MovieChat Forums > Tracks (2014) Discussion > American cut vs. original cut

American cut vs. original cut

posted 10 years ago by DotTheEyes
8 replies | jump to latest

I first saw this film during its U.S. theatrical run in September 2014. I loved it and saw it twice. Recently, I imported the Canadian Blu-ray, and noticed a few notable changes. Since the Canadian home-video release is exactly the same as the Australian one down to Transmission logos before the menu loads, I assume it represents the original cut as intended by the director.

Mostly small moments were cut from the U.S. version, presumably by Harvey Weinstein, such as one in which the brusque German camel farmer tells Robyn to stop wearing shoes so as to toughen her feet.

I also noticed the excision of voice-over in the second half of the film. In the U.S. theatrical version, Mia's Robyn reflects on her trip in voice-over at the end, declaring what is left behind more important to any trip than the actual destination. There is also a voice-over moment in the U.S. version in which Robyn declares her love of dogs and chides people who tease animal lovers. (I must admit, I miss these lines.)

I have no major overarching point here, ha ha. I just never realized this was given a low-key variation on the Harvey Scissor-hands treatment. I wonder how many smaller deviations there are.

[–] LifeVsArt 10 years ago

I have the british blu-ray and I saw the american cut in theaters twice this fall. The differences are very minimal, basically what you noted. I originally saw "Tracks" at the San Francisco Film Festival at the end of April, it was the same cut as the british blu-ray that I own. I actually like the couple extra sentences of Mia's voice-over in the later american theatrical release, I think they're a worthy addition, but I don't consider the U.S. version better, or worse. I love the film, both cuts. I think there's about a two minute difference in running time - the australian/european cut runs 112 min. and the american cut was listed at 110 min. Just a little bit of trimming and an extra sprinkle of voice-over, nothing at all radical. I do like Mia's final words at the end of the film in the american release. I'll probably have to get that blu-ray too, when it finally comes out, because that's the way I am.

[–] KawaiiKiwi 9 years ago

wonder why they felt the need to remove those? it's not like two minutes more or less really makes a difference...

[–] LifeVsArt 9 years ago

I now own both the american and the european/canadian cuts of the film. It turns out that the american dvd is actually about 12 minutes shorter (it's the one with the extra narration). Obviously, the Weinstein Co. wanted to make it "tighter" and more easily digestible for the american public, and the narration at the end kind of helps tie things up a bit with a message (something Weinstein thinks american audiences crave). After watching both versions at home, I've come to prefer the original longer euro/canadian cut (112 minutes) without the final narration. For me the extended journey is what the film is about, it takes it's time, and feeling as though you're alongside Robyn, taking it all in, is a great pleasure to be savored. I also prefer the ending with her floating underwater, gazing at the camera, without her words describing what she got from the journey (the message) - it's left more open-ended, and to me feels even more transcendent. I prefer the euro/canadian cut (plus they're available in blu-ray), but other's might not agree - either one delivers a unique and beautiful experience.

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

It turns out that the american dvd is actually about 12 minutes shorter ...

Quite an interesting thread and I agree with most of the posters, that I'm not sure why American audiences require/d an abbreviated cut. Interesting too that IMDB has no information on this alternative version.🐭

[–] LifeVsArt 9 years ago

Quite an interesting thread and I agree with most of the posters, that I'm not sure why American audiences require/d an abbreviated cut. Interesting too that IMDB has no information on this alternative version

Hi spookyrat. Glad you got to see "Tracks". As an american myself I have no problem admitting that we have the reputation of having short attention spans and wanting to have things somehow explained to us - we're not big fans of ambiguity. Is this reputation deserved? Probably. For years Weinstein has taken this approach to european films in particular: he shortens them and tries to inject a more obvious and agreeable message so that it will be digestible to american audiences. In the case of "Tracks", either way it's a beautiful, meditative, poetic film - personally I'm all for its taking its time and allowing the actions to speak for themselves. As one character in the film says to Robyn, "Words are overrated".

[–] spookyrat1 9 years ago

Hi LVA. Interesting that another similarly, dramatized "true" story, Kon-tiki, got the same sort of treatment for its US release, with a significantly "stream-lined" version gracing US screens.🐭

[–] murad23 8 years ago

The film was already an international screen FLOP. Worldwide under $5 million

[–] spookyrat1 8 years ago

Its box office is not the point of the discussion on this thread, unless your suggesting that a radically edited version was designed to succeed in North America, but even then it was only given an extremely limited release.🐭