|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 8, 2017 2:25:53 GMT
Just finished it a half hour ago. I just had to see it for myself. *Seven days later* Well, I could see where a portion of that $40 million went. Gorgeous production design. The scenery and sets look amazing. But damn what a slog to get through. Christopher Walken, John Hurt, and Sam Waterston weren't bad. However, Kris Kristofferson was a boring lead and Isabelle Huppert was badly miscast. I do think that if they split it into two films or something similar, they might have had something.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 8, 2017 3:47:46 GMT
I was able to finish the whole movie all at once and was never bored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 20:58:27 GMT
The most deserved box office bomb in history.An "unqualified disaster" as the New York Times called it.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 9, 2017 3:30:10 GMT
I was able to finish the whole movie all at once and was never bored. What about replay value though? Would you gladly sit through it again?Movies don't need replay value to be good imo, but yes, I would watch it again. I LOVE some movies I would never want to watch again. This is from a positive review of the film that I agree with 100% and these are some of the reasons I like Heavens Gate. Cimino displays, in “Heaven’s Gate,” the art of salience: his exquisite sense of composition calls attention to the details in the compositions without losing sight of the whole, and creates visual, psychological, and dramatic tensions between points and forms, between individuals and ensembles, between stillness and action. The profusion of details is focussed, but rather than highlighting only one, he highlights many. And the connections between them—the way they connect and the way they clash—suggests a surprising modernist abruptness and opacity, a sense of frenzied pushing against the very limits of experience. Instead of zeroing in on a commercial message, Cimino here elicits moods of a soul-stirring, bone-deep intensity, the most intimate perceptions of the big world’s vast resonances. Whether Cimino plotted out his expressive directions with an aesthetic-philosophical program or merely followed his artistic impulses—his sense of beauty and his sense of life—is beside the point. The film that resulted is both a gripping, moving drama and a work of distinctive cinematic modernism. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 9, 2017 3:31:31 GMT
Just finished it a half hour ago. I just had to see it for myself. *Seven days later* Well, I could see where a portion of that $40 million went. Gorgeous production design. The scenery and sets look amazing. But damn what a slog to get through. Christopher Walken, John Hurt, and Sam Waterston weren't bad. However, Kris Kristofferson was a boring lead and Isabelle Huppert was badly miscast. I do think that if they split it into two films or something similar, they might have had something. I think the lead casting was one of the biggest flaws. Cimino had Clint Eastwood and Robert De Niro in his other 2 features and The Deer Hunter was topical also. UA had no insight or brains and pandered to the massive ego and narcissism of a deluded film-maker. I like Kris Kristofferson in the movie. I think he portrays the character very well. Eastwood and DeNiro would have been miscast imo. |
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 9, 2017 17:08:50 GMT
I like Kris Kristofferson in the movie. I think he portrays the character very well. Eastwood and DeNiro would have been miscast imo. I'm not suggesting that Eastwood or De Niro should have been cast, but they were names that could light up a marquee. Heaven's cast had a prominent cast of talented and skilled actors, but they were not really box office draw cards. Sometimes it does pay to have a name, even if Cimino would have cast his film according to he felt was right for the part at the time. Considering all the money and effort invested in this film, the general public are the ones that ultimately determine what they feel is worth seeing, even though the herd are not necessarily the voice of reason. I doubt many would have been saying let's go and see the latest Kristofferson or Huppert film. If it was a name like Clint Eastwood, the interest could have piqued, especially since his name was associated with the west. The film just didn't look that appealing and quite frankly, it still doesn't appear to have grown much momentum or could be labelled classic, apart from curiosity value and the notoriety associated with it. Of course Eastwood or DeNiro would have made a difference BO wise and it would have been a smarter movie for him to cast a popular actor for the lead if he is asking the public to sit through a 5 hour movie, but I was talking about just my opinion as a viewer. Whether a movie flops at the BO has nothing to do with whether a movie is good or not. I realize many people dislike Heaven's Gate (though the theatrical version is the one that is usually referred to as being bad, not the director's cut) but I am one of many that considers it a good movie. I am talking about the Director's Cut btw. Based on it's reputation you'd think it would have a 4.5/10 on imdb, but actually it has a 6.6/10 on imdb which is an average rating. Heaven's Gate certainly isn't a classic in the traditional sense of the word but it has been re-evaluated over the years. I perfectly understand why many people would find the movie painfully boring but I think it is a compelling film. It is a good movie, but it is nowhere near a great movie, I just want to be clear about that. The screenplay certainly could have used some work and that is my main complaint but it is a great film to watch if you are interested in cinematography and historical backdrop.
Take Blade Runner 2049 for example. That movie is praised by the critics and stars Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling and it is not doing well at the BO.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Nov 9, 2017 17:15:49 GMT
Movies don't need replay value to be good imo, but yes, I would watch it again. I LOVE some movies I would never want to watch again. This is from a positive review of the film that I agree with 100% and these are some of the reasons I like Heavens Gate. Cimino displays, in “Heaven’s Gate,” the art of salience: his exquisite sense of composition calls attention to the details in the compositions without losing sight of the whole, and creates visual, psychological, and dramatic tensions between points and forms, between individuals and ensembles, between stillness and action. The profusion of details is focussed, but rather than highlighting only one, he highlights many. And the connections between them—the way they connect and the way they clash—suggests a surprising modernist abruptness and opacity, a sense of frenzied pushing against the very limits of experience. Instead of zeroing in on a commercial message, Cimino here elicits moods of a soul-stirring, bone-deep intensity, the most intimate perceptions of the big world’s vast resonances. Whether Cimino plotted out his expressive directions with an aesthetic-philosophical program or merely followed his artistic impulses—his sense of beauty and his sense of life—is beside the point. The film that resulted is both a gripping, moving drama and a work of distinctive cinematic modernism. I do use replay value as a measure of film that I feel would be worth owning a copy of, but I get where you are coming from. A once off experience, could still hit the jackpot. I have only seen Lynch's Mulholland Drive, and Spielberg's Munich once, although I have seen segments of them several times, due to where I worked at the time. I perhaps don't want to spoil the impact of the first time viewing experience of them.
That is quite an insightful review of HG and while I haven't seen this film in it's entirety, it does attest to Cimino's command of visual aesthetic and the language of cinema expression, as self-important as felt he was. I would really need to be in the mood to watch his full version all the way through to make a more informed opinion, but it is something that I don't necessarily feel like going out of my way for.
You are referring to movies that you would want to own. When I use to buy movies (I don't anymore) I only would buy the movies that I like a lot. There is a difference between a good movie and a very good movie as I'm sure you would agree.
It is nice talking to someone who is actually interested in the POV of other people, even if you disagree with them.
I take it you are a fan of Psycho II.
|
|
ravi02
Sophomore
@ravi02
Posts: 795
Likes: 418
 
|
Post by ravi02 on Jan 6, 2018 18:46:18 GMT
Just finished it a half hour ago. I just had to see it for myself. *Seven days later* Well, I could see where a portion of that $40 million went. Gorgeous production design. The scenery and sets look amazing. But damn what a slog to get through. Christopher Walken, John Hurt, and Sam Waterston weren't bad. However, Kris Kristofferson was a boring lead and Isabelle Huppert was badly miscast. I do think that if they split it into two films or something similar, they might have had something. Man, you perfectly summed up my own thoughts on this one. I don't feel Heaven's Gate is one of the worst films ever, but it's also far from being a misunderstood masterpiece like its defenders claim. The movie has amazing sets, costumes and period set design, but the main characters are as dull as dishwater and the story just rambles along. A better script, some editing and more people telling Michael Cimino "no" could have made this into a solid film. |
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Jul 7, 2018 8:07:39 GMT
Despite some enormous flaws I find a lot to like. I've seen it at least 10 times.
|
|
|
|
Post by notoriousnobbi on Jul 10, 2018 15:38:21 GMT
"Heaven's Gate's" reputation in Europe had always been much higher than in its country of origin. And it had been screened on many public broadcasting TV channels since then. One should not see it as a Western but more a history piece, something like "1900" or "Il Gattopardo".
I was in cinema when it came out - together with 3 friends. After 2 hours one of us left. "This in not a western" he said and preferred waiting outside! The rest of us stayed another 2 hours and absolutely loved it.
|
|
