Director's Cut was wwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy better than the dreadful theatrical cut. The commentary was bloody awful, its one of the single worst abominations in the history of cinema.
I can't disagree with you more adimently; the harrison ford commentary is terrible and the theatrical version is an awful piece of cinema history. I can't believe you've just dropped such a complete artist skull-f*ck of a claim on us
I have the LDrip version of the original and that is purely for collector's sake, it is diabolically bad and an utter travesty that i will never watch again. The director's cut on the other hand is a brilliant piece of directing, and a much more solid film.
Ridley Scott's Director's Cut is much better. Sorry, but I didn't forget that, in fact, in that case your providing evidence for fiersky's side not mine.
And bloody good evidence that director's know more than the editors. Another example would be Terry Gilliam's cut of Brazil. The studio edit was terrible. Similar, you can use Fincher's Alien3 (still not available, but the more restored version clearly proves the director's point of view much more).
However, my rebuttal in those cases is your dealing with bloody good directors.
)
