There's a lot I want to say about this film, but let me get my first point out there quick... they should be using this film as teaching material in film schools. When this film was first announced as the "ultimate director's cut" I have to admit, I cringed a little; but having seen it, I cannot think of a single other director's cut which has done so much with so little. In spite of the claim of 40 new minutes, the majority of that is of fight sequences and alternate shots, and there's probably only about 15 minutes of new story telling footage available. And yet it feels like a completely different movie, and from my perspective a far superior one.

Regardless of your opinion on the movie, from a technical standpoint it is edited infinitely better than the theatrical cut. It is a masterclass in pacing and ill try to give a couple of examples why. Regardless of your personal preference of cut (theatrical vs directors) and the included/excluded content, what is undeniable is that the directors cut is put together in a far superior manner. The biggest trade-off is that the time spent on fight choreography are reduced, with the time gained given to character interactions between the rounds which contribute directly to the stories being told. And in spite of the fights being a little shorter, they benefit from tighter choreography which allow for both fights to to tell their own mini story. Additionally, the themes in this director's cut are much more accessible (in that they exist as themes and not throwaway lines). [spoiler] They traded the literal robot for a metaphor on the robotic machine of the collective vs the individualism and uniqueness of man; the typical ideas of East vs West play out much more gracefully this way. The metaphorical transition from man into machine and machine into man for the two competitors in their own perspectives during the final fight plays into the theme delightfully. [/spoiler]

Outside of the story itself, one of the biggest criticisms of the theatrical cut was that from the midpoint on it felt like a race to the finish. The film was never allowed to breathe in the second and third acts. I'm happy to say that the restructuring fixes this problem for the most part. A little more time spent in the changing room before the fight, and the extra time between rounds gives the viewer more to chew on than passively watching a fight play out. That said, I wish there was one more scene in the second act somewhere, perhaps between the two training montages or even after them before they go to the arena (although its not really necessary). This director's cut feels cinematic, where the original theatrical cut feels like it was made for TV. This could be a result of the wider aspect ratio of 2.35:1, which is a curious choice considering the first three Rocky movies all make use of a taller 1.85:1 aspect ratio. I don't think it was a necessary change, but the shots are all framed well so it doesn't feel like there is any missing information from the screen.

Personally, I much prefer this less goofy director's cut. I grew up with the Rocky movies, and loved the goofiness of Rocky IV as a child. Those incapable of growing up and escaping the nostalgia trap will still most likely prefer the theatrical cut. But those who have embraced adulthood and love the first three movies that leaned heavily on the drama and mythological story telling, will be delighted that they finally have a sequel which deserves to stand alongside them. I am so happy for Sylvester Stallone who can finally put this 36 year ghost to rest and enjoy the fruits of his labour, whilst also offering a masterclass to young aspiring film editors in this appropriately named ULTIMATE Director's Cut.

There's a lot I want to say about this film, but let me get my first point out there quick... they should be using this film as teaching material in film schools. When this film was first announced as the "ultimate director's cut" I have to admit, I cringed a little; but having seen it, I cannot think of a single other director's cut which has done so much with so little. In spite of the claim of 40 new minutes, the majority of that is of fight sequences and alternate shots, and there's probably only about 15 minutes of new story telling footage available. And yet it feels like a completely different movie, and from my perspective a far superior one.

Regardless of your opinion on the movie, from a technical standpoint it is edited infinitely better than the theatrical cut. It is a masterclass in pacing and ill try to give a couple of examples why. Regardless of your personal preference of cut (theatrical vs directors) and the included/excluded content, what is undeniable is that the directors cut is put together in a far superior manner. The biggest trade-off is that the time spent on fight choreography are reduced, with the time gained given to character interactions between the rounds which contribute directly to the stories being told. And in spite of the fights being a little shorter, they benefit from tighter choreography which allow for both fights to to tell their own mini story. Additionally, the themes in this director's cut are much more accessible (in that they exist as themes and not throwaway lines). [spoiler] They traded the literal robot for a metaphor on the robotic machine of the collective vs the individualism and uniqueness of man; the typical ideas of East vs West play out much more gracefully this way. The metaphorical transition from man into machine and machine into man for the two competitors in their own perspectives during the final fight plays into the theme delightfully. [/spoiler]

Outside of the story itself, one of the biggest criticisms of the theatrical cut was that from the midpoint on it felt like a race to the finish. The film was never allowed to breathe in the second and third acts. I'm happy to say that the restructuring fixes this problem for the most part. A little more time spent in the changing room before the fight, and the extra time between rounds gives the viewer more to chew on than passively watching a fight play out. That said, I wish there was one more scene in the second act somewhere, perhaps between the two training montages or even after them before they go to the arena (although its not really necessary). This director's cut feels cinematic, where the original theatrical cut feels like it was made for TV. This could be a result of the wider aspect ratio of 2.35:1, which is a curious choice considering the first three Rocky movies all make use of a taller 1.85:1 aspect ratio. I don't think it was a necessary change, but the shots are all framed well so it doesn't feel like there is any missing information from the screen.

Personally, I much prefer this less goofy director's cut. I grew up with the Rocky movies, and loved the goofiness of Rocky IV as a child. Those incapable of growing up and escaping the nostalgia trap will still most likely prefer the theatrical cut. But those who have embraced adulthood and love the first three movies that leaned heavily on the drama and mythological story telling, will be delighted that they finally have a sequel which deserves to stand alongside them. I am so happy for Sylvester Stallone who can finally put this 36 year ghost to rest and enjoy the fruits of his labour, whilst also offering a masterclass to young aspiring film editors in this appropriately named ULTIMATE Director's Cut.

Watched the Rocky vs Drago cut to compare to the original. An interesting attempt to slot a ridiculous movie back into the relative grounded tone of the earlier films, it holds the most value as an educational tool on editing and how much changes as small as a line and as big as new or removed scenes change a film than as a story in of itself.

The first act is the most interesting for how it centers Apollo, jettisoning most of the Balboa family and hijinks to focus instead on his desperate need to return to the world he thrives in. They recontexualize his drive from jingoistic bluster and arrogance to a compulsion he can’t stop even if he wanted to. The fight is what’s given him meaning all his life, and it’s how he’ll end it, something he seems to know deep down. There’s a sort of dread hanging overhead of the inevitable ending. Weathers kills it, especially in his final plea to Rocky, raw and close to tears.

After his death, the film snaps back to Rocky and the film it always was. It can’t escape the jingoism for long. It can drop hints of characterization for Drago, but not enough to overcome it. It still devolves into a string of montages and a campy speech. Black and white flashbacks don’t suddenly lend the proceedings gravitas. Some characters, like Adrian, are better served by changes. Others, like Drago’s wife, are left with less. But at least there’s no robot. Rocky IV still ultimately has the most value as a Creed prologue, and in that sense, this cut delivers that better. But it’s still the same movie at heart. People can change, but this movie can’t.

Rocky Vs Drago: 2.5
Original cut: 2

Being true to my task of ranking each Rocky based on a rewatch, this one must be ranked as probably the worst 'Rocky'. It's extremely untrue to the series so far and works much better as a standalone 80s action film.

Why?

The ridiculously brutal fighting of III is ramped up to a Spinal Tap 11 here and it is, at best, uncomfortable viewing - and at worst, sickening.

But most of the movie is designed to detach you from reality with endless (admittedly great) songs and montages. For a 90 minute movie, at least 30 minutes is reused footage I'd say.

Ask most people what their favourite Rocky is and it's likely to be this one... Sadly that's because it's mindless music and action. It is actually the most un-Rocky and should have been reigned in for its 80s excesses.

So bad is the lack of believability that it has skewed the whole Rocky arc into dangerous territory that it is only the later Rocky Balboa and Creed that have managed to reign back even 10% of the damage.

It is a victim of the Cold War obsession that 80s American culture had. It is a sleight to Stallone that he thought he could impact the world using Rocky and Rambo - his ego must have been rampant during that decade.

My final word. Stallone is currently re-editing this film for a re-release... Done right that could flatter the arc of the Rocky saga and bring this movie back into line with reality in a way that the latter movies rightly deserve. He's spoken of taking the robot out and that bodes well that a fully recut version losing some of the cartoon violence in the fight as well as lengthening out the drama portion, could render a solid film from the carcass of this.


5.75/10 as a Rocky film.

It worked in the 80s. It doesn't work today.

**The greatest Rocky movie? I think it could be.**

It's hard to pick a favorite Rocky movie, but Rocky IV definitely makes its case for first place. The epic showdown with Ivan Drago drips with emotion, heart, and motivation in ways the other movies can't match. Add the restless conflict between USA and Russia at the time, and it just doesn't get better. Getting the final fight perfect was so crucial that Sylvester Stallone recommended actually boxing and ended up in the hospital after getting knocked out by Dolph Lundgren. Ivan Drago is, without a doubt, the franchise's best villain. The development of Rocky and Apollo's relationship in Rocky IV is a beautiful credit to excellent writing and four movies worth of growth. The added Christmas spirit gives the film more character. If you had to watch only one Rocky, I would say pick this one, but it's only as great as it is because it stands on the shoulders of the movies that came before.