Michael Mann's - Ali: Director's Cut - Is it worth getting?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 16 Aug 2006, 20:47

I own the UK R2 2 Disc from EIV which contains the Theatrical Cut, DTS (not on any R1 version) and on the second disc more interviews and featurettes than even the R4.

The R1 DC however contains a director's commentary plus some of the extras from the UK R2.

A: Is the new footage worth seeing? Does it change the film much?
B: Is the commentary decent?

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 16 Aug 2006, 21:38

Didn't the film suck big time?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 16 Aug 2006, 21:52

Are you asking me? If so then no. I thought the first hour could do with trimming (oddly there was to much boxing) but otherwise no not at all.

Mann hasn't made a bad film yet I don't think he's capable. I was fustrated by Miami Vice, Ali is flawed and I don't think Manunter is as good as most seem to think (but it's still good) but overall he's made one classic after the next.

Will Smith is fantastic too, oh and lets face it the film is about Muhammed Ali. Is it possible to make an uninteresting film about Ali?

I'm not convinced however it needs to be any longer hence why I've never picked the R1 DC up.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 16 Aug 2006, 22:14

I've got both versions of the film, and if you have a problem with the length of the film, then this won't help. I, however, couldn't get enough of the film, which is why I did buy the second release. Will Smith was robbed of his Oscar that year, Jamie Foxx overlooked as well as Michael Mann himself. But what does the Academy know. They thought that Forrest Gump was a better film that Pulp Fiction. Anyway, I digress.

The Director's Cut just takes a slightly more politicised turn, whereas the original version focused completely on Muhammmad Ali. It's more of a case of providing further background, and widening the scope of the film further.

I read that Mann himself never thought of the DC edition being a DC; it was more of a marketing thing that it was labelled as such. If his mind, it would've been called the Politics Edition. I could be wrong, but I'm sure I read or heard that.
The reason he wanted to do this as a separate cut of the film was because Ali's life was just so... big, and in order to maintain pace to the fight against Foreman, he had to make a choice, and that was to drop the politics and present a more specific version of the film. But the political shenanigans that were occurring were happening right at the time of the fight; Mbutu and the shady CIA agent, who I believe only appears once in the initial release of the film.

Brad already know my views on Miami Vice (for anyone that doesn't, I think it sits beneath Heat in terms of his crime films, but that's no bad thing, and the film has no problems with sound

), but I do like Manhunter, mainly cos Noonan's a freak and you couldn't ask for a more convincing performance of a nutjob.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 16 Aug 2006, 22:52

I know you have, it was your siggy that got me thinking

So which cut does he prefer? He must have some preference. It's 6 minutes longer right? I heard scenes were changed too, is this right? Can 6 minutes add that much new politics footage???

So as a fan you'd recommend I pick it up?

I did find the film long enough but frankly 6 minutes isn't going to suddenly turn it into a borefest now is it.

Thanks for the comments.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 16 Aug 2006, 22:57

I thought it was an OK movie. However, Will Smith (who I think is a marvelous actor when he chooses to do it seriously) is really just miscast as Muhammad Ali.
I'm sucha big fan of the real Ali, and I've seen so many documentaries and stuff... and Will Smith just isnt as good as the real thing. He actually makes a pretty boring Ali.

I havent seen the extended cut and I'm not sure if I ever will. I dont have either DVD so if I AM gonna pick it up, I'll probably go for the longer cut...

But all I gotta say about the movie: It's a well made movie, but it just isnt as exciting and interesting as the real thing. If you're interested about Muhammad Ali, please just get some good documentaries and you'll have a great time.

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 16 Aug 2006, 23:53

What?! I thought Will Smith was perfectly cast; granted he doesn't look like Ali, but he certainly has the mouth. And I've never thought of Smith as a serious actor (although he has a new film coming out soon called The Pursuit of Happyness which seems like a return to 'acting')) until this film.

The documentaries and so forth (of which I have a couple and have seen quite a few more), show the public persona Ali put to the world; when he was on show for the camera, as it were. Will Smith is specifically not as exuberant as the Ali that you know, because you've only seen the braggart

As for Mann, I don't remember him saying he had a preference, as they're the same story; it's just that the DC has a little more scope, that's all.
The running time on the boxes (bearing in mind that one is PAL and the other is NTSC) is 150 minutes for the standard, and 165 for the NTSC. So work that out. Whatever the difference, the result is that you get a little more background into what else was going on at the time...

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 17 Aug 2006, 00:25

Kurgan wrote:What?! I thought Will Smith was perfectly cast; granted he doesn't look like Ali, but he certainly has the mouth. And I've never thought of Smith as a serious actor (although he has a new film coming out soon called The Pursuit of Happyness which seems like a return to 'acting')) until this film.

No... it wasnt just the look, which indeed doesnt come close to resembling the real Ali, but it was just his whole performance. The way he looked and moved around. He did a good job as far as the voice and such, but it was at times like he was playing Ali, and then turned into impersonating Ali for the big loud moments...

I feel Smith is a good actor, but it's sad most of the projects that he chooses, dont allow him to really ACT serious.
There have been a few episodes of the Fresh Prince where he had scenes where he did an outstanding job (the show where Carlton took some pills from WIll's locker, and almost died, and Will had to apologize), but obviously most of the show was about him overacting and being funny.
But most comedians with great comic time are also good actors, as they know on instinct when to do what to get the best effect. Jim Carrey is a great example, as is Robin Williams, as is Billy Connolly... etc etc.

The documentaries and so forth (of which I have a couple and have seen quite a few more), show the public persona Ali put to the world; when he was on show for the camera, as it were. Will Smith is specifically not as exuberant as the Ali that you know, because you've only seen the braggart

I have a couple of docu's and in those you also see him when he's toned down and serious and around the house with his wife and kids etc...
I dont know, but Smith never really captured the Ali that I knew from the documentaries... he never really convinced me that he is, in fact, Ali.

But I just felt the whole movie was a bit boring. It's a good movie, as in it's well made, well shot, well-acted, good music etc etc... yet it never ever catches or grabs your heart... which the real Ali did within a heartbeat.
I guess that is the problem: You simply cant top Ali... you cant even compete with him. It's really hard to even come close to that level of charisma and bravoure and cheek and love and bravery etc etc...
He was so much memorable stuff all roled into one man... there was so much going on within him, around him, about him, without him, etc etc...
You can make a movie and make everything look like it was back then and make them all say the same lines they said back then, and make Will move and act and talk like him... but it still doesnt come close.
For me at least, it didnt.

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 17 Aug 2006, 01:09

I thought that Ali was a well-made film, but was let-down by Will Smith's lacklustre performance. The lead performance is absolutely vital in a biopic film.

If only the film had been made within the last 2 years instead, then we might've seen Jamie Foxx in the lead. (Since he now has A-list star status)

Kurgan · Post by **Kurgan** » 17 Aug 2006, 11:57

I thought Will Smith had the stature and physicality of Muhammad Ali down to a tee. Foxx was superb as Bundini Brown (balding top an' all), but (and here's the difference in my opinion), I thought his performance as Ray Charles was an impersonation, whereas Smith's performance as Ali was an actual acting endeavour, despite Foxx having an extra advantage of looking a lot like Ray Charles to help sell the illusion.
Yes, Smith's Ali was seemingly more subdued at times, but I think that's due to having so much being placed upon his shoulders, as part of the character at that stage of his life and perhaps as an actor as well - he knew he had to do justice to the person; lacklustre is not something anybody was in that film.

Yi-Long wrote:I have a couple of docu's and in those you also see him when he's toned down and serious and around the house with his wife and kids etc...

You've got to realise that even if he's toned it down, he's aware that there's a camera following him about, so he's still going to put up a front, even if he's not in full on mouth-mode.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 17 Aug 2006, 23:14

Personally I thought both Will Smith and Jamie Foxx nailed their respective performances. Both eat, drank, slept and "were" their roles.

Thanks Kurgan. What's the commentary like?