tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post6282382451208064992..comments2024-03-16T18:38:04.996-04:00Comments on Critics At Large : Michael Cimino’s Heaven’s Gate and the Death of the Auteur TheoryCritics at Largehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18073851963852030361noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-2974414305569434372019-06-09T05:16:59.155-04:002019-06-09T05:16:59.155-04:00The film was a masterpiece on release and always w...The film was a masterpiece on release and always will be.It was unfortunately too late on arrival in so far as what the movie going public had begun to be weaned on and thus solely anticipated and expected:the Hollywood Blockbuster/Sci-Fi/SFX era.The trivial hysteria surrounding the critical savaging of the film was pre-meditated and no worse than the many controversies surrounding it's making.It stood no chance.I saw it many years ago and declared it a masterpiece in my own mind,regardless of its squandered history.Its elegiac and painterly form,funereal pacing and craftsmanship all enveloped me like no other picture before.Like David Lean before him,with his rapturous and exquisite Ryan's Daughter,Cimino became just another statistic for the masses of film critics,all flailing around at the time in a bored panic,looking for the next 'big' cinematic target to crucify.So the film has finally come to be seen as the neglected masterwork it actually is over the past number of years..? Of course it has.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08299963396646297460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-77258428875515265082016-07-03T12:27:39.852-04:002016-07-03T12:27:39.852-04:00Extremely soporific film. The ambien of gorgeous l...Extremely soporific film. The ambien of gorgeous looking, super boring filmsPangeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10350494419930846719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-34533740641436748062013-07-25T10:56:44.983-04:002013-07-25T10:56:44.983-04:00I couldn't agree more with your article about ...I couldn't agree more with your article about Heavens Gate. I've tried to like this film several times and just gave up. I saw the edited version when it came out and left the theatre very confused. Sometime in the late 80's I borrowed a VHS version of the 3.5 hour version and was willing to give it a chance. I figured the edited version that I saw in 1980 was butchered and that this VHS version ( 2 tapes) would finally shed some light on the genius of this film. Alas it was not to be. The long (and I stress long) version was even more confusing then the 2.5<br />Michael Cimino as far as I'm concerned had a heavy hand in ruining the movie industry today. Investors today want their money going to a committee style of film making with stop gaps, too many meetings and endless testing. dnrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09507502378847944147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-15328102451700548422013-03-15T22:06:58.159-04:002013-03-15T22:06:58.159-04:00I'm afraid that HG is ONLY worth investing tim...I'm afraid that HG is ONLY worth investing time in if you have an "auteur's" control of the remote to FF through abominably bad scenes. Of which there are many. I see comments commending the music score and/or cinematography. I beg to differ.The film is preposterously unwatchable. It's unwatchably preposterous. Is it "The Worst"? Who cares? The music cannot be great in such a film. Ditto for the camera. It's NOT FUNNY. Give it a half hour. CAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17048701750859951424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-21943372150875142902013-03-11T20:51:58.079-04:002013-03-11T20:51:58.079-04:00I just saw the 216min version of HG this afternoon...I just saw the 216min version of HG this afternoon (would like to have seen the alleged 260min version) at the famous Castro Theater in San Francisco. I had never seen any version before, but had heard the legend, and was curious.<br /><br />Overall, I thought the film wonderful. I truly hardly noticed the time going by, and was sad when it finally ended. This article is simply unfair. "Worst Movie Ever"?!? I've seen thousands of worse films. (Try anything by the pretentious 'avante-gardiste' Tarkovsky. See that Nicole Kidman movie BIRTH - I think that was the name - for something genuinely unbelievably bad.) <br /><br />The rollerskating scene you mock was beautifully paced and shot, and I thoroughly enjoyed it, even if it obviously was unnecessary in the context of the central plot (though it did make the two main characters seem to be in love, and that love story or triangle was a sub-plot). Why do film critics love it when movie casts burst out into utterly inappropriate impromptu singing and dancing during any typical boring Bollywood flick? <br /><br />I can't imagine why persons found the plot unintelligible. I thought it was explained pretty well (the one flaw being the lack of explanation for how the Averill character got from Harvard graduation to being a Wyoming sheriff two decades later). <br /><br />The one terrible problem I had was likewise with the dialogic sound quality. I saw Cimino's THE DEER HUNTER last month, also at the Castro, and I could not make out about a quarter of the dialogue (fortunately I'd seen it previously). Before reading this review, I assumed the Castro Theater just had a poor sound system (I've had auditory problems with other films seen there over the years). I now think Cimino himself may have had a personal failing with respect to recognizing how an audience would perceive his films' aural quality. I'm surprised this problem couldn't get fixed in a 'remastered' version (though perhaps the Castro showed an original, 33-34 year old, 35mm print - I don't know). <br /><br />Anyway, in sum, I enjoyed the whole movie, and judge it ambitious and well (if not perfectly) made. I was certainly never bored, as I was with, say, the truly, spectacularly awful MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO, which I only stayed through because it was the second film of a three-pack I had paid for, and I wished to see the third film (director van Sant later miraculously outdid his own awfulness with a movie called GERRY, that I and perhaps no more than 10 other people actually saw - see that movie as a true yardstick of the worst a movie can be, and still get screened), nor did I think HG remotely as meandering and pointless as Antonioni's massively overrated ZABRISKIE POINT.<br /><br />You should give HG a second look.T. David Drumhellernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-13238187844407918342013-01-29T18:42:06.193-05:002013-01-29T18:42:06.193-05:00I would agree w/ the idiot concrete comment. Parti...I would agree w/ the idiot concrete comment. Particularly when one considers a "film critic" refuses to revisit a film. This is without question far from the worst film ever made. Indeed it is flawed, but it's significantly better than this "critic" gives it credit for. Films like 2001, L'Aventurra, Vertigo, and Eyes Without A Face were excoriated by citics of their time, only to find a complete reversal many years later. (I'm not suggesting Heaven's Gate is at the level of the aforementioned films, it's not.)<br /><br />However, while Mr. Churchill's account is an engaging, entertaining read, his view on the death of the Auteur theory is superficial, unoriginal, parroted group think written about in a myriad of other venues. The truth is much more involved and having to do w/ changing release patterns and infux of exec's coming from TV, etc. Mr. Churchill strikes me as an intelligent person who has some writing chops but this piece is not very well thought out at all. I believe this film, and the death of the 70's auteur film, deserves a much more rigorous analysis...Joseph F. Alexandrehttp://www.jfafilms.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-3620267681400766052013-01-19T11:05:40.030-05:002013-01-19T11:05:40.030-05:00I watched the movie last night on DVD. All I can s...I watched the movie last night on DVD. All I can say is thank God for fast-forward. I can't imagine having to sit through the whole four hours and twenty minutes of Cimino's painfully self-indulgent flick. I did, however, disagree with one of your comments, about the roller skating scenes. Yes, like everything in Heaven's Gate, it's loooooong. But I enjoyed every drawn-out minute of it! And the music — I can't get the tune out of my head. But that's a good thing.<br /><br />Vera GreenwoodVera Greenwoodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-86606421742590064812012-12-05T23:50:04.370-05:002012-12-05T23:50:04.370-05:00David Churchill comments: Hello Anonymous number t...David Churchill comments: Hello Anonymous number two. Although we welcome all comments, we do appreciate that if you are going to write that you actually put your name to your piece as we always do. Thank you.Critics at Largehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18073851963852030361noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-39049741084974315302012-12-05T23:40:05.082-05:002012-12-05T23:40:05.082-05:00He's not on anything so elegant as thin ice. ...He's not on anything so elegant as thin ice. He's in idiot concrete.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1975416078255909953.post-90483554882628521892012-09-24T07:45:42.388-04:002012-09-24T07:45:42.388-04:00This film falls within a small niche of American f...This film falls within a small niche of American films that investigate the depths of power in America. Jarmusch's Dead Man would be another example. It seems to me that a lot of political flexibility is required for such films to be adequately comprehended and enjoyed. I fail to see why you found it so incomprehensible. Most of your complaints seem to center around the film's failure to follow norms (length, etc.). However, you might be right that it's audio is quite bad. I think you are on very thin ice in your contention that this is the worst film ever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com