One of the very few "director's cut" editions that improved a film was Blade Runner, and that mostly by taking things out (Ford's awful voiceover, demanded by the studio and recorded basically under duress).
I am a big fan of the Aliens director's cut, since it restores the frankly crucial context that Ripley had a daughter who aged and died while she was in cryosleep. Suddenly her attachment to Newt has more meaning and the movie has a subtext that the theatrical cut lacked.
I agree that version gives more textual context, but the in the original cut Ripley’s emotional arc makes just as much sense, but because of Weaver’s acting rather than the script (absolutely earning her Oscars nomination for the performance).
The big difference in a lot of Cameron’s early movies between theatrical and Director’s cuts is how much more on the nose he meant his stories to be before Gale Ann Hurd and his editors convinced him to trust the audience and make the stories more propulsive.
? I don't understand the difference. Wouldn't a propulsive story be "on the nose?" Maybe I'm not clear on what you mean. (For the record, I think Gale Ann Hurd was a hugely beneficial influence on him.)
The theatrical version doesn’t include Newt’s parents finding the Xenomorph nest or Ripley’s daughter. They still bond without the audience being primed with the onscreen back story. It trusts the actors and audience to make the connection on their own, and lets the movie’s action play out faster.
