Talking about the Director's cut of Blade Runner in another thread... I thought this might appeal as a topic... As my opinion is that The directors cut of Blade Runner is very over - rated. [Don't get me wrong... I love the film... But I loved the original and would keep the naration but lose the Hollywood ending] Leon is another example - Great film but the directors cut was mostly just "More footage" Yes there is a lot more stuff between Mathilde and Leon... But you get that all from the film as it stood. In fact it makes the film all a little heavy handed... Whereas the audience have to work harder in the original. I still treasure my copy of Leon -version internationale ... But that's because I'm already a big fan of the film. The only "Directors cut" of a film I have seen that I can truly say improved the piece is Touch Of Evil. So does "Directors Cut" simply mean a new way to fleece money from fans and massage the go of Director's. And what about the writer? Where's his cut? After all the writer is where the concept starts... So why all this flattery for directors? Film is a collaborative medium after all. And god save us from the Directors cut of Titanic... I don't think I could sit through a movie Five hours long.