and hide behind the MPAA or RIAA or copyrights or trademarks. All they serve is their own ends, and they wind up protecting the weak when the weak should die off. If everyone could view a movie before paying for it, you'd see a lot less crap being made. People will support quality; it really is that simple.

lcnickell, congratulations on making your short film. If you had some courage and conviction about your creation and humility about your skills, you'd make it a challenge for someone else to take it and make it better. And if they could do so, you should thank them. And if they fail, you should thank them for trying and for challenging you as a filmmaker, not condemn them for being amateurs, Mr. Professional. Everybody's an amateur when they start; if they "left it to the professionals," that would be quite the catch-22. I guess you were born a professional.

I find it interesting how you completely ignore the dozen or so concrete examples of fan edits or reasons for them that have been provided, and instead post a hypothetical "what if someone replaces the credits with their own and releases it as a fan edit?" Yeah, "what if?" If that happened, they'd be ridiculed and condemned. Don't take your argument to a pathetic hypothetical extreme; deal with reality.



As for fan edits, here are some of the latest that have been released by fan editors:

Battlestar Galactica: The Tombs of Kobol (a fan took a two-part episode, created new CGI effects, inserted some deleted scenes, removed some others, and made a new experience)
Magical Mystery Tour: 40th Anniiversary Edit (a fan re-ordered the movie to match the booklet that came with the U.S. LP)
A Muppet Family Christmas (a fan took multiple sources and combined them to re-create the original broadcast, which is longer--and more enjoyable--than the DVD version)
Ophelia (A fan edited Pan's Labyrinth to make it a shorter story centered on that character. I haven't seen the original, and wouldn't watch this until after I did, so I can't comment on what I think of the quality of the idea.)

DonnachaOne

While it's a nice example in theory, Dave Sim is a creepy nut, so I don't think you need that sort of help.

Jason

Trent Reznor has released complete tracks for some Nine Inch Nails songs so they can be remixed by fans, DJs, etc. I know it would be a much more ambitious project, but it would be interesting if a director would release a collection of takes, scenes, etc. so fan editors could make their own cuts of a movie. This could be an interesting way to salvage a failed project (possibly even an unreleased film) or to market a cult film. I could almost see someplace like Troma doing this.

There's a company that has released a set of DVDs with multiple takes and scenes for use by editors for training purposes. You get a couple of dialog scenes, a car chase, etc. If I can find the site again, I'll add it to this post. I remember them being pretty expensive, but they were designed to be the same as what an actual hollywood editor would be given to work with.