was there a peckinpah film NOT cut by the studio?
-
Mr_McLaurel — 18 years ago(April 25, 2007 07:06 PM)
It's downright tragic the way Peckinpah's films have been treated. I'd put him up there with Orson Welles in a list of great directors treated badly by the studio. Though Peckinpah did get to make his Citizen Kane, Bring Me The Head of Alfredo Garcia.
What's the spanish for drunken bum? -
csu16387 — 18 years ago(July 06, 2007 06:42 AM)
I don't believe Ride the High Country was cut by the studio, but I could be wrong.
I'm thinking of buying Major Dundee. The restored version is said to be quite impressive.
"Dry your eyes baby, it's out of character." -
Tryavna — 18 years ago(July 12, 2007 11:26 AM)
Yes, by all means, buy it. It's well worth your while. Although I have certain reservations about aspects of the restoration (the new music score is a little overbearing, the night scenes are too dark, etc.), it's very good. The extra scenes help the narrative flow more smoothly.
I still think that the movie is flawed But the first two-thirds now demonstrate that this was very nearly a masterpiece. It just starts to unravel in the final third. -
flask — 18 years ago(August 04, 2007 10:41 PM)
was there a peckinpah film NOT cut by the studio?
According to film critic Roger Ebert,
Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia
was the only Peckinpah film that was not cut by the studio. Ebert claims that Pecinkpah said: "I did 'Alfredo Garcia' and I did it exactly the way I wanted to. Good or bad, like it or not, that was my film."
And, in actuality,
Ride the High Country
was cut by the studio a bit. Still a great film though. -
is_dis_d_way2amarrillo — 18 years ago(October 25, 2007 04:14 PM)
sam's original european cut of CROSS OF IRON was also nearer to his completed vision along with BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA.
"what do you think of him?"
"i think he's a beep peasant!"
see you at the movies baby -
hotnoodletuna — 17 years ago(April 19, 2008 11:06 AM)
That is actually quite an interesting tidbit of infomration. I certainly recognize that Sam is a genius and would have liked him to have retained Final Cut on all of his films, I kinda found Alfredo Garcia to be one of his weaker films. The pacing of it just seems off to me. It is nowhere near the level of Ride the High COuntry, Wild BUnch, Straw Dogs, or even second tier Peckinpah efforts like Junior Bonner or Ballad of Cable Hogue. Ah well, that is just my two cents
-
smith93 — 17 years ago(August 17, 2008 06:36 PM)
Movies I know where: The Deadly Companions, Major Dundee, The Wild Bunch, Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid, The Osterman Weekend.
I don't think he cared about The Killer Elite or Convoy, so maybe those were a matter of indifference. I'm not sure though.
I know Alfredo Garcia wasn't cut.
I don't think Ride the High Country or The Ballad of Cable Hogue were. I have no idea about the rest. -
pjwoodall1 — 17 years ago(August 20, 2008 01:22 PM)
The only cut I know of in "deadly companions" is at the end when Chill Wills shoots Steve Cochran. The cut makes it look like Brian Keith killed him. I could be wrong, but one of the biographies discusses this.
I remember seeing Jack Valenti at the AFI(DC) years ago in a special program where he discussed the rating system and the problems with it, showing clips from controversial films. He said if TWB hadn't been heavily cut, he would've given it an X for sheer violence.
Watching John Woo's THE KILLER for the first time was comparable to watching TWB. Woo had similar problems with his movies, and I was surprised he went back to Hollywood after HRD TARGET was butchered.
TWB looks mild compared to movies like HOSTEL and SAW which exist only to show how to torture people. -
weschingsdieder — 17 years ago(November 22, 2008 06:56 PM)
RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY wasn't cut, but the producers inserted much (often unnecessary score) music without Peckinpah's agreement. Other than that, the film wasn't touched and its current version is Peckinpah's original cut.
THE BALLAD OF CABLE HOGUE wasn't cut or changed in any way.
JUNIOR BONNER is said to have been one of Sam's happiest directing jobs as there was no trouble with the producers at all, neither in as well as after production. MAYBE, it was recut slightly (could be), but overall, Peckinpah biographs seem to agree that it wasn't.
BRING ME THE HEAD OF ALFREDO GARCIA - see above.
I'm not sure about STRAW DOGS but I don't think, that one suffered from violation by producers either, as well as CROSS OF IRON which already isn't too fast paced (= commercial) in its uncut theatrical version.
The worst thing ever happened to Peckinpah surely was the mutilation of MAJOR DUNDEE (Jerry Bresler, may you burn in hell!). The best (and most unreal) thing which could happen to us today would be a restoration of Peckinpah's original 160 minute version. -
pjwoodall1 — 17 years ago(November 23, 2008 06:27 AM)
I met Stella Stevens recently and found her fun to talk to. She said Cable Hogue was fun to work on. I said it and Junior Bonner were the only Peckinpah films I could get my wife to watchshe doesn't like westerns. She like working with Strother Martin and agreed Peckinpah could be an SOB because of his demons.
-
Hancock_the_Superb — 17 years ago(November 23, 2008 04:57 PM)
I think the complete director's cut of Dundee wouldn't be much more than a curios, to be honest. Peckinpah didn't have the project fully developed when he started shooting, and it's clear that he and screenwriters were by the end just making stuff up as they went along. Nor is it Bresler's fault the film was cut; the responsibility for that belongs to Columbia Studios.
Mr. Rusk. You're not wearing your tie! -
rcocean3 — 15 years ago(April 25, 2010 10:17 AM)
Peckinpah's usual M.O. was shoot enormous amounts of film - turn in an overly-long Director's cut, then cry when Studio editors tried to turn it into a commercial film.
I like the restored, longer, Dundee but I can see why the Studio chopped it. They were trying to make a mainstream movie - not an art film. And "Pat Garrett" is a bad film that isn't any better in the long version.
Peckinpah had complete control over "Bring the Me the Head of Alfredo G" - that disaster should confirm that he wasn't some Genius brought down by the suits. -
bstephens21 — 15 years ago(April 26, 2010 08:05 AM)
"Garcia" is possibly his best film. These remarks of it being a lesser film is ridiculous. It's a standout if only for Warren Oates performance, one of the greatest ever given on film.
RE: "Major Dundee". I think the movies was always going to suffer if only for the fact that several key scene were left un-shot. And I purposely don't find the "art film" version of the movie any less commercial than the studio cut. Certainly, if
Wild Bunch
and
Straw Dogs
could be huge commercial hits,
Dundee
probably stood a better chance of succeeding had the studio just let Peckinpah release his version.
RE:
Pat Garrett
. I don't think either cut of the current film is satisfactory. The longer version may include a lot of key footage missing from the film, but the shorter cut feels a lot closer to an actual Peckinpah film in regards to the cutting and rhythm. The attempt on the current DVD to create a synthesis of the two cuts, in my opinion, wasn't successful, and someone really should take another shot at it.
Peckinpah's true genius was in the editing room. While these retroactive "restorations" may be important in giving us an idea of the narrative Peckinpah wanted to tell, they still only tell us half the story, since Peckinpah himself isn't there to construct the movie. Much like many of Welles butchered works, the films work infinitely better if you don't approach them as
his
film, but rather, as notes and fragments towards a finished film that is simply lost to time. And like Welles, its a sign of Peckinpah's genius that the movies still work this way. -
-
rockmail — 15 years ago(June 05, 2010 01:00 PM)
Actually a film is the Producer's project and responsibility (not to mention vision), and it's up to him (and his bosses if he's working through a studio) to get the film edited.
Although it is often done, it's not a given that a producer has to let the Director be heavily involved in the editing. Sometimes the director is only allowed to review and comment, others of course basically do the editing themselves (in company of an editor). -
bstephens21 — 15 years ago(June 07, 2010 03:24 AM)
Actually a film is the Producer's project and responsibility (not to mention vision), and it's up to him (and his bosses if he's working through a studio) to get the film edited.
Although it is often done, it's not a given that a producer has to let the Director be heavily involved in the editing. Sometimes the director is only allowed to review and comment, others of course basically do the editing themselves (in company of an editor).
That would be true if this was 1930s Hollywood, but nowadays, the primacy of the director is pretty well accepted (even if Hollywood producers still go out of their way to undermine it). Even the most hands-on of today's producers - Jerry Bruckheimer, the Weinsteins, etc. - never "craft" the film as much as a David O. Selznick; they're usual content simply hiring company men whose "personal vision" is one-and-the-same with the studio's commercial concerns. Hollywood filmmakers, unfortunately, don't have the "Droits d'auteur" to the extent they do in other countries, but I don't think even the most fiscal studio-man would pretend that it isn't the director's job to "write" the film they just hold the they have the power to "rewrite" other people's work if its a question of profit.
And you're kidding if you think that this movie was anyone but Peckinpah's vision.