Probably one of the best introduction speeches ever for a show "Tonight we will showing one of the biggest failures in Hollywood history...but don't turn your set off..." Also, it's pretty common nowadays when a big budget Hollywood film bombs stateside, it tends to do better overseas usually in Europe and/or Asia, thus still making money and getting recognition, thus not receiving the dreaded label of "bomb". Than, also there's DVDs, pirating, TV airings, and now, on demand and streaming, which helps movies keep being seen even when their not the theaters anymore.
The roller rink scene is pure fiction. Roller skates were exceedingly rare, very esoteric at the time, like unicycles and stilts. Own a pair? The roller rink scene was meant to help modern, roller boogying Americans relate to people of long ago.
I saw the 3-1/2 version of the film (there are several, including one which lasts over 5 hours). Its major problem is the story; it lacks depth and understanding. And unless you're a scholar of late 19th-century American history, you've likely never even heard of the Johnson County Wars (many Americans don't even know who fought in the Civil War!). But it's worth watching for its epic scope and production. It was filmed on location in Montana and Wyoming (a huge set was built to resemble Laramie in the 1880s) and its period detail is fantastic.
Any critic who can praise Heaven's Gate should have his head examined. He never shows how Cimino made up the characterizations of the three principals, and also the actions between them. If a critic does not do his homework then he is not worth listening to. For instance, the Averill/Kristofferson never went to Harvard, and Champion/Walken was never an enforcer for the ranchers. The picture had no flow drama wise or character wise. And it is pretentiously presented.
Did Cimino even bother to research a little? I was able to learn a little about some of the major characters involved in like an hour. Granted he didn't have google back in the late 70s, but still, he was making a movie about this story. Even if he was only using history as inspiration for a fictional story, why take the name of a guy who actually died while trying to fight off mercenaries hired by the big cattle companies and make him an enforcer for those very people?
I very rarely watch television but often have something on in the background for noise. Recently it's been on Sky Arts as it's kinda perfect for what I need (and when I occasionally pay attention it's tolerable). This one guy is in pretty much every shallow retrospective on actors (Discovering: so and so) but I never see his name displayed. It was driving me crazy who he was. He looks like a cross between Richard Chamberlain and Michael York. Finally I found a cast list for one of the "Discovering"s and it's this Derek Malcolm fellow. Never heard of him before. At least he was getting some steady work later in life, as hack-y as it was.
Without the prologue and a few cuts here and there after? It's a great film. If it was edited to just over 150 minutes, it would be a flawed masterpiece. The prologue though essentially ruins the film. Why start a movie with long, vague, boring speeches? Not to mention trying to make Hurt and Kristopherson 22 or 23? lmao
no, the prologue is crucial to the film as it establishes those 2 characters as these men of privilege who are given a chance to use their wealth and education for the good of the world as kristofferson's character takes what joseph cotten says while john hurt becomes lost as his character isn't well-written. there is a 150-minute cut but it takes away so much of the film's guts.
![Final Cut: The Making & Unmaking of Heaven's Gate [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XnG-KZwrCxs/mqdefault.jpg)
![[Special Clip] ATEEZ(에이티즈) 홍중 'Why Do You Love'](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/I6XYXQKN_pY/mqdefault.jpg)
Why don't the BBC do this anymore with films I miss this and Moviedrome
Exactly what I was thinking! I’ve just about given up on the BBC
Probably one of the best introduction speeches ever for a show "Tonight we will showing one of the biggest failures in Hollywood history...but don't turn your set off..."
Also, it's pretty common nowadays when a big budget Hollywood film bombs stateside, it tends to do better overseas usually in Europe and/or Asia, thus still making money and getting recognition, thus not receiving the dreaded label of "bomb". Than, also there's DVDs, pirating, TV airings, and now, on demand and streaming, which helps movies keep being seen even when their not the theaters anymore.
It is now available on Blu-ray from The Criterion Collection.
Anyone at the time who liked Scorsese and Coppola were interested in this. A film which is remarkable and unique. Brilliant.
Heaven's Gate is like 90 percent fiction, though the cattle companies were pretty ruthless, that's true.
J Wunde
The roller rink scene is pure fiction. Roller skates were exceedingly rare, very esoteric at the time, like unicycles and stilts. Own a pair? The roller rink scene was meant to help modern, roller boogying Americans relate to people of long ago.
thank you so much for posting this
That might be one of the best movie reviews I’ve ever seen or heard.
RIP
I saw the 3-1/2 version of the film (there are several, including one which lasts over 5 hours). Its major problem is the story; it lacks depth and understanding. And unless you're a scholar of late 19th-century American history, you've likely never even heard of the Johnson County Wars (many Americans don't even know who fought in the Civil War!).
But it's worth watching for its epic scope and production. It was filmed on location in Montana and Wyoming (a huge set was built to resemble Laramie in the 1880s) and its period detail is fantastic.
I ♡ U for posting this.
better than Twilight...
original post.
Any critic who can praise Heaven's Gate should have his head examined. He never shows how Cimino made up the characterizations of the three principals, and also the actions between them. If a critic does not do his homework then he is not worth listening to. For instance, the Averill/Kristofferson never went to Harvard, and Champion/Walken was never an enforcer for the ranchers. The picture had no flow drama wise or character wise. And it is pretentiously presented.
It's a masterpiece and you are wrong. But that's just my opinion.
Did Cimino even bother to research a little? I was able to learn a little about some of the major characters involved in like an hour. Granted he didn't have google back in the late 70s, but still, he was making a movie about this story.
Even if he was only using history as inspiration for a fictional story, why take the name of a guy who actually died while trying to fight off mercenaries hired by the big cattle companies and make him an enforcer for those very people?
Malcolm was an admirable, knowledgeable, sensitive, perceptive, eloquent and distinguished critic
@@jaywunder13242 The Oliver Stone approach to history...
oh, and "a beautiful mind" is a masterpiece? fuck off. "heaven's gate" is a flawed film but it is worth watching in its full version.
Ah good old NHS glasses. 😄
@Lebo leigh Leigh Look it up yourself.
He doesn't sound any different on here than he does on the "Discovering" series of programmes on Sky Arts!
From what I've read the events in "Heaven's Gate" were wildly exaggerated. Which calls into question why Cimino chose to write it in the first place.
Allegorical purposes. Think 'There Will Be Blood'.
the issues are relevant beyond the story
The host said it, "it's a democratic western" i.e. fake news!
@@amaxamon A two party system is a fake democracy.
You can't make an infomercial for 36 million dollars today
one lump or two?
It was a western that was actually a historical documentary without actual historical accuracy. Great film though
I very rarely watch television but often have something on in the background for noise. Recently it's been on Sky Arts as it's kinda perfect for what I need (and when I occasionally pay attention it's tolerable).
This one guy is in pretty much every shallow retrospective on actors (Discovering: so and so) but I never see his name displayed.
It was driving me crazy who he was. He looks like a cross between Richard Chamberlain and Michael York. Finally I found a cast list for one of the "Discovering"s and it's this Derek Malcolm fellow. Never heard of him before. At least he was getting some steady work later in life, as hack-y as it was.
Without the prologue and a few cuts here and there after?
It's a great film.
If it was edited to just over 150 minutes, it would be a flawed masterpiece.
The prologue though essentially ruins the film.
Why start a movie with long, vague, boring speeches?
Not to mention trying to make Hurt and Kristopherson 22 or 23? lmao
no, the prologue is crucial to the film as it establishes those 2 characters as these men of privilege who are given a chance to use their wealth and education for the good of the world as kristofferson's character takes what joseph cotten says while john hurt becomes lost as his character isn't well-written. there is a 150-minute cut but it takes away so much of the film's guts.
The prologue is crucial to the film and anyone who thinks it should be removed would be better off watching Tombstone.
Dreadful film, no amount of yakking can make it watchable, intelligible or meaningful.
I'm looking to.watch it soon... Without any spoilers, what is so bad about it please?