1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Message
Author
beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#26 Post by beamish14 » Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:28 pm

Lighthouse wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:14 pm
dwk wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 3:51 pm
Looking at the disc art, the run times are
50th Anniversary cut: 117
Theatrical cut: 106
Preview cut: 122
Ok,then with 117 min the 50th Anniversary cut is about 2 min longer than the WB version from 2005. So it seems that Seydor and Spottiswoode prepared a new version similar to the 2005 cut, but hopefully omitting its errors and maybe bring back a few shots or shorter segments which that version would benefit from.

Hmm, if the Preview cut is the one that Peckinpah had stolen, than it is slightly different from the Turner version, and it will include the wife scene. But the runtimes are similar.


There were several preview cuts. The earliest one has no color left at all, but it has been transferred to VHS and is at the AMPAS.

beamish14
Joined: Fri May 18, 2018 3:07 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#27 Post by beamish14 » Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:30 pm

Tuppence wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:05 pm
This is going to be like L'Atalante, isn't it, where every time it gets restored, the film gets altered yet again, and something else I loved gets shuffled around or removed. Guess I should pick up Warner's DVD while I can. Anyway, semi-excited for the new Preview Cut, even if 122 minutes implies that it's the same length as the prior version (ie. without the Garrett and his wife scene).

As soon as I started watching the 2005 re-edit, I knew I was in the hands of bozos when they swapped out Peckinpah's intricately designed opening credit sequence for the slapdash freeze-frames that accompanied the theatrical release. I don't hold out too much hope for this 50th Anniversary cut if it's merely been "tweaked", as implied in that Facebook post, but we shall see.

I’d hold onto the WB disc for the commentaries, too. The Turner Cut looks like absolute shit on it, unfortunately

xmchaikenx
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2024 3:31 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#28 Post by xmchaikenx » Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:57 pm

Lighthouse wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:14 pm
dwk wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 3:51 pm
Looking at the disc art, the run times are
50th Anniversary cut: 117
Theatrical cut: 106
Preview cut: 122
Ok,then with 117 min the 50th Anniversary cut is about 2 min longer than the WB version from 2005. So it seems that Seydor and Spottiswoode prepared a new version similar to the 2005 cut, but hopefully omitting its errors and maybe bring back a few shots or shorter segments which that version would benefit from.

Hmm, if the Preview cut is the one that Peckinpah had stolen, than it is slightly different from the Turner version, and it will include the wife scene. But the runtimes are similar.
The final preview version is different from the first preview version, most notably the inclusion of the scene with Ida Garrett and the historical endnote that Sam wrote and initialed. What's missing are the end credits that Spotiswoode said they simply didn't have time to prepare. The first and second preview versions were shown to MGM within a week of one another. May 3 and May 10, 1973. Paul Seydor writes about all of this in his book "The Authentic Death and Contentious Afterlife of Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid: The Untold Story of Peckinpah's Last Western Film"

Also, the theatrical version wasn't left in the hands of "bozos" as someone back there wrote. Roger Spottiswoode, Garth Craven and Bob Wolfe did what they could under enormous pressure to preserve Sam's original vision, which included the opening titles.

User avatar
Lighthouse
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 11:12 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#29 Post by Lighthouse » Mon Apr 15, 2024 5:07 pm

beamish14 wrote:
Mon Apr 15, 2024 4:28 pm

There were several preview cuts. The earliest one has no color left at all, but it has been transferred to VHS and is at the AMPAS.

According to the Seydor books there were only 2 preview versions.
The so called Turner version was the first preview, which stayed in the vaults of MGM, and the stolen 2nd one that Peckinpah showed here and there to interested people. Seydor said that that one had later on totally faded colors and looked very reddish. In other words unwatchable. And that one was transferred to VHS, but actually before the reddening started.

User avatar
Maltic
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2020 1:36 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#30 Post by Maltic » Mon Apr 15, 2024 5:38 pm

A shame Stephen Prince isn't around any more to do commentary (not that CC would have commissioned one).

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#31 Post by dwk » Mon Apr 15, 2024 6:05 pm

They used Stephen Prince all the time for commentaries, and I imagine that they would have got him on this one.


pistolwink
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:07 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#33 Post by pistolwink » Tue Apr 16, 2024 1:39 pm

It's funny that the interview about Dylan focuses on his contribution to the soundtrack, since his contribution as an actor is... less acclaimed.
(Has there ever been a big music star who has seemed as profoundly uncomfortable in his acting roles? Whether his various cameos or his few starring(!) vehicles, Dylan can't hold a convincing pose or deliver a line to save his life.)

User avatar
Hogfather
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2020 2:20 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#34 Post by Hogfather » Wed Apr 17, 2024 2:33 am

Just to straighten things out, these are the different cuts of Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid that I know about and why they were or were not included in the Criterion release:

1. The First Preview Version, also called the 1988 Turner Version. This was the closest thing to a director's cut for about thirty-five years. It is 122 minutes long and was first shown publicly on TCM in, you guessed it, 1988, at which point it became the most widely circulated version of the film for almost twenty years. The physical materials have become badly degraded for this version, making it unsuitable for Blu-ray or 4k UHD.

2. The Second Preview Version, also known as Peckinpah's personal version of the film. It is the last version of the film in which Peckinpah was involved at all, and I think it's the version stolen from the MGM editing room by his buddies. It is mostly the same as the 1988 Turner version, but contains a handful of differences (a scene with Ida Garrett, a strange end-crawl written by Peckinpah himself. Because this print was rarely shown and was kept in Peckinpah's private collection, it was in good enough condition to be used as the source for a 2k transfer. However, because its original materials are a 50-year-old second generation print, it is not good enough for a 4k transfer.

3. The Theatrical Version. The 106-minute-long version was edited by, amongst others, Roger Spottiswoode (Straw Dogs) and Robert Wolfe (The Getaway, Junior Bonner) under enormous pressure from Peckinpah's archenemy, MGM studio chief James Aubrey. This version was critically panned upon release in 1973 and has been hard to come by since the rediscovery of the first preview version. Because the original film negative exists in this form and for historical reasons, this version is included on the Criterion release in 4k UHD.

4. The Television Version. I may be misremembering, but I seem to remember the existence of this strangely edited-for-television version that included then-new footage in exchange for the removal of violence and nudity.

5. The 2005 Special Edition, also known as the Seydor Cut. In the early 2000's, Peckinpah scholar Paul Seydor, who had seen Peckinpah's private cut of the film, attempted to assemble a version of the film that would resemble the "best of both worlds," using the higher-quality footage from the negative and the cut scenes included in the Turner Cut, as well as several scenes included in neither (I think the chicken-catching scene is one of these). Having known Peckinpah personally (Seydor even dated his daughter!), he wanted to create a version that would most accurately resemble Peckinpah's original vision. However, this 115-minute-long cut was rushed and underfunded. As a result, Seydor was able to rearrange the structure of the film to fit Peckinpah's version, but used a number of cuts that had been taken from the theatrical version and had never been meant for release; there were also issues with the audio. Seydor has for almost twenty years expressed a desire to retry this experiment with better funding, finally resulting in...

6. The 2023 50th Anniversary Edition. Produced by the Criterion Collection with the collaboration of Seydor and Spottiswoode, this version is an attempt to combine the editing from Peckinpah's preview cuts with the original materials and what Seydor and Spottiswoode believe to have been Peckinpah's ultimate intentions. It is 117 minutes long, longer than the 2005 Special Edition but shorter than either preview version. Who knows, maybe this version is the closest we'll ever get to what Peckinpah really wanted. After all, even his private print (The Second Preview Version) was just a rough cut. At the very least, I think it's a good thing that his chosen editor has finally gotten to work unencumbered on a version of the film. Because of all these reasons, this version is included on the Criterion release in 4k.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#35 Post by swo17 » Wed Apr 17, 2024 2:50 am

Very helpful summary, thanks!

User avatar
Lighthouse
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 11:12 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#36 Post by Lighthouse » Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:57 am

Hogfather wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 2:33 am


3. The Theatrical Version. The 106-minute-long version was edited by, amongst others, Roger Spottiswoode (Straw Dogs) and Robert Wolfe (The Getaway, Junior Bonner) under enormous pressure from Peckinpah's archenemy, MGM studio chief James Aubrey. This version was critically panned upon release in 1973
This is not really true, yes PG&BtK got his share of negative reviews at the time of its release (but which Peckinpah film doesn't?), but there were also from the beginning on positive reviews, and the film had from the beginning on a lot of fans. As one example in Phil Hardy's big western encyclopedia from 1983 PG&BtK is featured as "a masterpiece, despite being mangled" and "This film is essential viewing". Also in all the old Peckinpah books from the late 70s and early 80s the film was written about very positively. It was always one of Peckinpah's central films since the day of its release.
I watched the film for a decade only in that version, and after a short irritation after the first watch, I began to love it, and it was since then my 2nd favourite Peckinpah film, and was already then, and still is one of the 5 best westerns ever.

Of course I was very exited to watch a longer version after having only read about all the missing footage, but apart from the brilliant opening montage I was underwhelmed by the Preview version, it did not really improve the film for me. In that version it is the only Peckinpah film which drags here and there.
Last edited by Lighthouse on Wed Apr 17, 2024 5:56 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
filmyfan
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:50 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#37 Post by filmyfan » Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:58 am

Thanks Hogfather

Really useful info for someone who doesnt know the history of this film at all

Have just ordered Seydors book as well!

User avatar
Forrest Taft
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Stavanger, Norway

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#38 Post by Forrest Taft » Wed Apr 17, 2024 12:49 pm

Yes, that was uselful info, Hogfather. And you're right about there existing a TV-version. According to the Seydor-book, it was the only version including the scene with Pat Garrett's wife, until it was re-inserted into the 2005 cut.

Cautiously optimistic that this may be the release of the year, for one of my absolute favourite films. I remain slightly sceptical though, as the 88 Turner version is the one I really love, and much of it has to do with little details that never made it to the 2005 cut: the editing of not only the opening credits, but also the finale, which goes on for a bit longer in the Turner cut. In the 2005-cut, Peckinpah's cameo was shortened, as was Garrett's line "What you want and what you get are two different things". Little details, but the rhythm and the vibe of that sequence is my favourite passage in all of Peckinpah's oevre, so the 2005 cut felt useless to me with these trims. I did appreciate it for the inclusion of "Knockin on Heaven's Door" though. Hopefully those little touches I love are present in one of the two new-to-me cuts Criterion are including.

User avatar
Hogfather
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2020 2:20 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#39 Post by Hogfather » Wed Apr 17, 2024 1:41 pm

Forrest Taft wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 12:49 pm
Yes, that was uselful info, Hogfather. And you're right about there existing a TV-version. According to the Seydor-book, it was the only version including the scene with Pat Garrett's wife, until it was re-inserted into the 2005 cut.

Cautiously optimistic that this may be the release of the year, for one of my absolute favourite films. I remain slightly sceptical though, as the 88 Turner version is the one I really love, and much of it has to do with little details that never made it to the 2005 cut: the editing of not only the opening credits, but also the finale, which goes on for a bit longer in the Turner cut. In the 2005-cut, Peckinpah's cameo was shortened, as was Garrett's line "What you want and what you get are two different things". Little details, but the rhythm and the vibe of that sequence is my favourite passage in all of Peckinpah's oevre, so the 2005 cut felt useless to me with these trims. I did appreciate it for the inclusion of "Knockin on Heaven's Door" though. Hopefully those little touches I love are present in one of the two new-to-me cuts Criterion are including.
Thanks for clarifying about the TV version. I suspected as much, but I didn't remember and couldn't find any references to it at the moment I was writing my last post.

As for the 88 Turner Version, it's supposed to be 98% the same as Peckinpah's personal workprint, which the Criterion version will include. The Peckinpah cut has a handful of alternate shots not included in the Turner Version, the Ida Garrett scene, and an end crawl added by Peckinpah, but other than that they are identical. Peckinpah's personal print was made the same week as the 88 Turner Cut, so I'm sure we won't be missing too much.

User avatar
Lighthouse
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 11:12 am

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#40 Post by Lighthouse » Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:24 pm

In defend of the 2005 version, which is only partly a Seydor version, it must be said that according to Seydor's book, it was Warner's decision to use the theatrical version and to insert in this one the missing scenes (except one for good reasons), and to do no further editing than for the first scene (the only editing Seydor did himself) and where it was necessary for the including of the new footage.

So don't blame Seydor for any missing dialogues or other snippets, they are missing because they were edited out for the theatrical version.

But it is also true that the 2005 version in many respects reflects his ideas about the film.

User avatar
feihong
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:20 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#41 Post by feihong » Wed Apr 17, 2024 5:00 pm

I believe I've seen three-to-four versions of the film so far? And I've loved them all. Even the theatrical version, frankly. My feeling is, the movie is intriguing, even compelling, from its best expression to its most compromised version.

User avatar
Randall Maysin Again
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:28 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#42 Post by Randall Maysin Again » Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:13 pm

So unless imdb is lying, Rudy Wurlitzer, who is still alive, will not be involved with this release in any way. And he's been extensively involved with two past Criterion releases! Is there some sort of problem he has with Peckinpah or his own work on the film, or am i just feeling the steely chill of austerity Criterion? Or should I just shut the fuck up and get over myself? Nevermind, complaining is a legitimate use of this forum! It has to be!

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#43 Post by dwk » Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:18 pm


User avatar
Randall Maysin Again
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:28 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#44 Post by Randall Maysin Again » Wed Apr 17, 2024 8:13 pm

Richard--W no lie?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#45 Post by domino harvey » Wed Apr 17, 2024 8:26 pm

Richard--W actually is someone in the industry, but not that particular individual

User avatar
Randall Maysin Again
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:28 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#46 Post by Randall Maysin Again » Wed Apr 17, 2024 9:00 pm

Wait, what? That's a fake Richard--W? tee-hee!

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#47 Post by domino harvey » Wed Apr 17, 2024 9:35 pm

I was confused and thought you were confused but it was me who was confused so I confused you

User avatar
dwk
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 6:10 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#48 Post by dwk » Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:18 pm

To clarify, it is that Richard W and he is in the industry.

User avatar
Randall Maysin Again
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2021 3:28 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#49 Post by Randall Maysin Again » Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:30 pm

Well--Bravo!

In regards to the film, I've always been highly leery of the Peckinpah-bruh threesome, as I rented this a long time ago and tried to take in the 2005 re-edit, but found it immediately unwatchable. I've seen the.....other cut that was also available in the same set, whichever one that was, and maybe my memory is failing me, but I'm surprised to hear all the talk of how "pitiless" and "brutal" and so on in a way some think the film to be, for example on Letterboxd, as I liked many aspects of it, but the number one takeaway for me would be, "precious". I found the whole thing a tad self-conscious, and Bob Dylan's music, while certainly not terrible, kind of exacerbates this response. Maybe I should just see it again!

User avatar
Hogfather
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2020 2:20 pm

Re: 1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

#50 Post by Hogfather » Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:23 pm

Randall Maysin Again wrote:
Wed Apr 17, 2024 10:30 pm
Well--Bravo!

In regards to the film, I've always been highly leery of the Peckinpah-bruh threesome, as I rented this a long time ago and tried to take in the 2005 re-edit, but found it immediately unwatchable. I've seen the.....other cut that was also available in the same set, whichever one that was, and maybe my memory is failing me, but I'm surprised to hear all the talk of how "pitiless" and "brutal" and so on in a way some think the film to be, for example on Letterboxd, as I liked many aspects of it, but the number one takeaway for me would be, "precious". I found the whole thing a tad self-conscious, and Bob Dylan's music, while certainly not terrible, kind of exacerbates this response. Maybe I should just see it again!
I don't know why anyone would call the movie "pitiless." I found the way it treated the older characters, particularly those played by old Hollywood actors like Slim Pickens and Jack Elam, to be treated with a great deal of compassion. In fact, I don't know why any Peckinpah film would be described as "pitiless," though they're certainly brutal in their violence.

Also, the other cut you saw was the 1988 Turner Preview Version.

Post Reply