Which Cut?
Go for the original theatrical cut, I’d say, at least for your first viewing. If you dig it enough after that, move on to the extended version.
The original original theatrical cut at 150 minute version was perfect. Is that around anymore? What gives?
Take a look into this thread. Hope it helps
http://mubi.com/topics/the-new-world-extended-cut?page=1
The theatrical cut is perfection. The extended cut is even better. Watch the extended cut.
maybe the extra 37mins is where they put the plot
Thanks for the other thread, Freddie! It wasn’t linked to the film’s page, so I didn’t realize it already existed. It sounds like it’s just a matter of preference – If you love Malick, you’ll like 37 extra minutes of him. The reason I ask is because the extended cut blu ray is $9.99 on Amazon right now (the dvd is only $5.98). I think I’m gonna blind buy the blu.
Extended cut. It is truly an amazing experience
135, 150 and 172min; they are all great!
@Den
maybe the extra 37mins is where they put the plot
No wonder you hated the film. The film is not about plot or story, imo.
Moderated
Moderated
Huh – it’s interesting that spammers offer opinions now. Thanks guys!
135 minute cut not close. (only reason I prefer this cut is because it’s the one I saw first and therefore “fell in love with”)
//maybe the extra 37mins is where they put the plot//
LOL…if you took all of Malick’s films and edited them together they wouldn’t have 37 minutes of plot.
Oh, Dennis, you kidder, you!
The film has a plot. However, plot points are often separated by the director’s trademark fondess for nature shots and Q’Orianka Kilcher running about looking free-spirited and innocent (such a sequence could last for a considerable time).
In Leonard Maltin’s film guide, there is a line about how the film is like watching paint dry, followed by “at least it’s beautiful paint”. So I don’t think you can really lose with this film (unless you are the type who prefers much shorter films and doesn’t fancy Mr Malick’s methodical approach, or doesn’t like intensely gorgeous imagery).
Q’Orianka Kilcher must be one of the most stunningly beautiful young actresses around, and based upon her work in “The New World”, I believe she has strong screen presence and considerable acting ability. Hollywood these days must be batshit crazy not to make films for her that would capitalise on her talents. But I guess when you open your mouth, it puts you out of favour with a lot of people. Still, Vanessa Redgrave continues to make movies and has enjoyed a rather prosperous career, so maybe there is hope yet for Miss Kilcher.
Drunken Father Figure of Old
Extended 172 minute cut or the Theatrical 135 minute cut? Normally I go for director’s cuts, but since most of the Malick movies I love are the trimmed theatrical cuts anyway, I wonder if the shorter cut might be better. How many of you have seen both cuts? Are there major differences, or does the extended cut just incorporate deleted scenes of trees and grass? Which one would you recommend?