I thought I would start a series of posts over the next few weeks discussing movies that fans love but with a twist....what if they had been directed by someone else?
In these discussions, when considering the movie with a different director, I would like thoughts on what would change:
Would the soundtrack be different?
Would the cast be different?
What about the visuals and structure?
But most importantly, would the film have been better? And out of the three directors I have chosen as alternatives, how would you rank them?
So to start of this series of movie "what ifs?", I am going to offer up my very own favourite film of all time....True Romance.
And for the alternative directors list that I want you to consider, I have 3 very different directors:
1. Ridley Scott - the brother of the films director, Tony Scott
2. Quentin Tarantino - the writer of the movie, who despite loving the version made, has stated numerous times, how the structure and ending would have differed.
3. Robert Eggers - a notoriously dark and brooding film maker, who might take this and make it very different in its content.
So lets hear your thoughts and these directors vision and how they might improve or worsen what we got. And feel free to suggest other movies/ collaborators for future posts.
There'd be more explosions and crimes against the laws of physics.
(Trolley car scene from The Rock springs to mind!)
2
pasha_beyMar 24, 2026
+3
If Tarantino directed it, the non-linear structure would probably make it feel more like Pulp Fiction. Plus, Clarence definitely wouldn’t have survived the shootout. Tony Scott gave us the Hollywood ending, Quentin would’ve given us a bloodbath.
3
LiteratureProof167Mar 24, 2026
+2
I just think it would have been awful under QT for both of those reasons and many more:
The soundtrack would have been some 70s deep cut jazz. The existing soundtrack is phenomenal, even though it's an homage to badlands.
The casting would have been filled with 70/80s stars. We would never have got the acting masterclass of walken vs hopper. Instead it would have been Bill Bixby facing off against wings hauser.
I just can't see the QT version being as perfect as what we got.
2
infoxicatedMar 24, 2026
+2
True Romance is the only Tarantino movie I can honestly say I like and I'm so glad that Tony Scott directed it. Yes, as u/pasha_bey noted, it's got a Hollywood style ending rather than the Reservoir Dogs style bloodbath of finality that Tarantino would likely have done, but I think it fits Clarence's character arc perfectly. He played the odds, ran the gauntlet, and almost got away with it unscathed.
His boldness was rewarded in the version Tony gifted to us and I wouldn't have it any other way. 😎
I remember nodding in approval as the credits rolled the first time I saw. Better to have a satisfying ending and not need it, than to need a satisfying ending an not have it! 😅
2
gummilingusMar 24, 2026
+2
And we would've seen Patricia Arquette's feet in a scene or two.
2
LiteratureProof167Mar 24, 2026
Well that isn't a bad thing. The first plus for QT on this one!
0
dinkelidunkelidojaMar 24, 2026
+2
Eggers would had used Yakety Sax in the scene with Walken and Hopper for sure
2
LiteratureProof167Mar 24, 2026
Not a fan then 😂
0
EggElectrical669Mar 24, 2026
+2
Tarantino would make it darker and more talky. Eggers would be kinda creepy, while Ridley Scott would feel more clean but less wild.
2
Outrageous-Algae6821Mar 24, 2026
+2
Ridley ruins the movie. Just a feeling. As it stands, it’s a great movie and as it’s also one of my favorites, I wouldn’t change anything. That being said, Tarantinos version would also be excellent. As all of his movies are. We would only hope that he would keep the cast and go from there. Can’t say that I know Eggers. I know he did Nosferatu and The Lighthouse. Neither have I seen. “Dark and brooding” sounds like “not as much fun” when talking about True Romance. I don’t want dark and brooding during the elevator scene when Clarence is testing Elliott and the cops are listening in laughing their asses off. It may be a good movie, just not a Tarantino movie at all. Gotta have that wit. Gotta be fun. Tarantinos films are about characters that are relatable to the average Joe. No matter how fascinating the character may be, they’re always brought down to a human level.
2
LiteratureProof167Mar 24, 2026
+1
Do you think that it would have worked as a drama/thriller without any comedy (such as elevator scene and the interrogation scene)?
On reflection, the only person I can imagine taking the film in to something equally as good would be Michael Mann.
1
Outrageous-Algae6821Mar 24, 2026
+2
Like I said, it works as that type of film. Just wouldn’t have any hints of being a Tarantino film. As it stands, that dialogue is all Tarantino. And it’s kept fun so it feels like his touch also.
Michael Mann doesn’t f*** up this film. Cast probably changes but maybe not in a way that leaves a bad taste. Mann has skills
2
LiteratureProof167Mar 24, 2026
+1
The soundtrack would be more synth based too
1
Outrageous-Algae6821Mar 24, 2026
+2
Good point. I forgot the soundtrack. Also something that would change with each director and yet another detail I don’t feel needs changing
2
ThistleFaeBloomMar 24, 2026
+2
ridley scott would make it look insane visually but probably feel colder. tarantino doing his own script would be way messier and more nonlinear, probably darker ending. eggers would turn it into a slow creepy fever dream and somehow make the romance feel cursed. lowkey i’d still stick with the original, it just hits right
2
Competitive-Bike-277Mar 24, 2026
+2
Tarantino actually likes the way Scott directed the picture. He admits he would never have done it the way Scott did.
20 Comments