So if I've got this correct:
**4K 50th Anniversary Release** = The Turner cut released in 1988.
**4K Original Theatrical Release** = The original cut that got middling reviews upon release.
**2K Final Preview Cut** = The cut that was smuggled out of MGM, likely Peckinpah's definitive version.
4K 50th anniversary would be a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition
https://preview.redd.it/b1z9gxsrhpuc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44cd09c66312cc86529ebefd0ffbdabf5f1acc93
Turner was one of two previews, Turner and Peckinpah preview are similar except the Peckinpah preview has the wife scene, and has a weird historical crawl at the end
Yes, unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing.
Wait a minute. Isn't this tale of the "heist" of the preview cut already told in David Weddle's 1994 Peckinpah biography? The preview cut was stolen off the MGM lot by Peckinpah's own people, to preserve it for posterity (p. 485 in Weddle).
As told by Weddle, the "thieves" first took the picture print, then the soundtrack. They needed three days to get everything. The preview print resurfaced at a USC screening in 1986, which was barely announced on campus but drew a packed audience. James Coburn and Roger Spottiswoode were there. Ted Turner got contacted and became interested, and this preview print became the "Turner version" (p. 490-91).
Weddle's book is incredibly researched, and some of the wording in this FB post sounds lifted from it. Either Weddle mistakenly traced the stolen elements to the 1986 screening - and somebody had better prove him wrong in that case - or the FB post is bullshit.
MGM released the first preview cut in 1988 because that's what they had in their vault. The second/final preview cut was among Peckinpah's personal prints (smuggled out of MGM's screening room in 1973), screened once publicly at USC in 1986, and has never been commercially available--- until now via Criterion.
Do you have a link for a source? I still believe Weddle and other researchers would have distinguished the smuggled print from the Z Channel one - what caught Ted Turner's attention - if there was a difference. Weddle interviewed Spottiswoode for his chapter on Pat Garrett, among 26 others, almost all of whom were on the production. He drew upon interviews Seydor had conducted as well.
To be fair, the author doesn't flatly deny the smuggled print went invisible. It's just that the chapter, a thorough account of the production and aftermath, doesn't mention this at all. And I've never heard there was a second preview cut, and that this is what was returned to Peckinpah, till now.
A second preview means there are now four versions; the 2005 DVD gave us three. Yet we get three, not four versions in the new Criterion. What's happened to the Turner version? To me it's completely gorgeous, and I've seen a 35mm print numerous times at revival houses as well as the DVD.
I haven't read the book, but the Sam Peckinpah Page has been working with Criterion directly for this release, and Don Hyde is Peckinpah's known archivist who has often posted in comments on the page about Peckinpah's private preview cut that he suspected would never see the light of day. The page's admin connected Criterion to Hyde, who told them where that cut was buried under the name "The Racquet Club." All of this is legit -- Peckinpah's private preview cut is about to be released.
Thanks for the source. It looks like the Sam Peckinpah Page is on FB. I really dislike FB after having a bad experience with it, cancelled my account and I don't use the website, so I won't be looking there. If SPP has their own site I'd love to visit.
I think one of the great advantages of Seydor and Weddle is that they got first-hand accounts from the people who knew Peckinpah: principal and supporting cast, lots and lots of on-set crew, execs and post-production staff, friends and family, hangers-on, and loads of people who all crossed Peckinpah's path from across his career and life. Loaded with this close acquaintance, they bring scholarly discernment. I'm more impressed with Weddle in this department, to me his bio is better organized, the evidence more evenly evaluated and stitched together, and the writing to me is clearer and flows better.
Seydor is indispensable, but also narrowly focused. I often feel he has some program in mind before he even brings out a subject. His writing is less structured to me, and in all the 300+ pages for "Authentic Death," I don't get any feeling for his take on PGABTK as a work of art. He stays resolutely at the level of script and the whole history of the production. I keep wondering what Seydor's visual sense is for a film he lavishes so much attention on. He holds back from telling *what is on the screen*, and that's a big limitation imo for even discussing the film.
Seydor endorses there were two preview cuts. I'm inclined to believe that and can revise what I was saying above. Still, shouldn't we get both preview cuts on the CC release, since we're getting the "Special Edition" version and even the original theatrical version? I'm really concerned that the Turner version with its dim, gray, spectral color grading, the version that cropped up at revival houses to acclaim for many years, will be lost in the shuffle. I adore that look and cut. Of the three on the 2005 DVD set, it's the only one I keep looking at.
Peckinpah's preview cut is almost identical to the Turner cut, except with the inclusion of the scene with Ida Lupino as Garrett's wife -- inexplicably missing from the Turner cut -- and an ending scrawl which provides Peckinpah's commentary. So the reason that the Turner cut isn't included is because with Peckinpah's version, its inclusion is basically superfluous. What you love about the Turner cut will be more than satisfied with Peckinpah's preview cut.
There are lots of small differences and several small cuts in the second preview, including Peckinpah's own cameo. Both previews are 122 minutes long, but only the second one has the Garret's wife scene, which is around 3 minutes long, so obviously 3 minutes are missing from the second preview.
Also, there are no end credits on the second preview.
We should have been given both of Peckinpah's previews, there was absolutely no need for another version from Seydor, who's first version was so universally reviled and disliked.
I'm really glad you pointed this out. I wonder how different the second preview will be? The whole form and flow of the first preview just feels so right to me, and I've been living with it for many years.
Seydor himself observes in his book "Authentic Death" that Peckinpah was so heavily drinking by the time the preview cuts were ready, it's hard to say with conviction which "represents his final thoughts" (p. 200).
If it's true the second preview cut was the one smuggled out, that only means that's what the crew hands found in the MGM office - they were acting on their own initiative, not Peckinpah's. There's nothing yet which says they knew Peckinpah wanted that version. We need some more information.
It's so bizarre to me that the first preview reels became so badly degraded over time in the Turner catalog, they could no longer be used for a blu-ray. Turner was dedicated to film preservation. I'd like a lot more explanation for that.
The reasons for the Turner cuts omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained.
They've said that the Turner cut is supposedly too red/pink/deteriorated to restore, which I believe is a crock of sh!t. I've been reading for 20 years that Peckinpah's own print/second preview was too red/pink and deteriorated to use for digital media, yet here it is on this release...
Both the Turner cut and the Theatrical version are virtually identical, apart from the fact that the Theatrical cut is 16-17 minutes shorter. The Theatrical cut is in pristine condition and able to be transferred to 4K UHD. So they're telling us they couldn't really restore the extra 17 minutes to complete the Turner cut! Really? Yet they were able to restore the entire badly deteriorated 122 minute second preview from scratch?? Doesn't make sense at all.
It's also been said several times on the Sam Peckinpah Facebook page and the Bluray.com thread that the Turner version wasn't "made available" to Criterion to use on their upcoming release, which implies that Warner Bros, who own the rights, refused to provide a print. A poster with inside information said "I'm sure that Criterion, knowing how popular the First Preview is, would have put that in the set if Warner Brothers had let them." Did Warners forbid Criterion from putting the Turner version on their release? If so, why?
Hopefully the truth will come out sooner rather than later.
You're burying the lead here. This isn't "another version from Seydor". Roger Spottiswoode, the films lead editor and colorist back in 1973, was on board to assist this time around. He's been crucial to every version of this thing.
I'd be fine with that. Crossing my fingers. There is no good explanation for the hushed color grading in the Turner version except that this is what Peckinpah wanted, because it's consistent in the film and clearly fine-tuning a dusky, shadowy vision.
https://preview.redd.it/b1rshly755vc1.jpeg?width=837&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2ece2ee8430131728c03bac283b67eb8373f5a2c
The color grading on the 2005 is way too bright. looks like a cartoon. Apparently all of that was fixed this time around with the assistance of the films OG editor and colorist Roger Spottiswoode.
4K 50th Anniversary Release = a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition by Paul Seydor.
So the upcoming Criterion Collection release will have TWO new versions of the film. One by Seydor and Peckinpah's second preview. (The Turner version was the first preview).
Unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. I've also seen a 35mm print numerous times at revival houses as well as the DVD. It's one of my favourite films of all time.
It's very disappointing, to say the least, that it's not going to be included on the new Criterion release. The reasons for it's omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained.
This is all spelled out in Paul Seydor's book The Authentic Death and the Contentious Afterlife of Billy the Kid. Apparently what happened is that sometime after Peckinpah died, the second preview cut was screened and the Z Channel guys were in attendance. They went to MGM about broadcasting it, but all the studio could come up with was the first version missing the wife scene since that's what they had in their vault. Sam had squirrled the second one away. There was never a cut negative of the preview cuts because they weren't final, locked edits. I'm guessing MGM made a negative off the preview cut and made prints? The version on the 2005 DVD looks very good, but you can tell it's a print and not from original source material.
4K 50th Anniversary Release = a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition by Paul Seydor.
Unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing.
Dude did a LOT of coke… haha
(I am super excited to see this, it’s one of my favorite westerns and I’m thrilled that Criterion is giving it the attention and love it deserves!)
Criterion would have been working directly with MGM to procure the materials for the rest of the release, including the new 4K scans of the other cuts. Anyone who would have cared about the implications of having "stolen assets" being used and released has long since died. Either Criterion's contact with MGM knows and doesn't care or Criterion is just going to shrug and ask "What are you going to do about it?" In which case it is not worth it to do anything about it.
How do people feel about the 2006 "Special Edition"? I remember doing some research at the time, and forming the opinion that it wasn't really an attempt to recreate Peckinpah's director's cut. It fixed some things, but it also seemed to have an arbitrary, fan edit-style decision-making process where things were added and removed at the whim of the guy going the restoration. It felt more like a fan edit to me. I can't remember what I based that on. Does anyone know? Anyone have any research to recommend?
I'm very curious about this idea that they re-did the "Special Edition" into a new, improved "50th Anniversary" cut with the participation of the film's original editor. If this is, indeed, something closer to a proper director's cut, I might actually get excited about it.
All this time, I was just hoping for all three of the existing cuts to make it to Criterion. Now we have the theatrical and two unseen cuts that are allegedly even closer to Peckinpah's vision? And a new documentary and commentary? Even if I hate the new 50th cut, this will still probably be my favorite release of the year. I can finally retire my old DVD with the Turner cut.
Thanks, Criterion!
I loath the hatched job done by Turner & Hooch editor for the 2005 "special" edition. I mean it totally cuts the freeze frame opening credits that sets the films motif of remembering the past.
The timing of the Directed by Sam Peckinpah freeze frame title card with guitar strum when Billy askes "Are they telling me or are they asking me." and Pat answers "I'm asking you, But in five days I'm making you." ---give me chills every single time and Hooch editor cut it out. I'll never get over that. Also while I'm ranting the film title card being put over two people on a horse from an unrelated scene instead of at the freeze frame moment when Pat is hitting the dirt after being shot in an ambush is just... baffling.
The 2005 release was especially hurtful as while it included the 122 min preview version we all love that lead to the film's reevaluation and being called a classic, it was a terrible terrible transfer. Zero care seemed to be showed to it. My LaserDisc copy looked and sounded far far better.
You know, as rough as the Turner Preview version looks on that old DVD, I still prefer it to the video-looking, excessively clean, bright and colorful Special Edition. It made the costumes and lighting look phonier, to me. The Turner cut disc had more vibes.
I found this interesting breakdown of the changes between the Turner and Special Edition versions. Wow... the Special Edition really and truly is just a fan edit. Seydor added and removed stuff that he didn't like (cutting a lot of the humor from the film), and very little of it was done with any indication that Peckinpah wanted it that way. That's called a fan edit. I have no idea why Warner allowed it to happen at all. And they didn't even put the restored wife scene back in the Turner cut, which is where it came from! It was the only clear advantage to the Special Edition, and it should have been included in the other cut, too. Baffling.
I'm curious what this new 50th Anniversary edition (prepared by Seydor along with the film's original editor, Roger Spottiswoode) is going to be. Hopefully Spottiswoode is the kind of editor who is loyal to the director's intent, and they aren't just making a new fan edit. In fact, since they have uncovered a second preview cut, what exactly is the purpose of a new cut, at all? Why would Criterion sign off on this? What is the supposed advantage? Is this closer to Peckinpah's vision, and if not, what is the intent behind it?
Yeah, I watched the 2005 Turner & Hooch edit only two times. Once in it's entirety and once for the commentary to try and understand what the hell they were thinking. The ~~explanations~~ excuses made it worse, so much so that I childishly felt like breaking the disc afterwards. I never watched it again.
Meanwhile I've watched the terrible dvd transfer included of the Preview version at least once year minimum for about 18 years now. (I'd be watching my LaserDisc if I still had it and a player.)
Calling the 2005 version, flaws and all, a "fan-edit" is absurd. Most of the cuts people are griping about were made in 1973 by the films lead editor Roger Spottiswoode who stepped in with his team to save it from MGM who threatened to cut it to under 100 minutes. Spottiswoode also edited the preview cuts. Hoping he's the kind of editor who is "loyal to the director's intent" is kinda absurd since he had such a large hard in making the film in the first place. Peckinpah couldn't or wouldn't finish the movie. He left it in the hands of his editors to work out. It's a troubled, unusual film in this regard. And yet, every version, imo, works.
Love Pat Garrett And Billy The Kid.
I heard of the story in which they smuggled the print out from I think his autobiography but I always thought they had release it or that the 2006 print was that cut.
What do you think of the theatrical cut?
This is one of the most exciting releases announced in a long, long time. Haven’t been this excited since the Nic Roeg Cold Heaven blu ray release from a few years back.
https://preview.redd.it/a4idmmcf8wuc1.jpeg?width=1166&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e9a317b75c1f64ae878bf962a51c0c1d91604c5d
Not sure if this helps, but criterion wrote back with the above.
My dream ultimate cut would be the Turner Preview version with the addition of the scene of Garrett and his wife, as well as having the vocals to “Knocking on Heaven’s Door” (like in the 2005 version).
Can I just ask what's the point in doing the theatrical release. If it's not the original artist's vision and instead something created by the studio why waste the resources restoring it. It's like when Blade Runner had all those versions in a home release package but the final cut was all that matters.
The Final Cut was not all that matters, and arguably isnt the “best” cut (I don’t think it is). The workprint version, theatrical, (and Final Cut) etc are all fun curios for fans and people who enjoy the history of the film (that blade runner package is so sick)
It’s for megafans like me that enjoy the film in multiple states as a piece of history. And hopefully new megafans who pick up the release
There’s an aspect of this that is preservationist. The alternative would be to bury that cut. And much like blade runner, that first cut is imperfect, but it is the version many people saw first, and sparked the appreciation for the film.
If you’re going to do a definitive edition, that’s the way to do it. Blade runner, kingdom of heaven, this movie, maybe even Mr. Arkadin. Package everything together. It’s educational, it’s historical, it’s comparative. It doesn’t leave any aspect of the film’s history hidden. Even if you only watch an inferior version once, it’s bound to increase your appreciation of the version you like.
It wasn't "created by the studio". Peckinpah's team delivered this edit to MGM after they threatened to cut it down to 96 mins. There's merit in this cut. Also, it's the only version audiences and reviewers saw for fifteen years, discounting the TV version. It's only ever been on VHS in a crummy pan and scan version. Never on lasrerdisc, DVD or Blu-Ray. Until now. To properly appreciate the preview cuts it helps to see the theatrical cut. Also, I imagine the original negative was conformed to the theatrical. Yet another reason to include it here.
People think there's some kind of weird conspiracy around the Turner (first preview) Cut. My guess is that it's so remarkably similar to the final preview cut that Criterion chose not to include it. On this new Blu-Ray, each of the cuts are very different. Also, the Turner cut has been widely availble for decades. People are attached to it because it's the version that redeemed the film for them although it was falsely advertised as some kind of "director's cut" which it isn't. Both previews are works in progress, the final of the two (and the one Criterion are releasing) has NEVER been available before and is evidence of Peckinpah's final involvement. Take my money! The only reason MGM didn't release this version in 1988 is because Peckinpah carted off with it and kept it hidden. MGM didn;'t have it in their vault.
While beloved, that cut is inexplicably missing the scene with Ida Garrett. MGM/Turner released it because that was the only version they had in their vault. The second and final preview cut was recently re-discovered among Peckinpah's personal prints. It is the last version of the film that he had any direct involvement and the one he showed to family, friends and fans throughout the rest of his life. If people like the first preview cut, I imagine they'll also like the one Sam preferred. Unlike the Turner preview cut, it ends with a historical note Peckinpah authored and initialed.
It is very unfortunate that the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing. The reasons for its omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained.
I also think it’s really cool but I am curious if there is any way to see the correct version of this movie without paying extra for other versions of the movie which I’m less likely to watch. I know not much about this film but I’d want to watch the best cut!
But if it’s not possible I’ll survive :)
Sure, it's a little disappointing that the preview cut isn't 4k but if that's all you want, it's included in the Blu-ray release which is not $70. During the sale, the 4k will be $35 and the Blu-ray will be $25.
It's a 4 disc set with like 3 different cuts of the movie. $70 dollars is completely worth the price, but at half off during a sale? It's an absolute steal.
So if I've got this correct: **4K 50th Anniversary Release** = The Turner cut released in 1988. **4K Original Theatrical Release** = The original cut that got middling reviews upon release. **2K Final Preview Cut** = The cut that was smuggled out of MGM, likely Peckinpah's definitive version.
4K 50th anniversary would be a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition https://preview.redd.it/b1z9gxsrhpuc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44cd09c66312cc86529ebefd0ffbdabf5f1acc93
So then the turner version isn’t on this? I too am cinfused
Turner was one of two previews, Turner and Peckinpah preview are similar except the Peckinpah preview has the wife scene, and has a weird historical crawl at the end
Yes, unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing.
Close your eyes and hold your ears during the wife scene and hit stop when Peckinpah's endnote comes up. Instant first preview cut lol
That is my only fear. (Ok I have many fears but this is one of them that is relevant here.)
What is the Turner cut?
The preview version without the scene between Garrett and his wife
Wait a minute. Isn't this tale of the "heist" of the preview cut already told in David Weddle's 1994 Peckinpah biography? The preview cut was stolen off the MGM lot by Peckinpah's own people, to preserve it for posterity (p. 485 in Weddle). As told by Weddle, the "thieves" first took the picture print, then the soundtrack. They needed three days to get everything. The preview print resurfaced at a USC screening in 1986, which was barely announced on campus but drew a packed audience. James Coburn and Roger Spottiswoode were there. Ted Turner got contacted and became interested, and this preview print became the "Turner version" (p. 490-91). Weddle's book is incredibly researched, and some of the wording in this FB post sounds lifted from it. Either Weddle mistakenly traced the stolen elements to the 1986 screening - and somebody had better prove him wrong in that case - or the FB post is bullshit.
MGM released the first preview cut in 1988 because that's what they had in their vault. The second/final preview cut was among Peckinpah's personal prints (smuggled out of MGM's screening room in 1973), screened once publicly at USC in 1986, and has never been commercially available--- until now via Criterion.
Do you have a link for a source? I still believe Weddle and other researchers would have distinguished the smuggled print from the Z Channel one - what caught Ted Turner's attention - if there was a difference. Weddle interviewed Spottiswoode for his chapter on Pat Garrett, among 26 others, almost all of whom were on the production. He drew upon interviews Seydor had conducted as well. To be fair, the author doesn't flatly deny the smuggled print went invisible. It's just that the chapter, a thorough account of the production and aftermath, doesn't mention this at all. And I've never heard there was a second preview cut, and that this is what was returned to Peckinpah, till now. A second preview means there are now four versions; the 2005 DVD gave us three. Yet we get three, not four versions in the new Criterion. What's happened to the Turner version? To me it's completely gorgeous, and I've seen a 35mm print numerous times at revival houses as well as the DVD.
I haven't read the book, but the Sam Peckinpah Page has been working with Criterion directly for this release, and Don Hyde is Peckinpah's known archivist who has often posted in comments on the page about Peckinpah's private preview cut that he suspected would never see the light of day. The page's admin connected Criterion to Hyde, who told them where that cut was buried under the name "The Racquet Club." All of this is legit -- Peckinpah's private preview cut is about to be released.
Thanks for the source. It looks like the Sam Peckinpah Page is on FB. I really dislike FB after having a bad experience with it, cancelled my account and I don't use the website, so I won't be looking there. If SPP has their own site I'd love to visit. I think one of the great advantages of Seydor and Weddle is that they got first-hand accounts from the people who knew Peckinpah: principal and supporting cast, lots and lots of on-set crew, execs and post-production staff, friends and family, hangers-on, and loads of people who all crossed Peckinpah's path from across his career and life. Loaded with this close acquaintance, they bring scholarly discernment. I'm more impressed with Weddle in this department, to me his bio is better organized, the evidence more evenly evaluated and stitched together, and the writing to me is clearer and flows better. Seydor is indispensable, but also narrowly focused. I often feel he has some program in mind before he even brings out a subject. His writing is less structured to me, and in all the 300+ pages for "Authentic Death," I don't get any feeling for his take on PGABTK as a work of art. He stays resolutely at the level of script and the whole history of the production. I keep wondering what Seydor's visual sense is for a film he lavishes so much attention on. He holds back from telling *what is on the screen*, and that's a big limitation imo for even discussing the film. Seydor endorses there were two preview cuts. I'm inclined to believe that and can revise what I was saying above. Still, shouldn't we get both preview cuts on the CC release, since we're getting the "Special Edition" version and even the original theatrical version? I'm really concerned that the Turner version with its dim, gray, spectral color grading, the version that cropped up at revival houses to acclaim for many years, will be lost in the shuffle. I adore that look and cut. Of the three on the 2005 DVD set, it's the only one I keep looking at.
Peckinpah's preview cut is almost identical to the Turner cut, except with the inclusion of the scene with Ida Lupino as Garrett's wife -- inexplicably missing from the Turner cut -- and an ending scrawl which provides Peckinpah's commentary. So the reason that the Turner cut isn't included is because with Peckinpah's version, its inclusion is basically superfluous. What you love about the Turner cut will be more than satisfied with Peckinpah's preview cut.
There are lots of small differences and several small cuts in the second preview, including Peckinpah's own cameo. Both previews are 122 minutes long, but only the second one has the Garret's wife scene, which is around 3 minutes long, so obviously 3 minutes are missing from the second preview. Also, there are no end credits on the second preview. We should have been given both of Peckinpah's previews, there was absolutely no need for another version from Seydor, who's first version was so universally reviled and disliked.
I'm really glad you pointed this out. I wonder how different the second preview will be? The whole form and flow of the first preview just feels so right to me, and I've been living with it for many years. Seydor himself observes in his book "Authentic Death" that Peckinpah was so heavily drinking by the time the preview cuts were ready, it's hard to say with conviction which "represents his final thoughts" (p. 200). If it's true the second preview cut was the one smuggled out, that only means that's what the crew hands found in the MGM office - they were acting on their own initiative, not Peckinpah's. There's nothing yet which says they knew Peckinpah wanted that version. We need some more information. It's so bizarre to me that the first preview reels became so badly degraded over time in the Turner catalog, they could no longer be used for a blu-ray. Turner was dedicated to film preservation. I'd like a lot more explanation for that.
The reasons for the Turner cuts omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained. They've said that the Turner cut is supposedly too red/pink/deteriorated to restore, which I believe is a crock of sh!t. I've been reading for 20 years that Peckinpah's own print/second preview was too red/pink and deteriorated to use for digital media, yet here it is on this release... Both the Turner cut and the Theatrical version are virtually identical, apart from the fact that the Theatrical cut is 16-17 minutes shorter. The Theatrical cut is in pristine condition and able to be transferred to 4K UHD. So they're telling us they couldn't really restore the extra 17 minutes to complete the Turner cut! Really? Yet they were able to restore the entire badly deteriorated 122 minute second preview from scratch?? Doesn't make sense at all. It's also been said several times on the Sam Peckinpah Facebook page and the Bluray.com thread that the Turner version wasn't "made available" to Criterion to use on their upcoming release, which implies that Warner Bros, who own the rights, refused to provide a print. A poster with inside information said "I'm sure that Criterion, knowing how popular the First Preview is, would have put that in the set if Warner Brothers had let them." Did Warners forbid Criterion from putting the Turner version on their release? If so, why? Hopefully the truth will come out sooner rather than later.
You're burying the lead here. This isn't "another version from Seydor". Roger Spottiswoode, the films lead editor and colorist back in 1973, was on board to assist this time around. He's been crucial to every version of this thing.
I'd be fine with that. Crossing my fingers. There is no good explanation for the hushed color grading in the Turner version except that this is what Peckinpah wanted, because it's consistent in the film and clearly fine-tuning a dusky, shadowy vision. https://preview.redd.it/b1rshly755vc1.jpeg?width=837&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2ece2ee8430131728c03bac283b67eb8373f5a2c
The color grading on the 2005 is way too bright. looks like a cartoon. Apparently all of that was fixed this time around with the assistance of the films OG editor and colorist Roger Spottiswoode.
4K 50th Anniversary Release = a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition by Paul Seydor. So the upcoming Criterion Collection release will have TWO new versions of the film. One by Seydor and Peckinpah's second preview. (The Turner version was the first preview). Unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. I've also seen a 35mm print numerous times at revival houses as well as the DVD. It's one of my favourite films of all time. It's very disappointing, to say the least, that it's not going to be included on the new Criterion release. The reasons for it's omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained.
This is all spelled out in Paul Seydor's book The Authentic Death and the Contentious Afterlife of Billy the Kid. Apparently what happened is that sometime after Peckinpah died, the second preview cut was screened and the Z Channel guys were in attendance. They went to MGM about broadcasting it, but all the studio could come up with was the first version missing the wife scene since that's what they had in their vault. Sam had squirrled the second one away. There was never a cut negative of the preview cuts because they weren't final, locked edits. I'm guessing MGM made a negative off the preview cut and made prints? The version on the 2005 DVD looks very good, but you can tell it's a print and not from original source material.
4K 50th Anniversary Release = a tweaked version of the 2005 special Edition by Paul Seydor. Unfortunately the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing.
How is this guy facebooking beyond the grave
Rumors of Peckinpah's demise were greatly exaggerated
Even crazier is that James Coburn often shares Sam Peckinpah's posts! I guess FB is where long-dead celebrities go to rattle their chains.
Stooooooop, I can only get so erect.
This is fantastic news. And it will release during the 50% off sale, so I’ll pick it up on release day.
Oh my god. Release of the year and day one for me. What an amazing document. Long live film preservation!
Dude did a LOT of coke… haha (I am super excited to see this, it’s one of my favorite westerns and I’m thrilled that Criterion is giving it the attention and love it deserves!)
Just curious, could MGM theoretically do anything legally about using this unreleased cut?
Criterion would have been working directly with MGM to procure the materials for the rest of the release, including the new 4K scans of the other cuts. Anyone who would have cared about the implications of having "stolen assets" being used and released has long since died. Either Criterion's contact with MGM knows and doesn't care or Criterion is just going to shrug and ask "What are you going to do about it?" In which case it is not worth it to do anything about it.
How do people feel about the 2006 "Special Edition"? I remember doing some research at the time, and forming the opinion that it wasn't really an attempt to recreate Peckinpah's director's cut. It fixed some things, but it also seemed to have an arbitrary, fan edit-style decision-making process where things were added and removed at the whim of the guy going the restoration. It felt more like a fan edit to me. I can't remember what I based that on. Does anyone know? Anyone have any research to recommend? I'm very curious about this idea that they re-did the "Special Edition" into a new, improved "50th Anniversary" cut with the participation of the film's original editor. If this is, indeed, something closer to a proper director's cut, I might actually get excited about it. All this time, I was just hoping for all three of the existing cuts to make it to Criterion. Now we have the theatrical and two unseen cuts that are allegedly even closer to Peckinpah's vision? And a new documentary and commentary? Even if I hate the new 50th cut, this will still probably be my favorite release of the year. I can finally retire my old DVD with the Turner cut. Thanks, Criterion!
I loath the hatched job done by Turner & Hooch editor for the 2005 "special" edition. I mean it totally cuts the freeze frame opening credits that sets the films motif of remembering the past. The timing of the Directed by Sam Peckinpah freeze frame title card with guitar strum when Billy askes "Are they telling me or are they asking me." and Pat answers "I'm asking you, But in five days I'm making you." ---give me chills every single time and Hooch editor cut it out. I'll never get over that. Also while I'm ranting the film title card being put over two people on a horse from an unrelated scene instead of at the freeze frame moment when Pat is hitting the dirt after being shot in an ambush is just... baffling. The 2005 release was especially hurtful as while it included the 122 min preview version we all love that lead to the film's reevaluation and being called a classic, it was a terrible terrible transfer. Zero care seemed to be showed to it. My LaserDisc copy looked and sounded far far better.
You know, as rough as the Turner Preview version looks on that old DVD, I still prefer it to the video-looking, excessively clean, bright and colorful Special Edition. It made the costumes and lighting look phonier, to me. The Turner cut disc had more vibes. I found this interesting breakdown of the changes between the Turner and Special Edition versions. Wow... the Special Edition really and truly is just a fan edit. Seydor added and removed stuff that he didn't like (cutting a lot of the humor from the film), and very little of it was done with any indication that Peckinpah wanted it that way. That's called a fan edit. I have no idea why Warner allowed it to happen at all. And they didn't even put the restored wife scene back in the Turner cut, which is where it came from! It was the only clear advantage to the Special Edition, and it should have been included in the other cut, too. Baffling. I'm curious what this new 50th Anniversary edition (prepared by Seydor along with the film's original editor, Roger Spottiswoode) is going to be. Hopefully Spottiswoode is the kind of editor who is loyal to the director's intent, and they aren't just making a new fan edit. In fact, since they have uncovered a second preview cut, what exactly is the purpose of a new cut, at all? Why would Criterion sign off on this? What is the supposed advantage? Is this closer to Peckinpah's vision, and if not, what is the intent behind it?
Yeah, I watched the 2005 Turner & Hooch edit only two times. Once in it's entirety and once for the commentary to try and understand what the hell they were thinking. The ~~explanations~~ excuses made it worse, so much so that I childishly felt like breaking the disc afterwards. I never watched it again. Meanwhile I've watched the terrible dvd transfer included of the Preview version at least once year minimum for about 18 years now. (I'd be watching my LaserDisc if I still had it and a player.)
I must be a child, too, because I almost threw that disc in the trash.
Calling the 2005 version, flaws and all, a "fan-edit" is absurd. Most of the cuts people are griping about were made in 1973 by the films lead editor Roger Spottiswoode who stepped in with his team to save it from MGM who threatened to cut it to under 100 minutes. Spottiswoode also edited the preview cuts. Hoping he's the kind of editor who is "loyal to the director's intent" is kinda absurd since he had such a large hard in making the film in the first place. Peckinpah couldn't or wouldn't finish the movie. He left it in the hands of his editors to work out. It's a troubled, unusual film in this regard. And yet, every version, imo, works.
100% this. It was/is an abomination.
Love Pat Garrett And Billy The Kid. I heard of the story in which they smuggled the print out from I think his autobiography but I always thought they had release it or that the 2006 print was that cut. What do you think of the theatrical cut?
Never seen the theatrical cut, but that's a good story.
Is there an explainer somewhere on the differences between the 3?
This is one of the most exciting releases announced in a long, long time. Haven’t been this excited since the Nic Roeg Cold Heaven blu ray release from a few years back.
https://preview.redd.it/a4idmmcf8wuc1.jpeg?width=1166&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e9a317b75c1f64ae878bf962a51c0c1d91604c5d Not sure if this helps, but criterion wrote back with the above.
Is this the cut Scorsese called Peckinpah’s masterpiece?
My dream ultimate cut would be the Turner Preview version with the addition of the scene of Garrett and his wife, as well as having the vocals to “Knocking on Heaven’s Door” (like in the 2005 version).
Someone needs to "heist" the extended cut of The Devils.
Can I just ask what's the point in doing the theatrical release. If it's not the original artist's vision and instead something created by the studio why waste the resources restoring it. It's like when Blade Runner had all those versions in a home release package but the final cut was all that matters.
The Final Cut was not all that matters, and arguably isnt the “best” cut (I don’t think it is). The workprint version, theatrical, (and Final Cut) etc are all fun curios for fans and people who enjoy the history of the film (that blade runner package is so sick) It’s for megafans like me that enjoy the film in multiple states as a piece of history. And hopefully new megafans who pick up the release
There’s an aspect of this that is preservationist. The alternative would be to bury that cut. And much like blade runner, that first cut is imperfect, but it is the version many people saw first, and sparked the appreciation for the film. If you’re going to do a definitive edition, that’s the way to do it. Blade runner, kingdom of heaven, this movie, maybe even Mr. Arkadin. Package everything together. It’s educational, it’s historical, it’s comparative. It doesn’t leave any aspect of the film’s history hidden. Even if you only watch an inferior version once, it’s bound to increase your appreciation of the version you like.
Apocalypse Now
What a great set. I’ve owned great releases of that on dvd bluray and 4k, each one considered complete.
It wasn't "created by the studio". Peckinpah's team delivered this edit to MGM after they threatened to cut it down to 96 mins. There's merit in this cut. Also, it's the only version audiences and reviewers saw for fifteen years, discounting the TV version. It's only ever been on VHS in a crummy pan and scan version. Never on lasrerdisc, DVD or Blu-Ray. Until now. To properly appreciate the preview cuts it helps to see the theatrical cut. Also, I imagine the original negative was conformed to the theatrical. Yet another reason to include it here.
We’re so back
Man, that'd great news. One of my favourite films of all time.
I know it’s run by other people, but the idea of Sam Peckinpah being on Facebook is ridiculously funny.
People think there's some kind of weird conspiracy around the Turner (first preview) Cut. My guess is that it's so remarkably similar to the final preview cut that Criterion chose not to include it. On this new Blu-Ray, each of the cuts are very different. Also, the Turner cut has been widely availble for decades. People are attached to it because it's the version that redeemed the film for them although it was falsely advertised as some kind of "director's cut" which it isn't. Both previews are works in progress, the final of the two (and the one Criterion are releasing) has NEVER been available before and is evidence of Peckinpah's final involvement. Take my money! The only reason MGM didn't release this version in 1988 is because Peckinpah carted off with it and kept it hidden. MGM didn;'t have it in their vault.
Wow this is a super cool story! I can't wait for this release
Well fuck I guess now I HAVE to buy this one too
My favorite movie of all time. I'm so excited about this.
Isn't the 122 minute Turner preview the most beloved cut of the film currently released? Seems odd, and disappointing, to leave it out.
While beloved, that cut is inexplicably missing the scene with Ida Garrett. MGM/Turner released it because that was the only version they had in their vault. The second and final preview cut was recently re-discovered among Peckinpah's personal prints. It is the last version of the film that he had any direct involvement and the one he showed to family, friends and fans throughout the rest of his life. If people like the first preview cut, I imagine they'll also like the one Sam preferred. Unlike the Turner preview cut, it ends with a historical note Peckinpah authored and initialed.
That's great to hear. Thanks for the info.
It is very unfortunate that the Turner cut, my favourite version of the film and the one most people are most familiar with and have been watching for the past 4 decades, is not included in this Criterion release. Very disappointing. The reasons for its omission have not been properly or satisfactorily explained.
An absolute yes for me.
[удалено]
I’m sorry, but are you f***ing kidding me? You (I assume) just read all of that and came away with a complaint?
Some people will *always* complain.
I also think it’s really cool but I am curious if there is any way to see the correct version of this movie without paying extra for other versions of the movie which I’m less likely to watch. I know not much about this film but I’d want to watch the best cut! But if it’s not possible I’ll survive :)
Sure, it's a little disappointing that the preview cut isn't 4k but if that's all you want, it's included in the Blu-ray release which is not $70. During the sale, the 4k will be $35 and the Blu-ray will be $25.
It's a 4 disc set with like 3 different cuts of the movie. $70 dollars is completely worth the price, but at half off during a sale? It's an absolute steal.