I'm sure I read in the excellent Video Watchdog article "One Chance Out Between Two Worlds" that the first cut of FWWM was over 5 hrs long. And while I would agree that this (or any other pre-interference-from-the-studio version), therefore, is the true director's cut, it's also true that you simply cannot put out a movie that long. Most people balk at 3 hrs in a cinema. And rightly so, given the dross most people are "happy" to sit through. So Lynch must always have known that he had to cut that, and he was probably contracted to deliver a film of 2 hrs or less. The term "final cut" has to have a line drawn in the sand somewhere.

It looks like we'll never see an extended version of FWWM (not even the once-mooted mini series), and I for one think that's a good thing. As much as I liked Twin Peaks the series, I was glad that all of the quirky humour was cut for FWWM. I liked the dark horror of FWWM. Remember, too, that I saw FWWM before TP, so I was surprised to see so much humour in the show!

http://blogaboutnowt.blogspot.com

http://suchastheyare.blogspot.com

I respectfully disagree with this for several reasons.

First of all, ORIGINALLY, AN wasn't even Coppola's original script. John Milius wrote it, and it's a pretty dire piece of poop if you ask me. Somehow Coppola realized that it had potential, and somewhere along the way, he rewrote major parts of the script. I can't remember exactly what parts were in there originally, but it was a massive improvement nonetheless.

Secondly, Coppola's "vision" changed all the time, and I personally don't believe for one second that AN:R ever was a fixed entitiy in Coppola's then mind.

Thirdly, somewhere along the way he realized he was making two different movies: one war movie with a critical edge, and one meditation on power and violence. These two didn't necessarily blend well, and if you watch closely, pretty much all the scenes with political implications were cut from the original film, at Coppola's insistence. These cuts made the storyline less coherent, but the claustrophobic nature of it increased ten-fold and made it, in my opinion, a better film.

Fourth point: the only part of the film I've heard that Coppola was really unsure about was the ending. Note that the ending didn't change at all in Redux, reinforcing my view that AN:R is an after-the-fact creation. Also note how the music sucks in the French plantation scene. I have a definite feeling that scene would have been scored better, though I could be wrong. The only new scenes I think really work are (1) the scene where they meet the dancers, and (2) the scene where Kilgore wants his surf board back. The last one's hilarious!

Fifth: why is it that longer films automatically are better? I'd like to see some films getting SHORTER after a new director's cut!

One thing I do agree with though, is that FWWM and AN are similar caes. And I think both benefitted greatly from being cut. I'm not opposed to deleted scenes, but as a supplement. That's my take.

"What credit card do you want to put that on?"
"Caash, prease."

Erwin, I've not seen that interview, though it makes perfect sense. I wasn't arguing that FWWM isn't the director's cut per se; rather that there have been longer versions along the way to getting there, and that without a 2-hr limit, which was I believe imposed, FWWM would almost certainly have been a different film. Better? Who knows. Given that we are all converts here, I dare say we would have loved it anyway. 

http://blogaboutnowt.blogspot.com

http://suchastheyare.blogspot.com

SO, that must mean that David doesn't want to do an UNCUT director's cut of FWWM, being he just wants to cut all the extra scenes together in a seperate format.

 My main curiousity here is....is he fundementally against doing extended cuts, special cuts, alternate cuts....ect...ect...?

Has anyone ever heard him say anything in an interview?

The director's cut of Blade Runner is shorter than the original theatrical print, too.

http://blogaboutnowt.blogspot.com

http://suchastheyare.blogspot.com

If David were a more playful fellow, and found in himself a renewed kindling of love for Twin Peaks, he might throw together an If I Did It long-edit to show what the original idea was, even though the overall sound and picture wouldn't be up to snuff. His reasons against, I believe, are firstly about needing to maintain the integrity of the world by going to town with the audio and video mixes for the "extra" material, and secondly about not wanting to retouch a project when he's finally declared it finished.

As much as I believe him, I suspect that second reason would evaporate if someone backed up a big enough money truck to deal with the first reason.

And, as much as I love Chris Isaak's Chester Desmond, FWWM will always be a flawed pic for me because it's not Cooper in those scenes.

Robin Davies: >>The director's cut of Picnic At Hanging Rock is shorter than the original, much to the dismay of its star Anne Lambert!

Asterisk: >>The director's cut of Blade Runner is shorter than the original theatrical print, too.

Ooops! I actually knew about Blade Runner but forgot about it. Also, I can't remember the details but Stanley Kubrick has cut more than one film after the premiere, and he always made them shorter. These things are pretty rare, though, and my original point remains the same.

"What credit card do you want to put that on?"
"Caash, prease."

That god damn trailer's more popular than Uncle's Day in a whorehouse!

Dave was asked about "director's commentary" on any of his dvd releases, and also expands on "director's cuts" here, just in the first minute of the clip...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_sJBvoQLho

BTW: Great pic Booth!

Directors commentaries would be awesome, but the only thing Id like an extended Directors version of would be FWWM.