I just finished watching the Unrated version of it which is 11 minutes longer and apparently have some other scenes compared to the normal in some bits. I dont recall which one i saw many years ago but it was definitely much shorter and a complete mess editing wise. I gave it a 3/10 on imdb it was one of the worst scifi movies attempts ive seen. A scifi movie thats attempting at a story is not enough with a 1 movie imo and thats one of the many reasons its horrendous. However while the Unrated version overall is a better experience due to the slightly more length and a more fulfilling experience its still not a very good movie.
There are still way to many scenes poorly edited, the movie is just really unengaging and its incredible how poor Vin Diesels performance is in this one actually considering the decent level he has kept in his other scifi movies. All the 3 Riddick movies are a guilty pleasure but this is not. Like the original movie the unrated version really suffers from actually pace its story, everything philosophical and deep its trying to tell is condensed into the last 25 minutes of the movie or so while the first hour is literally just a road movie with some really bad chemistry between Diesel/Aurora/Asian nun.
I cant even remember their names, it was that bad. I think Diesel was called Taboor or something and it was just awful to hear any of the actors saying his name throughoout the movie. Not sure what i would rate this movie today as i thought the original was in the 3/10 or 2/10 region. Id say the unrated version is overall a better watch due to not feeling like youre being physically assaulted by the editor of the movie but its still a pretty bad package. I would prob give the unrated a 4/10 at best.
I wouldnt call it much better, the original is definitely worth 2 or 3/10 at best, this one is still a stinker though at best 4/10 no matter how way you turn it its really abysmal and was probably not worth my time so many years after seeing the shortest version of it.

This message has been deleted.

Did the UK version which is slightly shorter than the US one only run in the UK theaters ? I cant recall which one i saw but it felt like a short and poorly edited movie to me, i gave it a 3/10 myself, it was absolutely horrendous. Is the difference really that big ? what would you guys rate the Theatrical and the unrated separately from the /10 imdb scale if you could ?

NTSC or PAL have nothing to do with the running times unless someone messes with the original frame rates.

"USA:90 min | UK:86 min"
NTSC vs Pal issue might mean there is no difference between the two.

As mentioned several times already in this thread there are 3 versions of this movie.
USA:90 min | UK:86 min | 101 min (unrated version)
The 101min unrated version is more than just an extended version, it happens to run for 101 mins but there is about 25-30 mins of different/replaced scenes which means the extended version differs from the theatrical version by about 30% or close to 1/3rd of the entire movie.

So adding a 10 more minutes will make a "junk" movie awesome? Sorry, but I don't believe that. I don't know what the hell was the version I watched but it was decent. Adding more minutes to it won't do any good. Ending was really crappy. Minus points for that. 6/10

Its nice to see this film still getting some attention. It had originally been slated for release in Jan/Feb 2008 and seeing what came out after such a long wait was pretty disappointing, especially so because I had some work in it. The ending sequence just left most of us baffled.
Then years later when I was in France I noticed my cousin downloading it and I told him not to bother. He said that I should watch the Director's Cut and I was pleasantly surprised. About 20-30 mins worth of difference to the theatrical version. So in a way it was like a different film, not a great film by any means (despite my bias), but certainly more enjoyable. Though having said that, I know Mathieu wanted it to be so much more.

Just seen this film for the first time. Here in the UK it was shown on Channel 4, and after reading this thread, I'm disappointed to realise that C4 have shown the theatrical (US/Fox) version (83 mins) and not what is described here as the "unrated" (European) version. Why, I wonder?
Agreed, the ending of the version I just watched is a disaster. I was quite taken by the film until that point, but that really turned me off.
I shall get the DVD (which apparently includes both the 'theatrical' and 'extended' versions) and reserve judgement until I have seen the longer version.

Wasn't there an even longer more complete version intended by the writer/director?
Nadia01 and Blackalaureate don't care about white people.

I thought the ending of theatrical version was much better.

This message has been deleted.

I've watched the 96 minute version a couple of times, today on Netflix. I don't know if that one's considered extended or not.
This is definitely a better than average movie in my opinion and I recommend it to anyone interested in realistic sci-fi/fantasy/adventure.
One possibly missed topic is the realistic extrapolations it makes regarding the future, that I for the most part agree with:

• Power (and even wars) will be in the hands of global corporations (and banks); very much a fact already, at least indirectly through lobbying and funding
• Medical diagnoses will be performed by handheld devices; we are already there
• Cloning and its related ethical issues: Is a clone (possibly genetically modified) somehow artificial life? Not really (it's still life), but we will distance ourselves from clones as second- or third-rate, even when it comes to people (longer term), but it's already the case in terms of how we treat animals, that are just "mobile meat packages" of modified types that would not survive in the wild.
• TV sets that cover a whole wall and that show snippets of many channels at the same time, for easier choice. We are technically already there, yet kinda expensive at the time.
• Remote-controlled (and soon autonomous) weaponized drones; already there
  etc
  Actually this is one of my favorite sci-fi movies.

I watched the original "theatrical" version when it came out and thought it sucked monkey balls. I just finished watching the 1:40 extended version and liked it. The extended is a totally different movie.
Sure its good not great, far from perfect, but a hell of a lot better than the north american cut they put in the theaters. I didnt feel confused at the end like i did with the original cut.
There are rumors of people having seen a 160min DC version but I havent found it anywhere. I would hope that a true Directors cut comes out so that like the Richard Donner cut of Superman, the director of Babylon AD gets to show us what his vision really was.

Hm, there's only 1 version in Germany, which is 1:40:53h long. Cinema and BR version are the same.

Babylon AD is a French movie and European theatrical 101 min. version is director's cut.

i just watched the film on Blu Ray, on the front cover of mine it says Extended version, is that the same as Unrated/Uncut version?, i thought the film was just ok, surely the Unrated/Uncut Version wouldn't change that it would just have a few extra scenes in it?