Most pointless Director's Cut ever

I've never seen a movie improved by the DC. For all that it sometimes fixes, it always messes up a bunch of other stuff.

Watchmen was improved even if on its own it was great. Butterfly effect got better, once upon a time in america, Alexander, jfk, alien 4, and some more

The whole concept of a director's cut is so overplayed today that it's basically become just a sales gimmick. Every once in awhile you come across a director's cut that really changes the film, but its incredibly rare and only getting more so with each passing year. I actually prefer the theatrical cuts with most films now.

Still Shooting With Film!

Funny thing is i watched the blu ray with sly's commentary and he said the theatrical cut was the director's cut because he was sure the first submission to the MPAA would come back NC-17, but it didn't.

Reminds me of the south park episode where the boys try to stop director's from changing their movies. How right they were.

First of all, it's not the Director's Cut but an EXTENDED Cut, and that a difference. When a Director's Cut comes out it means that it is the version that the Director originally intended, but for some reason (usually either MPAA or studio interference) was forced to remove some scenes / tone down the violence etc. But it was not the case with this movie. This version is basically restoring some scenes that were not included in the theatrical cut, because the Director himself decided that they not essential to the movie's plot in the first place.

Therefore, it was hard to expect that these scenes will drastically change the movie (for better or worse). Having said that, I still believe that Stallone was able to do a pretty good job trying to make the extended cut 'different' from the theatrical, but you really need to WANT to notice that difference. It's very subtle, but in my opinion, quite noticeable. The extended cut is more like a personal Rambo story, than just a story WITH Rambo in it. Scenes that were restored tell us more about his character and about his internal struggles. Also, some of the shots were changed in such way, that even the same events now look more like observed from Rambo's perspective, than just from a neutral one. For example the scene with mercenaries on the boat does not focus individually on each mercenary, instead it shows us their conversations from Rambo's point of view, while removing the focus on their characters by cutting out some of their dialogue).

Whether it's pointless or not, its up to debate. Personally, I like some scenes better from the Theatrical Cut, and some better from the Extended one. I own both version and I've done a 101 minute hybrid cut (it's basically the extended cut with violence from the theatrical version restored and order of scenes changed a bit) that for me is the ultimate cut the movie.

Also there was a little less gore.

The one I hate is the Watchmen director's cut. Three hours and it's the only version available on bluray.

"Worthington, we're being attacked by giant bats!"

Wrong. The Extended Cut is far superior. It explores Rambo's motivations for helping the missionaries and is altogether a better movie.