MovieChat Forums > Centurion (2010) Discussion > Will we ever get to see the original cut...

Will we ever get to see the original cut of this?

posted 9 years ago by puirt-a-beul
5 replies | jump to latest

As a Neil Marshall fan, I bought this on Blu-ray sight-unseen when it was first released ... and was disappointed. I enjoy it, but felt (and still feel) it's strangely lacking in fluidity, with a plot that tends to move in fits and starts, some of it feeling strangely compressed and unbalanced.

The explanation wasn't long in coming: After the final cut was assembled, and in the face of unenthusiastic focus groups, Marshall was pressured by the studio to shorten the film, and reportedly removed more than 30 minutes of footage.

I've been hoping Marshall would have other film successes on the level of The Descent, and that eventually Centurion might be revisited and we might see the longer cut. But with Marshall disappearing into television, and his name seeming to fade, it doesn't look now like that will happen.

A pity, I reckon.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] Sophitia36 9 years ago

This is interesting... Reminds me of Kingdom of Heaven. I had that exact same feeling when I saw it in the theatre (that it was just OK but it could have been good with more plot development), and I had the same realization afterwards (that actually, it felt rushed BECAUSE it has been cut to fit the now-obligatory "under-two-hour" format)...

I find this trend so stupid, they prefer to destroy a movie, making it less good than it was, because they are afraid that people have such low attention spans that they cannot sit in front of a movie for 2 hours or more...

And I also feel a little bit cheated, because when I pay for a movie ticket, I expect to see a finished product, not some kind of "extended trailer", only to end up paying again to see the "director's cut" and get the real movie...

Anyway, I thought Centurion was OK, but indeed, it could have had more character development. I'm not surprised that 30 minutes were cut.

[–] coolaree 9 years ago

Disappointed to hear about this 30 minute cut out news. Bah.

[–] YuunofYork 8 years ago

That's disappointing. The film is definitely too short for its story. Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy the average run time on the action genre keeps ramping up, and certainly the better part of most of the three-hour snorefests the studios come out with these days should see cuts of that length. But with Centurion, it just doesn't work and with so much removed, that's probably why.

It makes a great deal of sense if 30 mins are missing. Arianne becomes such a focal point, it's odd we don't meet her until the 60 minute mark in a 97 min movie, only to come back to her again. It's difficult to tell the subordinates apart while they're getting slaughtered, and half the survivors are little more than names. No doubt some commaraderie earlier on is among the removed material.

Would've also been nice to see more from the Pict's point of view, especially the tracking band - only two of them have names and only one of those a backstory.

If the pacing and abruptness were all due to studio pressure, then the only Marshall input I really have a problem with is casting Mickey Mouse.

[–] puirt-a-beul 8 years ago

The film is definitely too short for its story.

Great way to put it, yes!

I agree with all your points, Yuun. And I suspect Marshall would have, as well.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

[–] spookyrat1 7 years ago

First I've ever heard of a 2 hour + "original cut" and I note the OP hasn't referenced his assertion. All I've read is that Neil Marshall wanted to make a fast-paced action adventure focusing on the legend of the Ninth Legion and I feel, he managed to do that. It's a pity that more people didn't go and see it, but that's the way it goes sometimes.🐭