Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,773
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 18:30:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Jun 12, 2019 19:46:26 GMT -5
Oh, joy. Kevin Smith.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,773
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 18:30:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Jun 12, 2019 19:48:50 GMT -5
Nothing says 2003 quite like Evanescence
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,773
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 18:30:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Jun 12, 2019 20:20:38 GMT -5
It’s alright. Sorry PhantomKnightTheatrical cut is better. It’s tighter. We don’t need 30 minutes of Ben Affleck defending fucking Coolio. |
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,773
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 18:30:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Jun 12, 2019 20:36:56 GMT -5
The problem is that we don’t really explore Matt Murdock as a lawyer. He just listens to people’s heartbeats and determines if they’re guilty or not. That don’t work in a court of law. We don’t see him trying to win cases. And walking into a room and touching things doesn’t count. All those scenes are dull. They also distract from the main plot which loses significance in the longer running time. As I said, the theatrical cut is tightly edited. This just... drags. Neither version is great or even objectively good but at least the theatrical cut is entertaining. It’s a small scale dark-camp superhero movie. It worked for what it was aiming to be. Shit, if Dracula liked it, it can’t be all that bad. |
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527 
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Jun 13, 2019 0:29:50 GMT -5
It’s alright. Sorry PhantomKnight Theatrical cut is better. It’s tighter. We don’t need 30 minutes of Ben Affleck defending fucking Coolio. Sure, the theatrical cut is better...if you prefer a rushed-ass story that's only given 70 minutes to be told because the first twenty minutes are spent on a prologue, thus resulting in a movie that's more concerned with just making it to the finish line rather than let the plot and characters breathe and give some of the more major moments emotional weight. Who needs a movie that actually tries when you've got a hacked-up studio edit that takes away significant development, context and atmosphere, am I right? |
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,773
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 18:30:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Jun 13, 2019 0:39:57 GMT -5
It’s alright. Sorry PhantomKnight Theatrical cut is better. It’s tighter. We don’t need 30 minutes of Ben Affleck defending fucking Coolio. Sure, the theatrical cut is better...if you prefer a rushed-ass story that's only given 70 minutes to be told because the first twenty minutes are spent on a prologue, thus resulting in a movie that's more concerned with just making it to the finish line rather than let the plot and characters breathe and give some of the more major moments emotional weight. Who needs a movie that actually tries when you've got a hacked-up studio edit that takes away significant development, context and atmosphere, am I right? They could have invested that extra runtime more wisely. |
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Jun 13, 2019 8:34:05 GMT -5
The extra runtime/storyline essentially restructures most of the movie into something more cohesive and interesting. The theatrical cut just feels like a series of thinly connected scenes. By the time the rooftop fight between Bullseye and Elektra comes up in that version, it's like, "Oh...we're here already? Okay..." The theatrical portrays Matt as essentially a lovestruck emo without the goth makeup, whereas the Director's Cut more wisely presents him as the protector of Hell's Kitchen and de-emphasizes the romance.
|
|
