Do you care if something you watch is in its original form?

[Raging Justice]

One thing I have become quite interested in of late is seeing things as they originally were released. So many things these days get altered, censored, cut, etc, etc. I've been watching lots of Asian, action movies lately and I always look for the uncut version or extended version. I usually go with original audio (usually Mandarin or Cantonese) and English subtitles too.

I hate watching a movie for the first time on TV because I know it's edited for time and commercials, not to mention how they speed through the credits

I'm a pro wrestling fan and I have found that Peacock and WWE edit and censor lots of things on the WWE network. Plus, original entrance themes are usually removed or changed due to copyright. I find the network distasteful for anyone looking to watch old, classic wrestling like WWF, ECW, WCW, etc. So I usually look around on the internet for "restoration projects" where they edit or splice in old footage or copyrighted songs to recreate how these shows were originally aired. Some even go so far as to put in the old commercials from back then. You have to be willing to accept the occasional drop in quality as you're watching something with pre-HD footage and old audio added into an HD program but I think it's worth it.

I've come to learn than there are a lot of cool fan projects online involving various movies where they restore them or just enhance certain things that were bad to begin with like color grading or other things. Some of these are kind of cool, like seeing people try to recreate Kill Bill into the four hour long, uncut, version that Quentin has teased releasing for years, but supposedly has only ever been seen in a movie theater that he owns.

Even in gaming right now, there's lot of stuff that gets re-released but severely altered like the Spyro Re-Ignited Trilogy that was full of changes and censorship. Sometimes it's better to play the original games. Plus, with Japanese games a lot of Playstation fans have to import now or play the games on the Switch or on Steam since Sony's been censoring a lot of this stuff.

I guess you could even look at how some gamers refuse to emulate and want to play games on original hardware. I'm a bit more laid back when it comes to this and have played many games through emulation. I have noticed some input lag though when old games get re-released on new systems like the Mega Man X Collection on PS 4.

So the point of all this rambling is my curiosity regarding if anyone else here cares about this stuff. Hence this thread

[Limewater]

One thing I have become quite interested in of late is seeing things as they originally were released. So many things these days get altered, censored, cut, etc, etc. I've been watching lots of Asian, action movies lately and I always look for the uncut version or extended version. I usually go with original audio (usually Mandarin or Cantonese) and English subtitles too.

Isn't there a contradiction in looking for extended versions of movies but claiming to be interested in things "as they originally were released?"

I'm not picking on you. I understand the feeling. I generally prefer to play the original release of a game on its lead platform, rather than ports or remakes. And I prefer original hardware over using emulators. And I always go with subtitles over dubs. And if there is an extended cut of a film, that's usually what I go for.

But the extended cut is not the same thing as the original release. It typically contains the entirety of the original release, with some exceptions. I have never actually seen the original cut of Blade Runner, which means I have never heard Harrison Ford's infamous voiceover narration. I don't really feel like I'm missing much...

[Raging Justice]

Well, the context tends to be different with Asian movies where "extended cut" can often mean the same as "uncut". It's basically footage that was removed from the movie when released internationally. Non-Asian movie studios and Hollywood are notorious for chopping up these movies. Also, a lot of these movies have gotten extended cuts when released in Japan. It's almost like they purposely leave out some footage to be added later to the Japanese cuts. Kind of reminds of the whole DLC/pre order thing with video games, which more often than not is simply content removed from the game in order to nickel and dime us later on DLC or manipulate us into pre ordering something for that extra content.

Anyway, my point is that I consider the extra footage in these different versions of these movies as footage that was meant to be in there in the first place

[Limewater]

A lot of music albums get extra tracks in the Japanese release, too. I don't know why this is.

[MrPopo]

A lot of music albums get extra tracks in the Japanese release, too. I don't know why this is.

That's because the prices for CDs sold in Japan is much higher than that sold in Western countries. The bonus tracks are to prevent people from just importing CDs from the US.

[Ack]

Sometimes mass edits can lead to some strange but interesting results though, like the weird world of Godfrey Ho's films.

[Nemoide]

I've got mixed feelings about it and am generally pretty open to whatever form of movie I'm watching.
I definitely *want* the original theatrical versions of movies to be available, although I'm not sure that's always the best version. I know there are better examples but my brain goes to My Bloody Valentine as one that's much better in its extended cut and I'll always prefer to watch that version, though I'm glad the blu-ray includes the original.
I'm not exactly hungering to see the racist caricatures in Fantasia that were removed in all the home video releases and totally get why Disney removed them, but I do wish the uncut version of Fantasia was readily available so that unsavory aspect of the film can be more widely known for those who appreciate the history of cinema.

I also think about how every slightly raunchy comedy in the early 2000s had a "UNRATED - TOO HOT FOR THEATERS EDITION" with implied nudity (presumably to trick horny teenage boys into thinking they'll get to see boobs) that usually contained only two boring scenes of characters talking that throws off the pacing and one additional f-bomb. And most of the time, the theatrical release IS the director's cut! Or Star Trek: The Motion Picture is which is almost exclusively available as an extended cut that is WAY TOO LONG and makes the movie even more of a slog.
I generally don't like when fans complain about different color timing. The Matrix is usually the go-to example where people talk about how it became much more green in later releases to visually match the sequels. But The Matrix is also an awkward example that came out when color timing was handled with extremely imprecise analog technology and I don't know if the Watchowski sisters or Bill Pope were overseeing the transfer of the original laserdisc or DVD release. If they purposely and consciously make later releases green, I accept that that's how they want the movie to look!

I appreciate all the options that are out there: sometimes a director gets to rework a movie and make it better than it was theatrically. Other times a movie gets new footage and is just made worse. Sometimes fans go through different international editions with a fine-toothed comb and make their own edits they consider to be more authentic than the released versions. But there's rarely "ONE TRUE VERSION" of any movie with multiple edits. For as much as George Lucas insists, some folks won't accept the Star Wars Special Editions. And even though they're longer, overseen by the director, and widely accepted by fans, the Lord of the Rings theatrical cuts *are* the director's preferred edit. And even if a new edit is just removing music they couldn't license for a video release, if it's some weird obscure movie I want for my collection, I'd rather support the official release than boycott it out of protest.

[o.pwuaioc]

With music, I typically want the album as it was released in its own time. Sometimes I'll take an extended version if it was released shortly after the original. A lot of early jazz albums were on 10" collections and were later re-released a few years later on 12" albums proper. I'll take the latter, because they're still in the same zeitgeist. I'll generally pass on the ones with outtakes and other bonus material released years later on CDs. But I like to experience my music in albums anyway, even if it's all in a digital collection now.

The big exception for me is when I like a song or two far more than I like the album as a whole. These handful of times I'll shamelessly get the Greatest Hits album instead.

With games, it's a bit more complicated. For arcade games and multi-system ports, I'll take their best version of the home consoles I have, yet best is subjective. I also tend to avoid compilations if I can help it. So, I'll play Frogger on the Genesis, since it looks closer to the arcade version than e.g. the SNES or previous games and it's not an emulated game on a compilation, but a true port. I'll make an occasional exception, like owning Raiden Project, which has Raiden 1 & 2 on it, or Gradius III & IV on the PS2. But if I want to play SFII, I'm throwing in a Super Nintendo cart.

Other games I generally prefer original version to the greatest hits releases, but I don't care if my NES cart was the first or second printing, if it has 5 screws or 3. The only thing that would turn me off is if there was a visual difference, like the cheap black and white manuals of the Majesco reprints.

I'm not a huge movie or TV fan, so I don't really care about that, and I have no movie collection of which to speak, so I can't chime in on that part of the conversation.

With books, I just want to make sure they're a nice copy and aren't abridged. I do find myself wanting to buy e.g. a book containing the complete works of Henrik Ibsen, rather than a book of a few of his "best works."

[Raging Justice]

I've got mixed feelings about it and am generally pretty open to whatever form of movie I'm watching.
I definitely *want* the original theatrical versions of movies to be available, although I'm not sure that's always the best version. I know there are better examples but my brain goes to My Bloody Valentine as one that's much better in its extended cut and I'll always prefer to watch that version, though I'm glad the blu-ray includes the original.
I'm not exactly hungering to see the racist caricatures in Fantasia that were removed in all the home video releases and totally get why Disney removed them, but I do wish the uncut version of Fantasia was readily available so that unsavory aspect of the film can be more widely known for those who appreciate the history of cinema.

I also think about how every slightly raunchy comedy in the early 2000s had a "UNRATED - TOO HOT FOR THEATERS EDITION" with implied nudity (presumably to trick horny teenage boys into thinking they'll get to see boobs) that usually contained only two boring scenes of characters talking that throws off the pacing and one additional f-bomb. And most of the time, the theatrical release IS the director's cut! Or Star Trek: The Motion Picture is which is almost exclusively available as an extended cut that is WAY TOO LONG and makes the movie even more of a slog.
I generally don't like when fans complain about different color timing. The Matrix is usually the go-to example where people talk about how it became much more green in later releases to visually match the sequels. But The Matrix is also an awkward example that came out when color timing was handled with extremely imprecise analog technology and I don't know if the Watchowski sisters or Bill Pope were overseeing the transfer of the original laserdisc or DVD release. If they purposely and consciously make later releases green, I accept that that's how they want the movie to look!

I appreciate all the options that are out there: sometimes a director gets to rework a movie and make it better than it was theatrically. Other times a movie gets new footage and is just made worse. Sometimes fans go through different international editions with a fine-toothed comb and make their own edits they consider to be more authentic than the released versions. But there's rarely "ONE TRUE VERSION" of any movie with multiple edits. For as much as George Lucas insists, some folks won't accept the Star Wars Special Editions. And even though they're longer, overseen by the director, and widely accepted by fans, the Lord of the Rings theatrical cuts *are* the director's preferred edit. And even if a new edit is just removing music they couldn't license for a video release, if it's some weird obscure movie I want for my collection, I'd rather support the official release than boycott it out of protest.

There actually is an original version of Fantasia available online for the curious. You can just google Fantasia Laserdisc Restoration. I also believe in preserving history no matter how people might feel about certain aspects of it.

[Ack]

Well, this has me curious, how do you feel about people taking films, re-editing and splicing in new footage, and redubbing to create "new" films?