You will never own the definitive version of a movie

Published Sep 2, 2026, 6:30 PM EDT Sydney Butler is a technology writer with over 20 years of experience as a freelance PC technician and system builder and over a decade as a professional writer. He's worked for more than a decade in user education. On How-To Geek, he writes commerce content, guides, opinions, and specializes in editing hardware and cutting edge technology articles. Sydney started working as a freelance computer technician around the age of 13, before which he was in charge of running the computer center for his school. (He also ran LAN gaming tournaments when the teachers weren't looking!) His interests include VR, PC, Mac, gaming, 3D printing, consumer electronics, the web, and privacy. He holds a Master of Arts degree in Research Psychology with a minor in media and technology studies. His masters dissertation examined the potential for social media to spread misinformation. Outside of How-To Geek, he hosts the Online Tech Tips YouTube Channel, and writes for Online Tech Tips, Switching to Mac, and Helpdesk Geek. Sydney also writes for Expert Reviews UK. He also has bylines at 9to5Mac, 9to5Google, 9to5Toys, Tom's Hardware, MakeTechEasier, and Laptop Mag. What you see up there are my two copies of Robocop. One is the version that people saw in theaters, and the other is the version that director Paul Verhoeven wanted people to see in theaters, but had to edit slightly to get past the ratings board. The differences between the two cuts are very small. In fact, if you hadn't seen the theatrical release a million times as I have, you might not even notice. But a more interesting question is which of these two movies is the definitive one? Is it the one that people first saw and put it on the map? Or the original vision of its creators? The truth is that there probably is no such thing as a "definitive" version of a movie. Blade Runner proves that “the definitive cut” is subjective This director never yells "Cut!" Credit: 1000 Words/Shutterstock.com Blade Runner has existed as a workprint, US theatrical cut, international theatrical cut, 1992 Director’s Cut, and 2007 Final Cut, with meaningful differences in narration, violence, footage, and the ending. This famous cyberpunk pillar sparked plenty of controversy at its theatrical release. The producers thought the movie was too hard to understand and that audiences just wouldn't get it. So, they strong-armed Ridley Scott and Harrison Ford into recording narration that played throughout the film. Spelling out what viewers were seeing and how they were meant to interpret events. Ford's delivery of the narration is widely considered flat and poorly delivered. There's a fan theory that Ford did this on purpose to sabotage the narration being included, but he's denied that. However, Scott and Ford are on record as hating the narration. The 1992 Director's Cut rips out the voice-over, adds a unicorn dream sequence that has deep implications for the plot, and gets rid of a stupid, tonally-deaf happy ending that was also studio-mandated. So the 1992 cut of the film ends up being a much better movie, despite them leaving the awful Vangelis soundtrack in place. I'd love a "silent" cut where you could turn off the wailing synths. In 2007, we got The Final Cut, which keeps the positive changes from the 1992 version, extends the unicorn sequence, restores more violent versions of scenes cut from the original, and even includes a reshoot of a scene where the stunt double is too obvious. The special effects were updated, the video and audio cleaned up, and that's how you get this version. Credit: Sydney Louw Butler / How-To Geek Personally, the 1992 cut is what I prefer to watch, but which is definitive? Ridley Scott says it's the 2007 version, but that's just his opinion. Making changes to the visual effects and altering the video and audio could be seen as inauthentic. Like painting over a historic mural, and that's something that means I can't consider it the definitive version. In the end, you just have to own all three collectively to have it all. Star Wars shows how a movie can be replaced by its revision Shots fired! We just don't know who started it George Lucas is notorious for going back and changing things in his Star Wars films. The original Star Wars trilogy has been repeatedly changed through new effects, altered dialogue, different color grading, additional scenes, and infamous revisions such as Greedo shooting first. For a long time, the only way to see the original theatrical cuts was to own the LaserDisc releases (or at least get your hands on a digital copy of those discs). The original cuts were included as a non-anamorphic bonus feature in the 2006 DVD release box set, but the proper wide-screen version of the movie people saw back in 1977 has not been released on modern formats. Disney announced on the Star Wars website that the original theatrical release would return to theaters for the film's 50th anniversary, so there is perhaps a (new) hope of getting a Blu-ray or even streaming release afterward. What is the definitive version of a Star Wars movie? Even George Lucas couldn't tell you. A movie collection is really an archive of competing versions I spent quite a bit of money to get my hands on the limited edition Blu-ray release of Neon Genesis Evangelion. Why? Because this version includes the original '90s English dub, which I consider crucial to the show's authenticity as I remember it from when I first saw it. At the same time, this version doesn't include the original ending theme because of licensing issues. Which means that if I ever get the opportunity to buy the original DVD releases, I'd likely go for it. Ending up with multiple versions of the same series. Neither is truly definitive, and as long as more than one version of a movie or show exists, there will never be a single version you can buy that's everything to everyone. The cynic in me sees this as a way to make more money from fans, but in the end, even great artists painted multiple versions of their most famous paintings too.