Harvey Weinstein isn't exactly famous for his leniency when it comes to choosing the final cut of a movie. Over the years tales of "Harvey Scissorhands"- a caricature of the vindictive executive dead set on getting his way- have carried through the industry, sparking controversy over the theatrical release of movies like Gangs of New York (2002), Frida (2002), and Sling Blade (1996). The most recent victim is Snowpiercer, one of the best movies of the year that you may never see. Director Bong Joon-ho refused to cut his movie to make it more accessible despite threats from the production company stating it wouldn't be released without the changes. He stood by the piece of art he had created, and was punished. Surprisingly, Weinstein relented a little, and Snowpiercer was released. The original plan had been to wide-release the film anywhere from 600 theaters to 1,000, but without the cut requested by Weinstein, Bong Joon-ho's vision will only see a select 100 theaters, mainly art house cinemas off of the beaten path. Unfortunately, while this was a highly-publicized case, it's certainly not the first.
In 1985, Terry Gilliam released Brazil, the second movie in his "Trilogy of Imagination" films. Brazil is the story of Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce), a mindless worker living in a world controlled by the totalitarian government reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984. He frequently daydreams about a saving a beautiful woman (Kim Greist) who, to Sam's surprise and amazement, actually exists in the form of his friend's neighbor Jill. Together they attempt to escape the bureaucracy, but their plan fails and Jill is killed while Sam is restrained and prepared for torture. Tuttle (Robert De Niro) is able to rescue him before the torture begins, but is lost in the debris created by destroying the building. Sam falls into his fantasy world and is reunited with Jill, and they drive away from the city together. This ending, known as the "Love Conquers All" ending, was the one studio executives decided was more palatable for American audiences and was attached to US distribution. In the European cut, there is one final scene that completely alters the tone and quality of the movie, going back to Orwell and Gilliam's original intent. The twist? The happy ending with Jill is merely a delusion. Sam is still strapped to the torture chair, smiling and whistling the movie's main theme. He is declared a lost cause and left alone in the room.
The whole idea that this scene would take the movie into uncommercial territory is ridiculous. Gilliam's movies aren't necessarily meant to be accessible- Time Bandits (the first movie in the Trilogy of Imagination) should have proved that indefinitely. Marketing Brazil would have been a challenge no matter what, but without the grand finale, it goes from a piece of art centered on nihilistic observations to a Hollywood-molded film that insults both the director and the audience.
In 1985, Terry Gilliam released Brazil, the second movie in his "Trilogy of Imagination" films. Brazil is the story of Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce), a mindless worker living in a world controlled by the totalitarian government reminiscent of George Orwell's 1984. He frequently daydreams about a saving a beautiful woman (Kim Greist) who, to Sam's surprise and amazement, actually exists in the form of his friend's neighbor Jill. Together they attempt to escape the bureaucracy, but their plan fails and Jill is killed while Sam is restrained and prepared for torture. Tuttle (Robert De Niro) is able to rescue him before the torture begins, but is lost in the debris created by destroying the building. Sam falls into his fantasy world and is reunited with Jill, and they drive away from the city together. This ending, known as the "Love Conquers All" ending, was the one studio executives decided was more palatable for American audiences and was attached to US distribution. In the European cut, there is one final scene that completely alters the tone and quality of the movie, going back to Orwell and Gilliam's original intent. The twist? The happy ending with Jill is merely a delusion. Sam is still strapped to the torture chair, smiling and whistling the movie's main theme. He is declared a lost cause and left alone in the room.
The whole idea that this scene would take the movie into uncommercial territory is ridiculous. Gilliam's movies aren't necessarily meant to be accessible- Time Bandits (the first movie in the Trilogy of Imagination) should have proved that indefinitely. Marketing Brazil would have been a challenge no matter what, but without the grand finale, it goes from a piece of art centered on nihilistic observations to a Hollywood-molded film that insults both the director and the audience.
The "Love Conquers All"cut of Brazil is a full 48 minutes shorter than Gilliam's cut, but the difference between the UK and US release of The Descent is a mere one minute- and it makes all the difference. When a group of female spelunkers are trapped in an unexplored cave system with no way out and possible company, you can expect the outcome to be bleak. But the original ending was deemed too "uber-hopeless" for American audiences and the last minute was snipped. The Descent is not as well known as it should be, so I won't do it the injustice of spoiling it within a few sentences. Although the director was satisfied with both cuts, saying understandably that neither constitutes a happy ending, I urge you to watch this underrated horror film- and make sure it's the UK cut.
Of course, no discussion about studio-meddling would be complete without mentioning Ridley Scott's Blade Runner. It's one of the most notorious examples of differences between original and director's cuts, but unlike Snowpiercer and Brazil, Scott was not opposed to the original happy ending. In this resolution, Deckard (Harrison Ford) and Rachael (Sean Young) escape to start a new life together. It's a little sappy, but it ultimately gives the audience what it wanted. The Director's Cut, however, omits this scene entirely and leaves the film on an ambiguous note when Rachael and Deckard exit the flat. Fans are split on which cut is better, Scott's includes the much-mentioned "unicorn dream" and leaves an air of mystery surrounding the central crisis, but this is not celebrated by all.
The takeaway from all of this should be that the audience doesn't always know best; artistic integrity should never be compromised for public palatability.
Of course, no discussion about studio-meddling would be complete without mentioning Ridley Scott's Blade Runner. It's one of the most notorious examples of differences between original and director's cuts, but unlike Snowpiercer and Brazil, Scott was not opposed to the original happy ending. In this resolution, Deckard (Harrison Ford) and Rachael (Sean Young) escape to start a new life together. It's a little sappy, but it ultimately gives the audience what it wanted. The Director's Cut, however, omits this scene entirely and leaves the film on an ambiguous note when Rachael and Deckard exit the flat. Fans are split on which cut is better, Scott's includes the much-mentioned "unicorn dream" and leaves an air of mystery surrounding the central crisis, but this is not celebrated by all.
The takeaway from all of this should be that the audience doesn't always know best; artistic integrity should never be compromised for public palatability.