Page 3 of 4

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 10th, 2015, 2:44 am
by Sky007
DotDotDotDotDash wrote:
titansupes wrote:It just means they shot a lot of footage. Various set-ups and takes and mistakes and alternates and tests etc. Not that there was a significantly longer movie that they cut right down.
Hmmm.... Source?
The source is how movies are made.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 10th, 2015, 2:48 am
by DudeBro
Sky007 wrote:
DotDotDotDotDash wrote:
titansupes wrote:It just means they shot a lot of footage. Various set-ups and takes and mistakes and alternates and tests etc. Not that there was a significantly longer movie that they cut right down.
Hmmm.... Source?
The source is how movies are made.
Haha seriously. Every movie has a first cut, which is usually 3-4 hours long. But only because nothing is trimmed. If somebody walks to the other side of the room to pick something up, the first cut would show that person walk the length of the room and pick up said item, rather than cutting halfway to him picking it up.

Nolan's said himself he never watches the first cut because it's so long and horrible. Not necessarily meaning there's a ton of more story in it.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 10th, 2015, 9:04 am
by DotDotDotDotDash
Sky007 wrote:
DotDotDotDotDash wrote:
titansupes wrote:It just means they shot a lot of footage. Various set-ups and takes and mistakes and alternates and tests etc. Not that there was a significantly longer movie that they cut right down.
Hmmm.... Source?
The source is how movies are made.
Again, source? That's not an answer. If one can't back things up then their statements are nothing more than opinion. I choose to believe there was/is extra footage such as the scene of Chastain and burning corn, Coop and Murph holding hands, etc. And a ton of other stuff we didn't see. And that's MY opinion. And unless you can disprove that (which nobody can unless they worked on the movie), well......

Good Day.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 10th, 2015, 1:21 pm
by Sky007
Well I've read the shooting script and what we see is the movieā€¦. There's your source. Like we just said. This is how movies are made. It's not a matter of opinion.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 10th, 2015, 3:22 pm
by DudeBro
[/quote]

Again, source? That's not an answer. If one can't back things up then their statements are nothing more than opinion. I choose to believe there was/is extra footage such as the scene of Chastain and burning corn, Coop and Murph holding hands, etc. And a ton of other stuff we didn't see. And that's MY opinion. And unless you can disprove that (which nobody can unless they worked on the movie), well......

Good Day.[/quote]

Every movie has a first cut, which is usually 3-4 hours long. But only because nothing is trimmed. If somebody walks to the other side of the room to pick something up, the first cut would show that person walk the length of the room and pick up said item, rather than cutting halfway to him picking it up.

Nolan's said himself he never watches the first cut because it's so long and horrible. Not necessarily meaning there's a ton of more story in it.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 11th, 2015, 12:57 am
by Disney+'s solo2001
OH MOVIE FORUMS!

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 11th, 2015, 6:49 am
by titansupes
DotDotDotDotDash wrote: Again, source? That's not an answer. If one can't back things up then their statements are nothing more than opinion. I choose to believe there was/is extra footage such as the scene of Chastain and burning corn, Coop and Murph holding hands, etc. And a ton of other stuff we didn't see. And that's MY opinion. And unless you can disprove that (which nobody can unless they worked on the movie), well......

Good Day.
It really isn't an opinion thing. It's the way it is, exactly as I said. Nolan isn't Peter Jackson (thank goodness). There's isn't a four hour cut of the movie coming to bluray six months from now. Nolan does all his editing in the script stage. The bits that are taken out in post (the shots you mentioned) are just a few shots here and there. He just elected not to use certain shots, trimmed things down, mistakes and plate work and tests etc. That's all.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 11th, 2015, 7:32 am
by Havoc1st
I do believe that DotDotDotDotDash has forgotten about what his/her original question is suppose to mean.


lol



I could explain why. But nah. Why bother.

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 12th, 2015, 1:31 pm
by ComptonTerry
Nolan has never made one, he isn't gonna start now. If he ever makes an exception (he wont) I think TDKR is in much more need of a DC than this is

Re: Official Director's Cut Thread

Posted: May 13th, 2015, 9:29 am
by Cilogy
DotDotDotDotDash wrote:
Sky007 wrote:
DotDotDotDotDash wrote:
Hmmm.... Source?
The source is how movies are made.
Again, source? That's not an answer. If one can't back things up then their statements are nothing more than opinion. I choose to believe there was/is extra footage such as the scene of Chastain and burning corn, Coop and Murph holding hands, etc. And a ton of other stuff we didn't see. And that's MY opinion. And unless you can disprove that (which nobody can unless they worked on the movie), well......

Good Day.
Inception's teaser also had shots of Leo that were made specifically for the teaser. No reason Nolan didn't do the same thing here.

Also, this movie was terrible just like the rest of Nolan's junk, so get over yourself.