Should I watch Dances With Wolves Original or Extended Cut?

Tools    


Which cut should I watch?
100.00%
6 votes
Original
0%
0 votes
Extended
6 votes. You may not vote on this poll




Because I'm not watching both for the war countdown.
Dances with Wolves is a war film? That's a new one on me. I just looked at IMDB, WIKI and Rotten Tomatoes and didn't see it tagged War.



Watch the theatrical cut first.



This is the original statement. This is the movie that was released. This is the cut that most people remember (it is, in essence, the majority of the cultural artifact in circulation). This is the cut that won an Oscar.



Your first viewing of the original cut will set the bar. Did you want to see more? Was anything missing? You get a better sense of what, if anything, the extendo-cut does only if you have the experience of the original to form an initial experience for you.



Dances with Wolves is a war film? That's a new one on me. I just looked at IMDB, WIKI and Rotten Tomatoes and didn't see it tagged War.

Huh. I guess they changed the tagging. I just checked Letterboxd too. I I knew one of the three had it tagged that a while back, but I guess that's out. Gotta double check some entries. At least now I know which version to watch should I decide to watch it later.



Wasn't aware of a DC, the theatrical version was a movie I watched bunches of times when I was a kid which is strange because it never bothered me with how long it was.


Ive just pissed my pants and theres nothing anyone can do about it...



Look it's obviously a war film. The original title was Dances with War. Dunbar is a soldier. You know what soldiers are for? That's right. WAR. The movie opens during the Civil War. Did you hear more. Civil WAR. WAR I said! Dunbar is stationed at a Fort, a place serving the U.S. Military, a WAR machine. Timmons, stationed at the same fort, is killed by Pawnee on the frontier. An act of WAR! Dunbar is at war for his own soul and identity. It's war all the way down. Bloody, lusty, grim-visaged war. The film ends with epilogue dedicated to war stating that "War is great" and 'that many animals were harmed in the making of this film."



I certainly wouldn't consider Dances a war movie, but that is what is great about not drawing lines in the sand over something as amorphous as genre. It should be fluid. All genre really is is a way to sell a film to a particular type of fan, and it's way more interesting to treat it as a discussion about why someone who generally loves war movies may also find a place in their heart for something like Dances With Wolves. Yes, there is war in it, but is there enough to qualify?


As for what version Id choose, there is no 'neither' option, and so participating in the poll would make a liar of me. And we can't have that.



As for what version Id choose, there is no 'neither' option, and so participating in the poll would make a liar of me. And we can't have that.

That's a little cruel. And yet, I must admit there is something distinctly milquetoast, bland, and at most yeoman-like about Costner's big outings in the 90s. He's not a great actor and he's generally best when he sticks to baseball movies.



That's a little cruel. And yet, I must admit there is something distinctly milquetoast, bland, and at most yeoman-like about Costner's big outings in the 90s. He's not a great actor and he's generally best when he sticks to baseball movies.

I'm not saying no one else should like it. Only that its exactly the bland sort of thing that can't possibly mean anything to me. At least at first glance.



But I'm always open for re-evaluation of anything I dont like. I don't protect my dislikes very securely.



He's not a great actor and he's generally best when he sticks to baseball movies.

I will also make clear that I hate Bull Durham. As great as Susan Sarandon is. As great as Tim Robbins is. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


Never seen Field of Dreams (even though it apparently makes my father cry, which is very weird)


I think JFK and Untouchables are the only Costner films that I can deal with.



I will also make clear that I hate Bull Durham. As great as Susan Sarandon is. As great as Tim Robbins is. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Well, it is baseball, after all.

Never seen Field of Dreams (even though it apparently makes my father cry, which is very weird)
If you can buy James Earl Jones selling baseball as the lynchpin of the American experience, it is transcendence (literally) through sports. You can get weepy about angels in the outfield, I guess (see what I did there?). Either that, or you just really wanted dad to have a catch with you outside and he never did, this would presumably be quite cathartic.



Maybe take your dad out for a catch while you still can? Might mean something to him.



I've only seen the original cut. While I enjoyed it, I found it rather overlong, so I don't think I'll check out the director's cut anytime soon.
__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd