Originally Posted by Dasher
For me its the best way. I have found that it elevates the viewing experience. You see the director's vision, actors audibles, and editors influence clearer.
Editing out Hildi's backstory removed the emotional heft from the movie. Django's transformation from a slave who was so meek, to a badass of McClainian proportions was left on the cutting room floor. As was the best scenes that explained why Stephen really hated Django so much.
Originally Posted by ZeN
I felt the same way when I read Inglorious Basterds' script months before it came out on screen. Maybe not blown away, but it definitely had a lot of extra great dialog and a lot of extra scenes that would have been cool to have watched.
You're not experiencing the film as itself that way. You're less likely to be fully transported by the story, if you
A. know where it's going.
B. are worried about what got cut out of the script.
It seems like you're watching the movie to watch the filmmaking and not the film.
When you talk about what gets cut out of the movie, ask yourself why they cut it out. It could be keeping that stuff in, whether it's great dialogue or a fuller backstory would actually make the film worse. And there's lots of ways this could happen. It could
A. Make the film too long.
B. Make the film too slow
C. Throw off the rythym of the movie.
D. Make some scenes redundant, because the audience can get information in other places.
A lot of stuff gets cut out a movie, because it simply doesn't work.
Lots of times, writing out something like a fuller backstory is helpful for the writer to figure out the story and for the actors to appreciate the character, but doesn't need to be part of the final story.
You're going to be prejudging the movie itself, by knowing the script. I think reading the script after a first viewing and then watching the movie again would be more rewarding in terms of looking at the filmmaking. Also seeing the movie first might make you think parts of the script were unnecessary.