MovieChat Forums > Nymphomaniac: Vol. II (2014) Discussion > Okay,...NOW I'm watching Directors Cut. ...

Okay,...NOW I'm watching Directors Cut. BIG difference

posted 8 years ago by Merrida
6 replies | jump to latest

Suddenly everything makes sense. The hour that was taken out of the censored version (or theatrical release?) was filled with crucial information that tied the story together.

Sure it's a long movie. A long pair of movies. Whether viewed as part of the Trilogy or not. But it's so important to be viewed in its entirety. To watch any other cut but the Director's and you are missing a good chunk of this movie.

LVT has always put together extensive and lengthy movies, very cerebral while also visceral. So I sat through Part 1, and then I watched Part 2 theatrical, and left feeling uneasy and so confused.

Now that I'm half way through the DC of P2 it's all coming together so much more. Don't miss out on it because of concern for time. It's really important information.

______________________________________
Sic vis pacem para bellum.

[–] KaRa308 7 years ago

I watched Pt 1 and 2 over the course of a few days. Do you think I should watch both DC of Part 1 and 2? It seems you are only watching Part 2 extended version.

I'll be honest, I didn't love this movie but I am interested enough to watch extras. I'd rather just watch all extras but that's impossible (unless someone out there made it!). I'm not thrilled to rewatch these movies but I'm too curious not too and it sucks because I don't know what to do lol

[–] Merrida 7 years ago

I'll be honest, it totally changed my opinion of the movie/s. I, also, was not particularly thrilled with it. I'm a fan of LVT's work, and can appreciate (for the most part) his aesthetic and direction, his use of imagery for reflection and comparison (I just wish he'd stop using animal mutilations/abuse...I guess it works though because it does make me sick, so he's getting the visceral response).

Watching the DC all of a sudden made all the pieces fit into place and the movie is very different. Without seeing those extras, the movie feels very loose and not very knit together with just vague references, and even some omissions. But the material that gets covered in the DC is crucial to the exploration and exposition of the character. Huge difference.

I know they're long to sit through, but if you like the artistic merit of his work and are willing to sit through them continuously, it really does present a very different picture and a very different movie. Suddenly, everything makes a whole lot more sense.

______________________________________
And I stepped on the ping pong ball!

[–] KaRa308 7 years ago

Cool thank you! I'm off and on about Lars although Dancer in the Dark and Dogville are one of my favorite films. Melancholia grew on me a bit.

But I will definitely try to find the DC and watch it again. Some of his stuff, yes, sometimes I feel it's just too much or pretentious but I appreciate it at the same time. There were moments in this film where I was like "O come on that's laughable" but it kept my interest all the way.

[–] Falconeer 7 years ago

I wish there was a third "alternate version" for Part 2 of this film. A version that removes some of the "in your face" material, but without removing any of the actual story. For instance, the self-induced abortion scene; it could have been filmed without the camera being practically shoved inside this woman. Why not focus more on her facial expressions? She is a wonderful actress, and I'm sure she could have conveyed the power and pain with just her expressions. And what is it with all these close up, lingering shots of her vagina and her anus? I'm not a prude at all, in fact I love when films deal with sexuality in a frank way. But this felt childish, like the director was trying to shock the audience with genital shots. My point is, there are a lot of people out there that would like to see an intelligent film that deals with such a fascinating subject; but a lot of people would not enjoy, or even be able to sit and watch such imagery. A slightly censored version would alienate a lot less viewers. I must say though, I did not have the same problem with part I. Those graphic sex scenes weren't disgusting; in fact they were beautifully filmed and quite erotic. I could re-watch part I, but I would not want to re-watch the second installment.

Fabio Testi is GOD

[–] Merrida 7 years ago

There is. That's the whole point. I watched the regular cut, what I assume might have been called a theatrical cut. It cut out most of the material you discussed being offended by. I watched it first, and to be frank, the movie did not make as much sense and did not have the same impact.

The Directors Cut is the only version that is as graphic. So there actually is a version out there for you to watch. Just avoid the DC and you should be fine.

Having watched it first, I walked away miffed and felt stiffed, like I missed out on what she and Sillyman were talking about. There was no connection. But, for me, the DC was perfect. I don't mind it at all, and I think it drives the point home, especially given the title and subject matter, it's actually quite relevant.

Now, where I can agree with you in a way is that I find his use of animal killing, mutilation, abuse, etc., to be over the top. But alas, that is this director's style. He's trying to force a visceral reaction in the viewers and the fact you and I are debating visceral reactions means he is a total success.

______________________________________
And I stepped on the ping pong ball!

[–] Merrida 7 years ago