A Few Words About A few words about...™ Heaven's Gate -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[John Hodson]

See this review

 

[AdrianTurner]

Thanks for linking that, John. Seems that we will be missing 23 minutes from the documentary - 55 mins as opposed to the IMDb's 78 mins. It sounds serious but perhaps it's merely a matter of cutting out all the film clips for copyright reasons? I live in hope.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Well that review is certainly unbiased *rolleyes*No matter how you slice it Cimino was shockingly irresponsible in the making of this film. No matter how the film turned out, and the circumstances of the rest of his working career were wholly deserved.

 

[Jari K]

Just talked to my friend yesterday about this film and he said that "he loves the film". And some really "hate the film", it seems. Cimino must've done at least something right if people "love" and "hate" the film. Worst scenario for any director is that nobody cares.

 

[Vincent_P]

Adrian: I heard the main thing they had to remove from the doc were film clips, so hopefully the interviews are all intact. I put together my own DVD of FINAL CUT using the youtube version. It came to around 75-minutes, but then again I edited out the redundant "coming up" montages that were put before where the commercial breaks would be.

Vincent

 

[Vincent_P]

Well that review is certainly unbiased *rolleyes*No matter how you slice it Cimino was shockingly irresponsible in the making of this film. No matter how the film turned out, and the circumstances of the rest of his working career were wholly deserved.

Yeah, like the initial reviews out of New York weren't at all biased themselves? Please...

Re: Cimino's "shocking irresponsibility"- uhm, he went over budget and over schedule. He wasn't the first filmmaker to do so, nor was he the last.

Vincent

 

[Cinescott]

Agreed that Vilmos Zsigmond is a great talent. I had the privilege to meet him 2 years ago during a 35mm screening of Close Encounters at the Milwaukee Film festival. There was a Q&A after the film and he went on at length about cinematography, Hollywood, and his favorite works.
When the festival directors asked him which of his films he thought best represented his work and which he would like to screen for an audience, his initial answer was The Deer Hunter. However, since he felt it was a bit long for a festival screening, he chose the obvious title for which he won the Academy Award, CE3K.
Prior to the movie, there was a retrospective short film that showed scenes from many of VZ's classics, among them Heaven's Gate. The audience applauded during those scenes, so maybe it's reputation is getting better with time.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Yeah, like the initial reviews out of New York weren't at all biased themselves? Please... Re: Cimino's "shocking irresponsibility"- uhm, he went over budget and over schedule. He wasn't the first filmmaker to do so, nor was he the last. Vincent

I think there's a vast difference between a director who is willing to go that far over budget and schedule with no concern for the people writing the checks. If someone is over and is doing everything they can to cut elsewhere or minimize the problem that I have total respect for, but what Cimino showed was a total disregard for the hand that was feeding him and as a director I find that does nothing but hurt our cause in matters of creative freedom.The proof is the prologue - when held absolutely to money and time constraints Cimino delivered a sequence that looked just as good and worked just as well as anything else in the picture but he did it respecting the limits set for him. If he'd followed that ethos for the rest of the film I don't think it would be crippled in any way and we'd all have maybe a bit more respect for him and he certainly wouldn't have cratered his own career, no matter how unsuccessful the film was.

 

[JoshZ]

I think there's a vast difference between a director who is willing to go that far over budget and schedule with no concern for the people writing the checks. If someone is over and is doing everything they can to cut elsewhere or minimize the problem that I have total respect for, but what Cimino showed was a total disregard for the hand that was feeding him and as a director I find that does nothing but hurt our cause in matters of creative freedom.The proof is the prologue - when held absolutely to money and time constraints Cimino delivered a sequence that looked just as good and worked just as well as anything else in the picture but he did it respecting the limits set for him. If he'd followed that ethos for the rest of the film I don't think it would be crippled in any way and we'd all have maybe a bit more respect for him and he certainly wouldn't have cratered his own career, no matter how unsuccessful the film was.

Perhaps someone who knows the history of the production intimately can comment on this, but did the studio actually pressure Cimino to cut costs or hold him accountable during much of the production? My understanding was that, after Deer Hunter, Cimino was basically given a blank check to do whatever he wanted, and it wasn't until deep into production when they saw the footage that the studio realized what a mistake they had made and what a boondoggle they'd created for themselves.


I'm not particularly a fan or defender of Heaven's Gate. I find it hilarious how oblivious Cimino apparently was to the irony that he wasted obscene sums of corporately-funded money to make a message movie about the evils of Capitalism. However, as a man who fancied himself an "artiste" rather than an accountant, when handed a huge pile of cash and told, "Go do what you want to do. Seriously, we trust you," can you blame the guy for going overboard? Is that really his fault, or is it the studio's fault for lack of oversight with regard to their money?


I also don't understand your point about the prologue - which is a hugely elaborate and expensive sequence that has basically no bearing whatsoever on anything else in the movie's narrative. How is that an example of Cimino respecting the limits set for him? That's probably the most wasteful scene in the whole movie.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Have you read Final Cut, Josh? It's all laid out there.Cimino committed to x budget, and after a certain point it became clear he was going to go not just over but more than double budget. A series of people went to see him to try to solve this, he either ignored them or just told them what they wanted to hear, until it got to the point where the decision was made that it was less damaging to continue on and at least have a finished picture than cancel it and have nothing to show for $20+ million. There were serious talks about so nuclear an option as replacing Cimino.As to the prologue, it was something Cimino desperately wanted. By this time UA was putting their foot down (as they absolutely should have WAY earlier - the problem was the management was new and didn't want to tarnish the "artist friendly" UA reputation, and also UA was far more hands off than any other studio to begin with on every film they made). The deal was that Cimino could have x budget and time to do the prologue (I think it was a few hundred thousand). If he ever fell behind by any amount or went over budget, the shoot would end then and there and he would not get his prologue.Guess what? He followed the rules and got his prologue. If they'd done that at the first signs of trouble they'd have not had the problems they did with the shoot at large. UA execs were at fault for not showing tough love but Cimino is the root of the problems.

 

[Vincent_P]

Actually the budget for the prologue/epilogue shoot in England was just under $3-million, not "a few hundred thousand".

Vincent

 

[Moe Dickstein]

which is why I originally said x budget because I wasn't home to refer to Final Cut. Thanks for the clarification

 

[JoshZ]

UA execs were at fault for not showing tough love but Cimino is the root of the problems.

Makes sense. Thanks for the recap. I haven't read Final Cut.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

You should read it, if only to see how quickly a studio can fall.

 

[Moe Dickstein]

Seconded, it's a great read, I've done it 3 times.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I ordered the trade paperback as a Christmas present to myself.

 

[rsmithjr]

I have read all of the standard sources and then some about the making of the film.

After over 30 years, however, people need to start actually looking what what is on the screen (and in the sound) of this masterpiece.

I am confident that, with the continued passage of time, this will be a highly-appreciated movie.

 

[Paul Rossen]

I have read all of the standard sources and then some about the making of the film.

After over 30 years, however, people need to start actually looking what what is on the screen (and in the sound) of this masterpiece.

I am confident that, with the continued passage of time, this will be a highly-appreciated movie.

Masterpiece? To each his own. That said the prologue just never ends nor does the shootout at the end nor the rollerskating in the middle. What a waste of time for all concerned. Actors and audience alike!

 

[Moe Dickstein]

This film is mainly interesting for its production.When you ignore that aspect of it, it's just a lot of very pretty and very boring pictures.

 

[Professor Echo]

Bringing down an entire corporate entity is bad, but allowing your arrogance to kill people is worse. If there's anyone who deserves to be a pariah, it's John Landis and all the star struck buffoons who acquitted him. Cimino earned his shunning and exile to be sure, but Landis deserves to be rotting away in prison.