• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

Spider-Man 3 "Editor's Cut"

NegaScott128

Well-known member
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
21
61pi6tACchL._SX200_QL80_.jpg


So apparently Sony stealth-released an "editor's cut" of Spider-Man 3 on streaming services. Even stranger still, this isn't a straightforward extended cut like 2.1 was. In fact, it's about 1.5 minutes shorter.

Here it is on Amazon Instant Video.

This Blu-Ray.com post goes into the differences between this new version and the theatrical cut. There's no word yet on a physical release, but there is a new collection coming out soon that might (emphasis on might) have it.

I have no idea where this cut came from, or why it's only being released now. Posters on Blu-Ray.com theorize that it might be an alternate cut of the film from when the movie was in post-production in 2007, but that's just guessing. A Japanese Blu-Ray set included this version of the film (only it was called 3.1 over there) and claimed it was supervised by Sam Raimi, but this was via Google Translate. If it were supervised by Raimi, I'm not sure why it's called the "editor's cut" and not a director's cut.
 

SpectacularSMan

Well-known member
Messages
193
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
23
I find this Editor's Cut really bizzare.  For one, it came way after the release and any buzz for the movie. Also, there really aren't that many changes to even justify the release.

That being said,  it sounds like there are a few really good additions that can be used, such as Harry with the picture and the sandcastle scene.

While this edit doesn't really sound like the big cut we wanted,  it can help us inch towards a perfect SM 3 edit.
 

Canon Editor

Well-known member
Messages
1,730
Reaction score
80
Trophy Points
53
Oh my, this is weird.  BUT I am ridiculously happy for it.

What's a stealth-release, by the way?
 

NegaScott128

Well-known member
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
21
Canon Editor said:
Oh my, this is weird.  BUT I am ridiculously happy for it.

What's a stealth-release, by the way?
No fanfare, no announcement. It just popped up on streaming services with no warning. Which is really weird, considering that the only reason Sony would release it now is to promote Homecoming, but they didn't tell anyone about it.
 

hbenthow

Well-known member
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
170
Trophy Points
68
It appears that the "Editor's Cut" is indeed an earlier cut that was made before the theatrical cut, or at least based on it.

A member of the Blu-ray.com forum emailed Bob Murawski (the editor of "Spider-Man 3"), asking him why the final Peter/Aunt may scene was removed from the Editor's Cut. Murawski replied thusly:

"It is a good scene, but we went back to an earlier version of the movie that existed before this scene was shot to create this alternate cut. In the original version of the script, Peter made up his own mind to try to make amends with Mary Jane after he rid himself of the black suit."

http://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.php?p=13652822&postcount=1186
 

hbenthow

Well-known member
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
170
Trophy Points
68
Some more answers from Bob Murawski (via this post from the Blu-ray.com user who contacted him):

1. Why not have the scene where Flint’s family comes in during the final battle and tell him to stop fighting Spider-Man, and that Penny is incurable?

"That was cut long ago because it made the third act too slow. Plus, the goal of this cut was to go back to a version where the characters made their decisions themselves."

2. Were there any thoughts to make an even longer extended cut and include the other parts of the sandcastle scene and other rumored deleted scenes?

"No. This will probably be it. The big thing was fully restoring Christopher Young's great score from start to finish. The new edit was a bonus."

3. I would like it if you made a retrospective audio commentary for the Spider-Man 3: Editor’s Cut, talking about your experiences editing the theatrical version, the studio mandating, and your goals behind this new cut.

"There was no time. The new version barely came together in time for the release date."

4. I’m just saying that there is so much more you could have added to this Editor’s Cut to improve the movie. Make it an actual extended cut.

"Not in my opinion. The movie is better shorter."

Also, there was this exchange between the two (you can read it in context at this link):

I told him: 
"What’s weird about this Editor’s Cut, is that there is virtually no advertising for it. It’s available to rent and buy on Amazon Video, but Sony hasn’t come out with any press release confirming it being on the new Spider-Man Trilogy Blu-Ray Digibook coming in two weeks."

His response: 
"I don't understand it myself."
 

NegaScott128

Well-known member
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
21
hbenthow said:
Some more answers from Bob Murawski (via this post from the Blu-ray.com user who contacted him):

1. Why not have the scene where Flint’s family comes in during the final battle and tell him to stop fighting Spider-Man, and that Penny is incurable?

"That was cut long ago because it made the third act too slow. Plus, the goal of this cut was to go back to a version where the characters made their decisions themselves."

2. Were there any thoughts to make an even longer extended cut and include the other parts of the sandcastle scene and other rumored deleted scenes?

"No. This will probably be it. The big thing was fully restoring Christopher Young's great score from start to finish. The new edit was a bonus."

3. I would like it if you made a retrospective audio commentary for the Spider-Man 3: Editor’s Cut, talking about your experiences editing the theatrical version, the studio mandating, and your goals behind this new cut.

"There was no time. The new version barely came together in time for the release date."

4. I’m just saying that there is so much more you could have added to this Editor’s Cut to improve the movie. Make it an actual extended cut.

"Not in my opinion. The movie is better shorter."
So it's sort of a reworked version of an earlier cut of the film? His wording is very unclear.

I agree that the movie doesn't really need to be much longer than it is, but seeing as the changes are so minor, I think I might've preferred an extended cut. If for no other reason than it gives us more to work with regarding fanedits.
 

hbenthow

Well-known member
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
170
Trophy Points
68
Hardback247 (the Blu-ray.com user who contacted Bob Murawski) just announced that Murawski has confirmed that the Editor's Cut will indeed be on the new digibook release of the trilogy.
 

SpectacularSMan

Well-known member
Messages
193
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
23
That "no time" comment really makes me think this may have been a rush job. That would make sense, as there doesn't seem to be a ton of changes or new content and from what I've heard, there are some amateurish cuts in there. Atleast there is some new footage to use.
 

NegaScott128

Well-known member
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
21
SpectacularSMan said:
That "no time" comment really makes me think this may have been a rush job. That would make sense, as there doesn't seem to be a ton of changes or new content and from what I've heard, there are some amateurish cuts in there. Atleast there is some new footage to use.
Everything about this release is botched. Over 10 years after the theatrical release, and yet it was rushed out the door? Presumably promoting Homecoming or the 10th anniversary of SM3, yet absolutely no promotion? Using the vague and confusing "Editor's Cut" moniker instead of continuing the .1 naming convention? It doesn't make any sense. Only Sony could screw up a re-release this badly.
 

SpectacularSMan

Well-known member
Messages
193
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
23
Hopefully it has been taken down with the intention of releasing something more substantial. Making people buy a whole new cut with barely any differences to the original is just silly. Hopefully something good comes out of this.
 

hbenthow

Well-known member
Messages
1,600
Reaction score
170
Trophy Points
68
It's more likely that it wasn't supposed to be released yet, or there was a problem with the release. I read that the version that was on Amazon didn't even have the correct subtitles.
 

Canon Editor

Well-known member
Messages
1,730
Reaction score
80
Trophy Points
53
This is getting weirder.  They are either adding some more into the cut, or trying to boost the release a bit with marketing, and rightly so.  I believe that even if this cut isn’t a game changer, it does give us some interesting material to work with for future fan edits.
 

coinilius

Well-known member
Messages
286
Reaction score
0
Trophy Points
16
The sandcastle scene is something I have long wanted to see - hopefully I can use it to add a nice piece of closure to my Sandman mini movie idea which I posted about earlier in this thread.
 

henzINNIT

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
384
Reaction score
117
Trophy Points
53
Also looking forward to seeing the sandcastle scene. That is definitely my favourite among the deleted scenes we've heard of. I've been following this cluster of a roll-out for about a month, it was quite a ride. Sony are the worst.

Hard not to think that this rare opportunity has been wasted. 15 years of Raimi's Spider-Man, 10 years of this film in particular, and the impending release of a new movie; this was the perfect time to milk another home release. Sadly, this "Editor's Cut" sounds half-hearted, not significant enough to warrant being a definitive new take, not even significant enough to be promoted. Neither does it deliver on new footage. It's a weak showing compared to 2.1 and considering the amount of known deleted scenes.
 

SpectacularSMan

Well-known member
Messages
193
Reaction score
4
Trophy Points
23
It really is a shame. Between cutting some content and adding other stuff that never got released to the fans, I bet Sony could put out a pretty solid Directors Cut that would redeem this movie for many. Sam Raimi's Spider-Man never got the ending it deserved.
 

Canon Editor

Well-known member
Messages
1,730
Reaction score
80
Trophy Points
53
Indeed it could be half a miss.  Nonetheless, I feel that the reordering could really help the film, while the sandcastle scene does give you more of a reason to believe that Sandman would join Venom as he “won’t let Spider-Man stop him again”.  By tweaking the beginning of the film, the finale, and keeping some of the alternate material from the alternate cut, could give us a true definitive hybrid cut, for all that’s possible.  And I would be more than happy with that.
 

Canon Editor

Well-known member
Messages
1,730
Reaction score
80
Trophy Points
53
Finally a neat, detailed analysis of the Editor’s Cut of Spider-Man 3. 

https://www.comicbookmovie.com/spid...n-3-editors-cut-is-it-worth-your-time-a151814

Having finally watched the deleted scenes.  It appears to me that (like the analysis already states), although the changes seem slight at first, on the overall the film their impact is indeed pretty sound.  There is probably a bit more I would fix, but I will probably use the Editor’s Cut as a basis WHEN I get around to edit the film.  A temporary cutlist would no go now something like…: 
• Alternate the mixes from the alternate and the original cut (there are moments where the latter could work better); 
• create a hybrid between the theatrical and the alternate takes of Harry and Peter’s meeting at the manor before the fight; 
• cut the montage at the beginning and have the film’s first scene be the theatre scene, as this allows us to touch upon Harry and Peter’s relationship before a big fight; 
• if possible, I would reinsert the last scene between Aunt May and Peter and move it to after the funeral, so that some more emotion is brought to the end of the film and the marriage plot is tied up.  If this is possible, it would mean something would have to be pushed back between Peter in the shower and Venom meeting Sandman.  A half-idea would be to move the scene where Penny hugs the sandcastle there, so that we would also have some more time pass between Venom’s birth and his full revelation.  I don’t know if this is possible, though; 
• remove the dance scene, as it is totally out of place, even more than before; 
• add a Daily Bugle newspaper front page which wraps up Flint Marko’s story and tells us he constituted himself in exchange for cures for his daughter (someone would have to make that for me); 
• I would leave in glimpses of Peter’s dream where he sees Flint Marko kill his uncle, although not in its entirety.  This way, we have a darker character, an even darker symbiote and a scene where, hopefully, we’re experiencing the symbiote twist Peter’s mind and perception of reality - his thirst for revenge is nourished by a false memory; 
• shorten the scene between Peter and Mary Jane before he goes off to save Gwen Stacy; 
• maintain the reordering of scenes from the alternate cut; 
• cut all overly comedic moments (shorten OR delete the desk scene and cut the scene betwen J. Jonah Jameson and the little child.  

This is about it for now, but I wish to specify how this is all talk and “brainstorming” for now.  I will get to the edit once my X-Men 3 edit is released.
 

henzINNIT

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
384
Reaction score
117
Trophy Points
53
I really enjoyed the Editor's Cut. The small changes made some dramatic differences.

-Re-ordering the symbiote suit sequences only added a few seconds of extra footage but it felt so much more sinister. Really effective.

-The conversation Emo Peter and Harry have before fighting has been switched out for another take. This one is much better. In the theatrical cut, Peter is dead serious. He's a total douche in this scene, more fun and more interesting. They feel more like real friends that have turned on each other.

-I liked the Sandcastle sequence. Brief but necessary character moment to bring Flint back into the story. Think it was missing some fx work though, which was jarring.

-Cutting the butler was great. Bernard never bothered me as much as it did most, but the replacement sequence gets to the point much faster and doesn't need any expositional dialogue so it's an instant win.

-I didn't notice the score change all that much. It was still good, though I had no complaints about the theatrical score.

-The new edit is not without flaws. There are a few rough transitions. The Sandcastle sequence plays immediately after another Marko scene that now sticks out and is basically pointless. It was a shame to see the last Aunt May scene removed, and removing only 1 line of Dafoe's Goblin is 1 line too many.
 
Top Bottom