Quote
Originally posted by: D0CT0R_W40
On the back of the box all the movies say director's cut 2003, except for Aliens, which says 1993 (or something close to that). Is the new Aliens dvd the same as the old one, just better quality? I didn't notice anything different about it, so I'm guessing it's the latter.
The ALIEN "Director's Cut" was made in 2003 even though Ridley Scott's preferred version (his true DC) is the 79 theatrical version.
ALIEN3 was put out in 93 and it was a completely ridiculously different version than what David Fincher wanted. So in 2003 some producers re-created a version as close to Fincher's version as possible, but he has disowned the film, so it does not have his stamp of approval.
ALIEN RESURRECTION was shitty in 97, and adding in all the cut scenes in 2003 for the DVD makes it worse if anything, and Jean-Pierre Jeunet's preffered version is the 97 theatrical run.
Now ALIENS, James Cameron was dissapointed in the eighty-something theatrical version (I want to say 87, but I believe it is wrong...) Around the time ALIEN3 came out he was given the opportunity to create a Director's Cut, which he opted to call the Special Edition (George Lucas anyone?). That's why the SE of Aliens says 93 or whatever when every other one is 2003 - it is the only one not specifically created for the DVD.
And don't bother sitting through Resurrection . . . still the worst film ever made. Personally I've always thought 3 was underrated, but the new "Extended" edition is MUCH MUCH MUCH better, watch that and don't turn on the deleted footage marker because there are scenes where it's nearly impossible to hear because production audio couldn't be recovered, and they weren't looped, so you need the subtitles they provide. But it's a much more complete version of the film.