FYI: 40th Anniv. Director's Cut of Wrath of Khan in theaters this September

[Probe Droid]

An FYI for the Trekies or Trekkers or whatever you call yourselves now: TCM and Fathom events will present a 40th anniversary director's cut of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan on the big screen September 4, 5, and 8 in select theaters. Go here and put your ZIP code in to see if it's near you.


It's quite a ways off so mark your calendars, boys.

 

[Krieger]

Now I just have to get the monster maroons underway…Dino Ignacio is my role model now

 

[squirk]

Y’all can’t spring something like this on us last-minute.

 

[Krieger]

...with all the other star trek threads lighting up today, I figure there is no dispute here - even numbered original movies are the best

"Khan: To the last I grapple with thee. From hell's heart I stab at thee. For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee.Jun 4, 1982"

 

[Treadwell]

Am I the only one who prefers the original theatrical cut? The removed/alternate stuff was absent for a reason.

 

[Krieger]

Am I the only one who prefers the original theatrical cut? The removed/alternate stuff was absent for a reason.

Either/or is fine with me, it still holds up well after 40 years

 

[squirk]

Am I the only one who prefers the original theatrical cut? The removed/alternate stuff was absent for a reason.

I don't know if I prefer one cut over another. The extended cuts added a bit of color, but nothing that filled any "gaps" in the theatrical cut, except one:

The explanation of Saavik's heritage. Her "damn" during Kobayashi Maru, her literal "letting her hair down," and her crying at the funeral make a lot more sense when you know she's half-Romulan.

 

[Treadwell]

That isn't in the director's cut, though, is it? Just the trailer.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

Everyone needs to do their civic duty and take a Discovery or Picard fan with them to see this movie and introduce them to Star Trek.

 

[Mottrex]

Am I the only one who prefers the original theatrical cut? The removed/alternate stuff was absent for a reason.

Always grates a bit when I hear lost cuts and missing scenes..no they were just not good enough or slowed the pace..
We all know there is prolly double the footage before a movie gets trimmed edited for release.
Its interesting to see this stuff but unless its a project taken away from the maker or demands from studio interference the OG should be that Movie..most DCs don't really add anything special... just the running length.

 

[Treadwell]

In this case Meyer did both....so they are both director's cuts!
He's said that the studio gave him the opportunity to add stuff back so he did, but it wasn't because he was unhappy with how he did it the first time.

 

[squirk]

Always grates a bit when I hear lost cuts and missing scenes..no they were just not good enough or slowed the pace..
We all know there is prolly double the footage before a movie gets trimmed edited for release.
Its interesting to see this stuff but unless its a project taken away from the maker or demands from studio interference the OG should be that Movie..most DCs don't really add anything special... just the running length.

I think you’ve said it, though - sometimes the studio places constraints on the film in terms of run-time or edits that the suits think will “play better” than what the director has in mind. These people are often marketers, not creatives. And very few directors have final-edit authority, or can otherwise tell the studio to go scratch.

That’s not to say every studio note is bad or that a director never needs to be reined in, but more than once, I’ve watched an extended or director’s cut and been puzzled as to why this or that was cut from theatrical, because it was pretty good.