Criterion Press Release: Red River (Dual Format) (1 Viewer)

[clambake]

This is one of the Duke's crown jewels among his Westerns catalog, right up there with "The Searchers" and "True Grit"...one of his top 5 ever performances in the genre, Ron...you WON'T be disappointed, as it not only co-stars Montgomery Clift and Jo Anne Dru, but is directed by Howard Hawks!!!

I was going to say the same things about it, it's an excellent movie! Plus Coleen Gray is in it too.

 

[Matt Hough]

One of the greatest westerns in the history of film.

I could not agree more. I think it's probably my favorite western.

 

[Dave B Ferris]

The criterion will give you the director approved version the MoC lacks.

That will be a neat trick - from the grave, and all of that!

 

[mikeyhitchfan]

That will be a neat trick - from the grave, and all of that!

He means that the shorter cut with narration was Hawk's preferred cut. He thought of the longer version as a 'preview cut'.

 

[Robert Crawford]

The criterion will give you the director approved version the MoC lacks.

It's been my impression that the 133 minute version is considered the director's cut of the film which is on the MoC release. Anyhow, I prefer the version without the spoken narration by Brennan.

 

[Robert Crawford]

He means that the shorter cut with narration was Hawk's preferred cut. He thought of the longer version as a 'preview cut'.

I'm not sure that's true as that version was altered by Hawk due to a law suit by Howard Hughes.

 

[Dave B Ferris]

He means that the shorter cut with narration was Hawk's preferred cut. He thought of the longer version as a 'preview cut'.

Of course, that makes sense.Having seen Moe's humor before, I genuinely thought he was cracking-wise about the "director approved" label Criterion has long been (do they still do it?) slapping on their packaging.

 

[Derrick King]

Specs are up on Criterion's site and this will include a copy of the original novel!

 

[Moe Dickstein]

If you take Peter Bogdonavich as a credible source, which I do, then Hawks' preferred version (preference stated before his demise) is the one WITH the narration. The MoC includes the version the director does not prefer. This release will include both so you don't have to decide.

 

[DavidJ]

Like Ron, I haven't seen this yet, but am planning on a day one purchase.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Specs are up on Criterion's site and this will include a copy of the original novel!

Rarely seen theatrical version????? That's about all I saw growing up on the 60s. It wasn't until the video age in the late 80s, that the general public was exposed to the extended cut. I must have seen this film at least 60 times in my lifetime and I do prefer the extended cut. Sorry Mr. Hawks, but it's a great film with or without the narration.

 

[jauritt]

I'm happy enough with my recent Masters of Cinema version of the movie, which looks good. I have to add to the voices praising this film, as both Clift and Wayne give excellent performances. However - and I know I'm going to be murdered for saying this - I really wish this movie had been filmed in color and not B&W. With few exceptions, I've always felt that only color westerns truly capture the full grandeur of the vistas involved.

I have the MOC version as well, but I was very surprised and disappointed with the poor condition of the transfer, which has considerably more scratches, speckles and other annoyances than I would ever have expected from MOC considering their past efforts. Of course, it's conceivable that the Criterion version will be in the same shape (and, if it is, it will also be well below the standards they have set), but the inclusion of the Howard Hawks' preferred cut will be enough to offset that possibility and make double-dipping a no-brainer.

 

[DennisBassi]

I can't wait for this. Red River is the movie that comes to my mind first whenever I think of what I want to see on Blu ray--my collection has always seemed incomplete without it, notwithstanding the fact that I have the DVD. With it getting the "Criterion treatment" I could not ask for more. It shall be mine at the June BN sale.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

July.

 

[Derrick King]

Amazon has the wrong MSRP for this, it is actually a $49.99 title not $39.99, so the current pre-order price is just $3 more than B&N's 50% off price.

 

[JoHud]

I have the MOC version as well, but I was very surprised and disappointed with the poor condition of the transfer, which has considerably more scratches, speckles and other annoyances than I would ever have expected from MOC considering their past efforts. Of course, it's conceivable that the Criterion version will be in the same shape (and, if it is, it will also be well below the standards they have set), but the inclusion of the Howard Hawks' preferred cut will be enough to offset that possibility and make double-dipping a no-brainer.

I'm thinking it has more to do with the fact that the print used is the best MGM currently has available. Is there any information on whether or not the OCN of Red River is existent?

 

[Persianimmortal]

I didn't think the MOC version shows that much damage, certainly not compared to other releases from roughly the same period, such as Double Indemnity.

The booklet that comes with the MOC release has a two-page epilogue by Peter Labuza entitled "The Two Versions". It refers to the longer version as the "Book Version", and the other one as "Voice Version". The last paragraph of it reads as follows:

It might seem curious to debate the official version of a film for viewing and study, like comparing the various versions of Shakespeare's Hamlet. While the differences are notable, the version presented here is the now more canonical Book Version, which has been better preserved and has been provided the best transfer. We recommend to viewers, however, to seek out the Voice Version as well, and make their own decision of what they prefer.

Criterion's release specs do mention that the shorter version has had a 4K restoration (though note that it says digital restoration), so it may wind up looking better than the MOC release. But then again, it may not. Having read of the differences between the two versions, I'm still happy with the MOC release, and until we see otherwise, assume it looks about as good as the film can look.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Original post updated with artwork and specs

 

[cadavra]

I love Peter, but he's flat-out wrong about the shorter version being the preferred one. Virtually every other Hawks scholar considers it inferior, and Gerald Mast, in his essential book "Howard Hawks, Storyteller," goes into scrupulous detail about how it came to be and what changes were made. The narrated version was in all likelihood prepared for overseas use--it's easier to redub narration than replace written pages. The problem is that in the narrated version, Brennan's character "tells" us things he could not have possibly witnessed. Moreover, the music is different, and the choppy, Howard Hughes-imposed ending is only in that version, not the long one. As for Hawks preferring the shorter cut, he was well-known to play fast and loose not only with the facts but even his own opinions: I've read different interviews with him in which he expresses opposite views of his own films; e.g., in one he places TWENTIETH CENTURY among his three best films; in another, he dismisses it with a bland, "It didn't work at all."

But most importantly, a simple viewing of both cuts proves conclusively that the long version is the "correct" one.

Mike S.

 

[BIANCO2NERO]

But most importantly, a simple viewing of both cuts proves conclusively that the long version is the "correct" one.

Mike S.

If only life were so simple ...