Directors Cut- I have it. Any questions?

[wastedyuthe]

Right. After buying the original version on Ebay, I decided to buy the Directors Cut as I was interested to see if it had improved. I was ultimately disappointed, as although Hines cut 45 minutes from the film, he showed that he still hasn't improved much in terms of editing. Now, instead of the film being seemingly un-edited in places and chopped up in others, the whole film seems chopped up. It's a mess!
On another post, I have stated I am doing my own edit of the film, and have almost finished. Guess what? It's far better than either of the official versions!
The Directors Cut has cut out some of the walking, is definately faster paced. But it seems that Hines didn't really want to be rid of any scenes, and so instead of cutting any non-important scenes, he has seemingly trimmed every single one. When he drops his wife off, for example, we still see them at the dinner table for a few seconds staring at her, before he leaves. In my edit, we skip from them arriving straight to the writer saying goodbye. The bits where we see the laughable donkey chaise cut-out riding along the road are still there, although trimmed in length too. In my edit, I have cut out any cut-outs all together! One of the worse parts of the edit is STILL the brother scenes- seemingly placed in any random order throughout the film- right in the middle of key writer scenes sometimes! I was really hoping the Directors cut would rectify this, but they are all in exactly the same places. My edit has some of the earlier brother clips removed all together, as they just get in the way. What Hines has done, by trimming every scene rather than cutting non-important scenes all together, is heightened the 'mess' that was apparent in half of the first film, and made the whole Directors Cut a mess.
To top this off, there has been very minimal 'improvements' in the effects department. The initial heat ray now has a blue/grey flame/smoke thing that covers the screen to block your view of the tripping skeletons (once again, in my edit I just cut this section down for better effect). I think the martians look a little more detailed too, but not much. To be honest, I didn't see any other differences. The Thunderchild effects are untouched.
There are two parts where I would say the Directors Cut does improve on the original. The first third of the film was in need of a faster pace, and it now has it (although I would have, and indeed have done, edited it in a different way). Also, the Artillery mans tunnel scene has been slotted in right where it should be. It is only a minute or so long, and consists of the writer narrating over a few clips of him being shown the Artillery mans tunnel, and them relaxing etc, before the writer decides to leave. It still seems minimal, but at least it is there, and fills a very prominant gap in the original.

So there you go, a couple of improvements but otherwise, very poor. The original of course, was not perfect. But after making my own edit from it, I was expecting something of similar quality as my own editing from Hines- and I didn't get it.

Anyway, I was going to do a comprehensive comparison, but I am that miffed about it, I can't be bothered- sorry. However, if anyone has any questions they would like to ask regarding how it compares to the original, feel free to ask. I have both, so I will give an honest and true answer.

[EvilNerfherder]

Just confirms what I already thought and justifies my decision not to bother ordering it. Once bitten..
I have the 3 hour cut and I'm happy with that. Sorry, did I say 'happy'?
Anyway, since when was a DIRECTOR'S CUT shorter than the original film?

[richardburton]

Arse about t!t springs to mind, mate

[wastedyuthe]

You know what really bugs me? The fact that if this film was edited in a more professional and caring manner, then it could have been a lot better. Still not perfect of course, but still. My own edit proves this. I have done lot's work on this, like cutting out earlier scenes of the brother, and moving the Big Ben scene to BEFORE a character states that London has been taken by the Martians, and not after. I will incorporate the Artillery man tunnel scene into mine, but that's the only bit from the Directors Cut I will use.

[EvilNerfherder]

Actually, I have a question.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way but I would be interested to find out what make people want to edit this themselves. I've seen people talk of many such attempts since this film was released.
I can't see much point. The film was pretty bad yes, but the director tried to re-edit it and it sounds like he made it worse.
Even if someone does manage to, as the adage goes, 'polish this turd' it's illegal to post it anywhere or to distribute it. Is it the process itself you are interested in or are you just desperate to make this better?
Personally, I'd like to see this left as a bad idea done badly and for someone else to try and make the definitive TWoTW film.

[richardburton]

I'm guessing its a passion of editing coupled with a passion for WOTW that drives people on this one.

[wastedyuthe]

I am not interested in distributing it- this is just for my own benefit, and anyone else who cares to watch it.
Actually it was the original version of this film that got me into editing- even before I watched it. With all the comments about the walking bits etc, I thought that maybe it would benefit from an edit. Obviously I love WotW, which helps my motivation. Of course you can't polish a turd- but this turd does have a few bits of sweetcorn in it, and by cutting out the crap, at least some of the sweetness will shine through.
So far I have turned this turd into a very nice Walnut Whip!

[richardburton]

God I feel a bit sick now....all this talk of sweetcorn and walnut whips (ordinarily nice in other circumstances! lol)

[Lensman]

I sat down the other day to time out the walking scenes. Went thru the entire first hour of the film. To my surprise, there's no single walking scene that's that long. Oh, they're too long by far for the purpose of the film-- they could be cut by 75 or 80%-- yet most of them were under a minute.

The problem, at least in the first part of the story, is that Hines has made absolutely no attempt to condense the story in a manner appropriate to turning it into a film. For instance: He slavishly follows the story as the Narrator walks from the pit at Horsell Common to Lord Hilton's manor to deliver a message (end of Chapter 3), finds the landowner is not home, walks home himself, has a spot of tea, walks to the train station where he's been told Lord Hilton will be arriving, delivers the pointless message (a scene Wells left out of the novel, for good reason), then walks back to Horsell Common.

All these sequences do absolutely nothing to advance the story, nor do they have any impact on what follows. It occupies only three short paragraphs in the novel, yet several minutes of screen time. So right there are four scenes of pointlessly walking back and forth which should have been cut out.

Personally, I wouldn't try to discourage anyone who wants to do a "fan edit" of the film-- virtually every fan film I've seen is edited much better than the Pendragon film, so I have no doubt it could be improved. Just keep in mind it's not legal to post it to the Internet or even give copies away.

But my personal opinion is that (as ENH said) it's simply not worth the effort. In my opinion there simply isn't enuff good material there to make anything worth watching, no matter how it's edited.

[Lensman]

nerfherder said:

since when was a DIRECTOR'S CUT shorter than the original film?

Another first for Pendragon! ;D

nerfherder said:

Just confirms what I already thought and justifies my decision not to bother ordering it. Once bitten...

Me too. Besides which, I refuse to give Timbo another penny of my money.

[wastedyuthe]

"Hines has made absolutely no attempt to condense the story in a manner appropriate to turning it into a film. For instance: He slavishly follows the story as the Narrator walks from the pit at Horsell Common to Lord Hilton's manor to deliver a message (end of Chapter 3), finds he's not a home, goes home himself, has a spot of tea, walks to the train station where he's been told Lord Hilton will be arriving, delivers the pointless message (a scene Wells left out of the novel, for good reason), then walks back to Horsell Common."

You are absolutely right Lensman my friend. Unfortunately Hines did trim this sequence in the DC, but kept all the clips in. So he still goes to the manor, then goes home, then to the station, then back to the common. The edit is too abrupt in the DC too- when he gets to the station he says "Lord Hilton, I come bearing a message of the upmost importance", and then all of a sudden it jumps to seeing him walking back to the common. Daft. For my edit, I couldn't find a way to keep the writer at the common as in one clip there would have been a few people there, and the next clip there would have been a large crowd- it wouldn't have looked right. So I skipped from him walking away to seeing him walk into the station, then immediately to him walking back to the common- giving that sense that he dealt with his business, and that time had passed whilst only taking up a few seconds of screen time.

[Lensman]

wastedyuthe said:

For my edit, I couldn't find a way to keep the writer at the common as in one clip there would have been a few people there, and the next clip there would have been a large crowd- it wouldn't have looked right. So I skipped from him walking away to seeing him walk into the station, then immediately to him walking back to the common- giving that sense that he dealt with his business, and that time had passed whilst only taking up a few seconds of screen time.

I was confident from what you'd posted earlier that your sense of editing was better than Hines', and by this description you've certainly confirmed it's a *lot* better. I hope you're happy with what you're able to come up with.

[wastedyuthe]

Thank you Lensman- yes I am happy with what I have done so far, and I must admit, the film is all the better for it. I don't normally like blowing my own trumpet, but in this instance I thought 'Sod it!'

[David Faltskog]

Maybe just have a edit of Mr Narrator walking back and forth to Lord Hilton's abode now that would be exciting

D.F

[RustiSwordz]

alien8 said:

Maybe just have a edit of Mr Narrator walking back and forth to Lord Hilton's abode now that would be exciting

D.F

so would pouring bicarb of soda in my eyes...

[nervouspete]

alien8 said:

Maybe just have a edit of Mr Narrator walking back and forth to Lord Hilton's abode now that would be exciting

D.F

Inspired by that little post, I bring you a transcript of an exciting new trailer I saw on the net. *Ahem*

'The Voice':

"It was a time of tranquility. Anthony Piana was a moderately successful journalist, who thought he had it all, until one day..."

(Camera abruptly zooms into Piana's face)

Anthony Piana: "I have to do my errands!"

The Voice: "...And Anthony Piana was about to find out, that doing his errands, isn't as easy as it looks!"

Cut to fast clips montage of Anthony walking about, delivering a message, buying some milk, going to the post box, walking about some more.

Anthony Piana: "I certainly hope no martians invade our planet, Ogilvy!"

The Voice: "It's a film that delivers its laughs like so much accurately posted mail!..."

The Voice: "From the almost makers of Chrome..."

(Picture of website with broken links)

The Voice: "And... *cough*... Chrome..."

The Voice: "Comes Anthony Piana in... 'Peace of the Worlds'!"

(Shot of Piana with stupid moustache, looking absurdly pleased with himself)

The Voice: "Rated PG 13"

[wastedyuthe]

We all like a laugh people. But come on now- I'm trying to keep this one open to questions and discussion, not just another take-the-piss-out-of-Hines thread. Thank you.

[richardburton]

I agree, I think we've had enough p!ss taking of this adaption. This is a serious thread discussing the merits of editing this adaption with the hope to make it better. I know a lot of people think that it is impossible to salage anything from it, but there are a few people on these boards that do see some good points in it, so for their sakes lets keep this thread for discussing ways of possibly improving it and move the slating to another thread.

Thank you, I'm here all week!

[nervouspete]

wastedyuthe said:

We all like a laugh people. But come on now- I'm trying to keep this one open to questions and discussion, not just another take-the-piss-out-of-Hines thread. Thank you.

Erk! Sorry mate. I was just drawn to the classic South Park 'Rob Schneider' sketch, which I still find incredibly funny. But it wasn't fair of me to help in the hi-jacking of this thread, and I 'm sorry. I wouldn't like someone using my realist-style modern film fan-fiction to knock the Spielberg effort, and I'm a bit ashamed that I didn't think before I laid in here.

This will be my last knock on Hines in a thread not dedicated from first post to the knocking.

Good luck with the adaptation. It takes a lot of gumption to do editing, and it's not easy. Out of curiosity, are there any other bits (big or small) you find in the novel that don't fit well into a film-based format, and are keen to get rid of in the editing?

Hope you get a good rhythm going. Cheers.

And again apologies.

[wastedyuthe]

Thank you very much for your apology and understanding, Nervouspete.
As to your question, there are probably lot's of sections in the book that wouldn't adapt very well if filmed exactly as so for the screen. Let's face it, if that were the case, we'd be looking at a film a good deal longer than 3 hours.
In terms of the original version of this film and the DC, I am finding it very difficult to decide what to do with the brother scenes. On one hand they (loosely) follow the brother story in the book so should stay in. However there are a few reasons why they should be cut out all together-
1) I always liked the idea of following one character- the writer. It is always easier to see things from one persons perspective as that's how you would see it in real life. However, the brother section adds more back-story with what's hapening with the rest of the country. I forgive the book, as without the brother, we wouldn't have excellent sections like the exodus, and of course the Thunderchild. But this leads me on to point 2...
2) The film does not do the book justice at all with the brothers story. In fact it makes it rather dull. The exodus is almost non-existant, and of course the less said about the Thunderchild sequence the better.
3) As I said before, the brother scenes really get in the way, and some clips are not needed in the film at all.

So, do I keep what bits of the brother story are half-decent, or do I just rid the film of the brother all together? One things for certain, if I do keep him, the Thunderchild has already been edited out all together. The last we see of the brother in my edit is when they board the steam boat and bugger off down the river. It then fades to the writer and stays with him for the remainder.

Hasn't anyone got any question regarding the DC? Anyone interested in differences on a particular scene?