Heaven’s Gate (Michael Cimino, 1980)

Reviewed it on NK a while back (in German)

So it’s just as good as Criterion’s release?

I think in the end they did get all the extras, too, so yes, as it’s the Criterion material as well. And no censorship (horse falls) like the UK version. I don’t have an exact 1:1 comparison, but this one is a marvelous release for sure

Yes it’s an out and out masterpiece in my book. Cimino was a grossly underrated talent. There have been very few directors with his visual brilliance - Sergio Leone would be another.

4 Likes

Am I the only one who thinks the pace is much better in the shorter version? The only thing I dislike about the shorter cut is the way they re-edited the ending. I’m still undecided about John Hurt’s speech and whether it’s really needed. Overall, I think I’ll be sticking with the 149 minute version in future. A hybrid would be even more preferable.

I decided to watch the 1981 theatrical cut again and I stand by my opinion that it is superior to the original/director’s cut. Perhaps the ending isn’t too bad in this version, either. I suppose it doesn’t really matter. John Hurt’s speech wasn’t missed but I suppose they could have left it in. The only scene I would have definitely left in is the part showing Canton execute the man after he’s confronted by Champion. That’s the only scene I can’t believe they cut but other than that, the shorter version is nowhere near as bad as Cimino’s fans would have you believe. It’s the exact same film but with better pacing. You’re able to appreciate the beauty of this film without getting lost and the story feels more straight-forward. I’m glad I bought the German Blu-ray since it contains both versions. Others can decide for themselves which version they prefer.

I’ve always refused to watch it on principle. So both the Harvard dance and the roller skate dance are cut?

They are shortened but not completely cut out.

Finally saw this and… well, didn’t really like it. I saw the short version so maybe the longer cut would be better but I thought the film was quite a mess. Maybe Cimino was aiming for another Deer Hunter with a similar story line where during the first half of the film nothing really happens except funny dances and romantic stuff but it doesn’t work that well here.

I can see why this was such a disaster considering it’s huge budget back in the days. Maybe the long version is really good then I dunno.

I feel so alone in my love for the 149 minute version. I think there was one critic who said the same. The build up is too slow in the longer version and it feels like you’re watching a remastered workprint. I can watch the shorter cut over and over.

The longer version is pretty good, but it’s still somewhat erratic and lacks a proper development of its characters which is the primary reason I’ve never bothered to watch the shorter cut and probably never will, as it won’t resolve the issues I’ve had with the film in the first place. I think Cimino intended to turn it into a much more languorous and contemplative movie than The Deer Hunter and he just couldn’t achieve it within the Hollywood format. Viewing the longer version is a bit like watching what’s left of the original and it still does not feel like the ultimate version IMO. The original 5-hour has to be properly restored and released. Not sure if it can be done at this point, but it sure would be great.

Well I find the restoration just beautiful and the movie masterful. Not for when you are tired granted but generally I loved every minute of it

The one thing you can’t say about is that it doesn’t look good. It looks effing gorgeous and yes, the restoration looks fantastic.

1 Like

Just finished watchting the “longer” version of 196 minutes. It was broadcasted at AMC so the oppurtunity came along to scrap this from my watchlist.
I have mixed feelings about the movie. For me it was not the big disaster is known for but also no masterpiece.

I still do not know what the added value is of:

  • The dancing scene at the opening. What does it ad to the story? Beautiful filmed but not really what to expect in a western. Something for a musial :thinking:
  • The character of John Hurt. He could have been used more for commenting on the actions going on;
  • The opening with graduation scene. This does not have anything to do with the "Johnson county war "IMHO. Instead the time could have been used to give more background of the characters
  • The (overlong) scenes with the rollerscates. How nice made, it takes a lot of the action attention out of the picture
  • Somewhere in the movie there is a discussion between nate and James inside the bar. in the window behind them there is an annoying juggler pulling the attention aay from the scene

Probably due to the long scenes and the chosen storyline with some used excesses used it does not come together; the movie can not be pinned to a certain style. There are too many scenes that make it not a western. Also it does not tell the story of James, only some parts of it.

I would not re-watch the movie again.

All these discussions make an interesting read. I hope the participants are interested in my thoughts about the movie:

1 Like

I too found this a little over the top, and it does seem rather forcibly choreographed, like (as you said) a scene from a lavish film musical.

This whole sequence is uncomfortable for anyone expecting a ‘let’s get straight to the action’ film … but I believe it’s there to establish what very different social lifestyles existed in the late 19th century, and that Kristofferson’s character, James Averill is from a privileged and cultured background … not typical western sheriff material.

The film does however ‘shit on it’s own hands’ , as there’s NO WAY anyone can take seriously the age of the two main participants, John Hurt 40 years old when this film was made and Kris Kristofferson 44 … they both must have had to repeat their final exams for over 2 decades !? I’ve heard of mature students, but this is ridiculous.

Overall the good outweighs the bad … but it’s this sequence which has always bugged me.

Watching it about once every 10 years is enough for me … I don’t love it, but I can’t hate it either :wink:

That is brave :face_with_raised_eyebrow:
For me there are better movies to re-watch, also from Cimino like “the Deerhunter” and “Thunderbolt and Lightfoot”

1 Like