People have considered this to be awful for thirty years and now people are coming out saying it's a masterpiece? How can something be considered terrible by the entire cinematic universe when it first comes out only for it to suddenly achieve an about turn so many years later? I wouldn't be surprised if The Lone Ranger achieves masterpiece status in 2043 if HG can pull it off in 2013!
shareIt's unlikely... but why not? If people in the future have the distance to see something valuable there which we're blind to, they're not wrong. We are.
DVD has helped a lot of great films such as Heaven's Gate and Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid by restoring the films so that they're closer to the vision which the directors had in mind.
You can take the footage shot for one film and edit it with very different results. From pacing, tone, the addition of a few scenes or removal of a few scenes, it can make a big difference.
For something like Heaven's Gate, people have only really in the past decade or so been able to see the film as it should have been seen. In this restored form it's an elegiac, poetic masterpiece but it's also very different from the disjointed original cut. Heaven's Gate is now being judged on the merits of the restored version, what a lot of people will probably call the 'proper' version, because it more closely matches the artistic vision which Cimino had.
Apples & bananas. HG has better acting, direction, writing, story, etc. I think it's a misunderstood film but the majority of people on the IMBD boards seem to hate it -- I even like it more than the Deer Hunter & it's often considered sacrilege to criticize that one b/c of all the acclaim it got. HG's rep precedes it. However, the Lone Ranger is a cartoonish mess that had bad acting, direction, storywriting, plot, etc, it's all substandard.
-----------------
ARRET! C'est ici l'empire de la mort!
Hell no.
share[deleted]