Sergio Leone Web Board

Would anyone like to comment on the rumors that producer Arnon Milchan has been talking to the  Leone estate about restoring the cut scenes of OUATIA for a directors cut of this great film.

First i've heard of it, but it would be a dream come true!

i happen to think it's a bad idea... assuming that the cut footage isn't in great conditioning and that the restoring would be more of a remaking... i also heard that there is no sound on the cut footage... i just think it is a bad idea to try and get badly kept footage into an already great movie.

I happen to think its a bloody brilliant idea.
When scenes from a film end up on the cutting room floor its usually for pacing or rating reasons- for scenes of sex and violence.  This wasnt the case with OUATIA , Leone reluctantly excised between forty five and fifty minutes of what he called 'significant material' from the film once he realised there was no chance of a two part film!

All the scenes of Louise Fletcher as the director of the Riverdale Cemtery, how Noodles came to meet Eve, Senator Bailey and the elderly Jimmy O'Donnell, Noodles watching Deborah on stage and at the station cafe, Max and Noodles casing the Federal Reserve Bank, the elderly Carol and Noodles at the rest home, a black car tailing the elderly Noodles, young Noodles quarreling with his parents, Elderly Noodles in the office of a synagogue, God im getting goose pimples just thinking about these extra scenes.

Think about it Gramps we can have the best of both worlds, we will always have the 229 minutes (recently restored) Euro/dvd version that we all love so much.  And then we would have Sergio's cut.  Dont get me wrong Directors cuts can sometimes be too much of a good thing. I prefer the original cuts of Amadeus and Donnie Darko to the newly restored directors cuts.  So even if OUATIA DC  turned out to be one big let down (somehow I dont think this would be possible with  Leone ) at least we would all get the chance to make up our own minds. I happen to think it would make it a richer experience.
The print would have to be remastered, the actors would have to redub there lines, Morricone would need to be available for the musical cues, Nino Baragli or one of his assistant editors would need to be on hand to advise where Sergio wanted the cuts-especially when were dealing with flashbacks.  Expensive-yes. Difficult but not impossible.

Hell I would even like to get my hands on the infamous 147min US release, only to see what a pigs ear the Ladd Co made of it. So If any of my cousins across the pond have a spare vhs copy-let me know?

i agree with you... if it can be done correctly... i just don't see that happening... seems like a tall order.

i mean look at all the complaints about the good the bad and the ugly... and that was a much simplier restoration... they tried to do too much from what i've heard... all they had to do IMO was add the italian-only scenes that were mising from the american release and leave them as is with subtitles... but no they had to redub them, which i've heard sound terrible... also heard they botched the sound, even on the scenes that they didn't have to touch but decided the mono sound wasn't good enough... this is all from what i've heard, because of this i haven't even taken a look at the new gbu restoration, and if i hear the same problems with this, i wouldn't touch it either... i'm just skeptical that is all... and maybe they have the right people on this one.

I would like to see the scenes with Louise Fletcher (to shore up the explanation for Max's 'death') and the scenes of Noodles with his family to demonstrate the full extent of his sorrow - but no more. You're talking 4 hours plus - and that is too long really. To me it flows fine as it is - but any longer and you're going to alienate even the die-hards.

Well,the possibility of a new restored OUATIA version to be released is very likely.After all,OUATITW and GBU have already been re-released on DVD.OUATIA would most probably be the next target.

Well,you heard it wrong.  :) I got the GBU DVD at Christmas,and it was fantastic!The dubbing was good,as well as all the other voices and sounds.  :o

I''m also happy with new 2-disc restored GBU, and I also have the original GBU DVD, so I have it both ways.  For the GBU music, the GDM European CD with the extra tracks is the best I''ve got so far.

Maybe the best thing would be options on the dvd to view the film with all the new material put in or as just the old 220 minute version. It would have been better if they''d done that with the GBU dvd, cos I find the restored scenes are of such obviously lower quality they break up the flow of the film.

Of course, since most of us probably have the 220 minute dvd it wouldn''t really matter to us.

 8)  y''know, I think that it is unfortunate but true - like another "dismissed at time of release" classic: BLADE RUNNER, we may never get to see a complete, COMPLETE version of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA on dvd.

There is been rumors that Warner Bros and producer Arnon Milchan head of Regency Entertainment planning to release closest version Sergio Leone 2006 daughter of Sergio Leone Raffaella Leone had interview with italian press she confirmed here's the text below translated to the english and link to the italian original website

http://www.repubblica.it/2006/09/sezioni/spettacoli_e_cultura/cinema/venezia/il-leone-restaurato/il-leone-restaurato/il-leone-restaurato.html

 - Reporter:
And you are now working on Once Upon A Time In America, isnt'it?"
 - Raffaella Leone:
"Yes, again in collaboration with Sky we retrieve forty minutes (as a matter fact they recovered only about 25 minutes of scenes) which we rediscovered: for example, a part that Louise Fletcher, Oscar winner for ' one flew over the cuckoo's nest ' which in the final was gone. Let us be clear, though: not you'll close the movie will remain what did my father. We would however show, maybe in a projection to a festival, these unpublished so interesting. Maybe presented and illustrated by someone of Grosso, type Quentin Tarantino ".


Stuart Kaminsky receive an outline for the film the outline was 200 plus pages after additional dialogue reach over 400 pages long. Sergio Leone to release movie in 6 hrs in two parts after producers force Sergio Leone reduce hours of print. The cut was almost 6 hrs according to the original shooting script, but since original shooting script was change alot in terms of financial situation, Stuart Kaminsky claims There is three versions is release in the US, the first two versions got released got very bad reviews, and there is much longer Definitive Version that had never been shown in US.

According to the dvd comentary by Richard Schickel Sergio Leone printed 10 hours of film to assemble as the initial cut of the movie which he prepare with his editor Nino Baragli down to a almost 6 hrs cut at that time, he strongly considered releasing the movie in two and three hours parts each, producers refused in terms of budget (true facts) the original shooting script was change that some scenes were in the script were never filmed.

scenes which failed to appear in the 229 Min Cut on Canne Film Festival Premiere

Deleted Scenes

The boys mug a black musician and take his trumpet

Noodles in bed with Eve and Noodles holding a gun pointing at someone
http://www.moviegoods.com/movie_product.asp?sku=169689&master%5Fmovie%5Fid=7745

Young Noodles returns to his tenement, discovering his parents at prayer, and no dinner on the table

When his parents criticise him for being 'godless,' Noodles retorts that money is his god

A brief scene in the 1921 sequences, showing local ganglord Bugsy (James Russo) and his gang being arrested by the police for bootlegging while Noodles and his gang looked on. This would occur right before the gang's meeting with the Capuano Brothers at the harbor

The main importance of this scene would be to establish why Noodles' gang is working with the Capuanos. Dialogue from that scene indicates that Bugsy had been working with them, but since he and his thugs have now been jailed, Noodles and Co. have taken over his old job

Shots of a black limousine tailing Noodles

An ominous garbage truck, used as a link between 1933 and 1968

Senator Bailey arguing with an older Jimmy O'Donnell about a pension scam, just before Noodle's climactic meeting with the former

An opium-induced flashback of Noodles and the gang as children

Louise Fletcher as director of the Riversdale cemetery
http://www.littlereview.com/goddesslouise/articles/frayling.htm

Noodles' first meeting with Eve, and many other minor scenes with Eve. In the original shooting script, this occurs after his rape of Deborah (which happens at night, rather than early morning). A very drunk Noodles meets Eve in a speakeasy and goes to bed with her, calling her 'Deborah'

Scenes of Noodles watching Deborah performing a Busby Berkely musical scene at a nightclub, just before their date, as well as scenes from Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra (DVD's picture gallery feature includes an image of Elizabeth McGovern dressed as Cleopatra and holding a snake)

A scene of Noodles talking to the limousine driver before the date with Deborah. There is clear enmity between the two characters, highlighting the way in which Jewish gangsters are perceived by fellow Jews. The reason that this scene was cut was because producer Arnon Milchan, who played the chauffeur, felt that he should not have had such a noticeable role in the movie, and he did not want people to make a big deal out of his cameo

A long scene involving Police Chief Aiello (Danny Aiello) and his involvement with the strike breakers. (Some of the scene's dialogue was reworked into the brief interview with Aiello on the steps of the police station in the final version.) As a follow-up to this, a scene where the gang plans the famous baby-snatching scene with crooked politician Sharkey (Robert Harper) was also shot. Noodles wants to kill Aiello, but is convinced not to by Max and Sharkey

A brief scene during Noodles, Max, Carol, and Eve's vacation to Florida, where a lifeguard, having heard of the repeal of Prohibition, digs up a bottle of liquor from the beach and drinks it thirstily

A frisbee scene another part sequence

An older Carol (Tuesday Weld) revealing to Noodles that Max had syphilis. In the original shooting script, this scene (set between the beach scene described above, and Carol and Noodles' scene outside the Federal Reserve) also has Carol revealing the details of Eve's death to Noodles: "Oh, how she waited, but you never showed up... She shut the windows and locked the door, and nobody bothered to check. She was in there all the time, with her little capsules...there was nobody at the funeral but me." (The latter part of this scene may never have even been filmed, since Eve's death is depicted very differently in the final film)

These scenes were all shot, and the footage still exists

let's hope what else we got

I heard that TV Italian dubbed version clocking at 4 hrs 25 Min

check ot this page some interesting material about movie maybe some facts too

http://articles.dhwritings.com/m16a.html

http://articles.dhwritings.com/m10.html

Zoinks! That's fantastic news, Derbent 5000, thanks for the info.  O0

Might account for why Max always got so worked up about being called crazy.

That's really great news. Now I have another hope in my life ;D.

This would clean up some loose ends in the existing story -- mainly by answering the question, Where the heck did that Eve character come from?

On the other hand, it appears to do nothing at all to the loose end represented by Frankie Minaldi. We see him in a hospital lobby, and then -- nothing.

On the whole, I wouldn't classify most of these additions as in any way essential to the story, and it's an open question whether Leone would have wanted them 'restored' at this point.

Derbent 5000 thanks for the posting.  Interesting information.  Last night I was going through a few books I had picked up and was going through a book I picked up sometime ago called Italian Filmmakers Self Portraits: A Selection Of Interviews by Jean A. Gili.  I decided to buy the book for a two part interview with Bernardo Bertolucci, but had forgotten there was a 1984 interview with Sergio Leone.  I haven't read the Frayling biography or the Adrian Martin BFI analysis yet.  I think the Gili interview is cited in both those books.  There were a couple of passages in the interview that I thought fit in with your thread so I thought I would post them.

Gili:
With the passing of the years had the final screenplay become very different from the first adaptation?

Leone:
Yes, it had changed a lot.  For example, there  were, shall we say, historical things in the 1968 part that were clearly understandable; with the passing of the years, they became less so.  We eliminated those.  Initially the film was supposed to begin in a completely different way.  I had written the first part with an American screenwriter who afterwards made a movie with Frankenheimer; he practically stole that first part by giving it to John Frankenheimer's
99 And 44/100 Dead.  The film was released and it was a bad film; there's this sequence in the beginning that I wanted to do, a cemetery along the Hudson River.  So, we changed the original screenplay a lot.  I first started writing with Medioli and Arcalli, and then Arcalli died and I worked with Benvenuti and De Bernardi.  I gave them all the childhood part, a little because I remembered a film that they had written with Franco Rossi, Friends For Life.  Ferrini did the last part, that is, he collaborated with us on the writing of the final script, but the treatment was already finished when he joined. (p 118)

Gili:
Did the long period of waiting and the screenplay's long development help the film?

Leone:
I don't know.  One thing is absolutely sure: the way it was conceived, the film was more than one film, it was two.  Grimaldi, in fact, was hoping it would become two long episodes, a bit like 1900, and this, for better or for worse, was something that remained.  Even after the cuts, it was constructed like that.  This was so true that I still have an hour more to add for TV, an hour already edited but not dubbed, that would make the film four and a half hours long.  Maybe you can tell where it was cut.... nevertheless, the film is rigorously structured.  Clearly, the film might be a little  bitter  to taste, since it is born out of nothingness, that is, out of the  limbo of opium.  There's this character who appears and who,  suddenly, in twenty minutes of the film, goes into oblivion and returns without the public knowing the characters' or story's background.  Then little by little there's a  long flashback to his childhood,  which to me is crucial, since childhood, of course, is the platform  for the entire story of this great friendship between two characters.  It's a little like Once Upon A Time In The West , a dance of death with a man plunging into oblivion .  If the film had a subtitle, it could also be called, " Once Upon A Time A Certain Kind Of Cinema".
It's a homage to things that have interested me; we find here a preoccupation with death which, after fifty, comes automatically.  I see that I've started reading the obituary columns now, though I never read them before.  (pp 118-119)


Gili:
How long did the shooting take?

Leone:

It lasted six or seven months, with a few short breaks and one month devoted to traveling.  In fact, Once Upon A Time In America is equal to two films.  If you consider that I shot Once Upon A Time In The West in  fourteen weeks, automatically I needed thirty for this one. (pp 119-120)

does it have any commentary?

Does anyone know anything about the strange moment where De Niro is being stalked by a frisbee, then the film cuts to him getting out of prison? I remember in Richard Schickel's DVD commentary he mentions that there may be footage cut here.

I don't know why they don't just go the whole hog and release the whole 6 hours or at least the longest possible version so long as there is an audio track to accompany the footage.
Or are they going the cynical route by extracting as much dosh from us as they can by releasing stuff in bits and bobs? :(

It might of been interesting as an experiment to put everything back in but as Sergio's no longer around whose not to say, having seen everything put in, he might have said take that out etc. To have them seperatly allows us to enjoy them restored without making a 'restorers cut' of the film rather like the 2006 Pat Garett Cut.

But to quote Derbent 5000:-

"With his editor, Nino Baragli, Leone trimmed this down to about 6 hours, and wanted to release the film in two three-hour parts but producers refused"

That's just a weird assumption based on nothing.  The transition (frisbee to suitcase) as it is works fine - it's a very jarring moment, but it doesn't need to be anything deeper.

Keep in mind that the original post was taken from Wikipedia, which includes material contributed by me. . .  ;D So take it with a grain of salt.

The scene with Noodles pointing a gun in bed was probably taken from the deleted scene where Max and Carol barge into their hotel, saying they need to go to the beach.  This was covered by the scene in the hospital lobby in the final film, so I don't think it's necessary (unless of course I'm wrong.)

Also, do we really need to find out that Eve "killed herself"?  Because clearly she didn't, and Noodles knows about it. . . That would just make things much more confusing.  I know that was in the original script, but it definitely wasn't in the film.

And why does everyone assume Joe Pesci's character should have more screen time?  Read the outline of the original script in Frayling's bio, there wasn't anything other than the two scenes he was in (though he was called Esposito rather than Minaldi).  Also, while I'd like to see more of the Danny Aiello/Treat Williams subplot, it would only be if it doesn't make the film awkward.  I would like to see the intro to Eve (although, though her unannounced appearance makes little sense, somehow it never bothered me), some of the cut 1922 sequences, and the scene with older Max and O'Donnell, but otherwise, I'm fine with the film as it is.

I always thought the frisbee was a rather cool transition back in time.  The scene is full of tension.  Noodles has this case of money.  He's been away and the area looks more run down.  He's really concerned about walking alone with that suitcase full of cash.  Then the frisbee unexpectedly comes swirling by; the suitcase transitions us back to when Noodles is released from prison.  All the other transitions are done so seamlessly.  Lights blending into other lights, old Noodles looking into the peephole becomes young Noodles.  This was one of the few segues that was kind of abrupt.  I think also it was effective because it sort of fits in with the dream quality of the film.  The slow pace, long held shots and the very abrupt actions from time to time.... like in dreams.  The other thing i was thinking about the frisbee was that maybe it could be viewed as metaphor.  The circular structure of the film....beginning and ending in the opium den.  Perhaps the frisbee as a spinning object in the air or space.....could be representative  of the way Leone destroys time for the viewer with the structure of the film.  Maybe that's reading too much into it and it could just be Leone's wicked sense of humor..... :)

Good point Slowstir.  It's a weird, bizarre, surrealistic moment in a weird, bizarre, surrealistic film - why does it need to be part of a bigger scene?  This is a huge presumption on somebody's part.  ???

In total agreement with you Groggy.  I thought Schickel was off track when he made that slight suggestion in the commentary.   What could be possibly missing from that scene?  Do we need to see kids walking around beforehand with a frisbee in their hands.  It has to be a sudden happening for it to be effective in the scene.  I guess because of the editing history of the film there's always that speculation and conjecture. 

check ot this page some intresting material about movie maybe some facts too

http://articles.dhwritings.com/m16a.html

http://articles.dhwritings.com/m10.html

Thanks for those articles. Interesting read. The US Theatrical we basically taken out of Sergio's hands which is such a crying shame. I'm glad we have the 'Cannes version' on DVD now. An editor I worked with is convinced that he's seen a longer version then the Cannes cut. Not sure if thats true though...

Hang on I'm confused, they are restoring the footage back in to a new version? Another article posted here said about a new DVD release with the footage avaliable sepertatly not restored back in. The thing is if Leone and Baragli did this six hour cut then there must be a version of this somewhere. In editing it works like this. You first have the work print which collects all the footage together so the editor and the director have something to work from. The next version to be made is called the directors cut. This is the version of the movie the director feels is his and how he sees it. This is then often screened to the studios and producers who make their own versions till a version is made which both sides agree on. So in theory the 6 hour version would be Leone's directors cut which also means there must be a copy of this to go back to when creating the new restoration version. If they can find this they they should be able to use this a guide. Of couse I would like to see how they're going to do the dubbing (i.e impressionists or the original cast)

Very interesting insight into this part of the  filmaking process LA O0

Do you think it's likely that the directors 6 hour version would contain the Morricone score throughout?

In editing a temp score was used. As the score for OUAITA was written and presumably recorded before filming I suspect they would have used that. Of course there's also the possibility that the six hour version could have been the work print. For instance, Alien 3, the new version on the DVD is the work print that for years was mistaken as a directors cut. In the early 90's a Workprint of Blade Runner surfaced before the directors cut. Workprints are never to be seen by the public, they are like the outline of a novel full of notations. The film is covered in 'scaffold' which will be taken down by the time the film is made into the directors cut.

I wonder if Morricone has seen the 6 hour version of OUATIA ???

Prob'ly not.  The score was mostly pre-composed, wasn't it?  That's what James Woods said.

Yeah it was but i was just wondering if him and sergio were just hanging out and saw the 6 hour version.

kick start test

who would lie about that??  :o

I'm tempted to close this thread as I seem to keep getting notification emails when no new damn message has been posted. If i close it hopefully this won't happen anymore. Of course if it was to stop now and only start again when someone posts something thats not just a quote I would great appreciate it  :)

Ok one more time then I'm closing the thread...

Heehee.

I read the script on www.dailyscript.com (http://www.dailyscript.com) is little bit different from the final draft of movie plus it got some deleted scenes that movie doesn't include, the dialogue little bit different from the original movie chek it out http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Once_Upon_A_Time_In_America.pdf (http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/Once_Upon_A_Time_In_America.pdf)

Hey.

Shut up.

 ;D

No need to put a "sticky" on this thread!

No it seems to stick already on its own..... ;D

Well it made it easy for me to merge it with an older duplicate thread. O0

This IS a thread?

yeah i guess so...kind of a loose thread..... ;D

Will someone please lock this piece of crap?

Many of us would like to see the unpublished footage either as extras or incorporated into a revised cut of the film.  Some may even like it if the film was remade with possibly Russell Crowe as Max, Sean Penn as Noodles, Jennifer Connelly as the older Deborah and directed by De Niro or Eastwood, with all the implausible bits made plausible.

However much we may want to see the unpublished footage, regrettably it's not going to happen by our just talking about it.

 :) 

take a look at this french VHS cover the longest version of Once Upon A Time In Ameica

http://aram.free.fr/covers/images/il_etait_une_fois_en_amerique.jpg

Cool it please,afterall you don't have to look at this thread even if its not really progressing anywhere quickly. :)

Derbent,do you have more details of the extra footage on the French video tape?

If Leone had to cut 50 minutes that he felt were IMPORTANT then wouldn't the footage being put back in be Leone's original vision?

It has been reported in other threads that, at the end of filming, Leone had 10 hours worth of footage. With his editor, Nino Baragli, Leone trimmed this down to about 6 hours, and wanted to release the film in two three-hour parts.

The producers refused (partly due to the commercial failure of Bertolucci's two-part Novecento) and Leone was forced to further shorten the length of his film, resulting in a completed (i.e. scored, dubbed, edited, etc.) film of 229 minutes.

Leone has said that ideally, he would have liked the film to be "between four hours ten minutes and four hours twenty-five minutes" (250 minutes to 265 minutes), and that such a cut would mainly have served to restore scenes developing Noodles' relationships with women.

Many people have said that Leone had a vision of the film from the start; he could act out every part and his vision did not change.  The documents I have read and commonsense contradict this.  Various parts of the film differ from the screenplay.  The actors, writers and even Grey will had had an input and unlike some directors, Leone would listen to the views of others.  Some scenes resembled scenes in other movies and had to be altered.  Money and time prohibited the filming of other scenes.

I would love to see the deleted scenes either on their own, integrated into a new cut or even a complete remake.  However some of the unpublished scenes are pointless - Eve dying from a drug overdose/broken heart etc. Others would no doubt make the film less puzzling or more appealing to a new viewer - the arrest of Bugsy, scenes with Jimmy, Police Chief Aiello, Eve etc but it is doubtful whether the benefit can be justified by the cost. In any event it's a pretty good film just the way it is.

One option would be to include with new DVDs a booklet, describing the history of the film and giving various explanations for some of the scenes which new viewers may find confusing. Plus, if possible, some of the unpublished footage in its raw form - who needs dialogue anyway?

Been catching up lately - A Bronx Tale and Mean Streets scheduled for this weekend, 1900 in 2 weeks' time, followed by Frayling's book and revisiting the fistful of dollars trilogy .

Many thanks for these links Derbent. 
The Williamsburg bridge is in the background of one of the links.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbPSqE48PHQ


(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa192/msb247/wbridge2.jpg)

I love that picture! The black and white looks great.

I remember talk on the old board that there was a cut scene shown on Italian TV, that some had on tape. It showed McGovern acting as Cleopatra on stage while Noodles watching. Has anyone found this on the net? YouTube or somewhere else?

Would love to get my hands on this, preferably a high quality version, but even a low quality YouTube video would be great.


Tor

Thanks! Nice one. Anything from this film is of great interest to me.


On a strange memory flashback to the 80s, I suddenly remembered that there was a music video with
the German band Modern Talking that used bits from OUATIA... Found it here in so so quality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ect3VoEUJn8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ect3VoEUJn8)


Tor

Thank you rot66 - line dancing to Modern Talking (From Coast To Coast and Heart Of An Angel) is very popular at a nearby venue but it's the first time I've ever seen this.  Leone's film certainly makes a lasting impression worldwide.

I dont know i mean i really really wish it was true but Leone Commentary?

Many thanks Derbent.  We can only hope that the anniversary is marked with something special and I shall certainly be at the front of the queue if anything is released.
 :)

Wow, I'm sure LeoneNut is prepping the final cut already in his mind  O0

A1, that will be interesting. I expect that if there is an official new release coming, it will include the missing scenes as supplements only, not re-integrated back into the movie. Last I heard, that was the philosophy the Leone family was operating under.

Well spotted!  O0

I wonder though . . . the current widescreen DVD is already called a "Special Edition." Will this new release actually be something new, or just the current SE repackaged?

Could it possibly be the HD version of the film ???

I wouldn't get my hopes up. A lot of the titles announced are clearly re-issues of current editions (Goodfellas, the Film Noir box sets, etc). I don't doubt that a new edition of OUATIA is coming, just that it may not arrive until after they first re-issue the old one.

This guy is dumb. He is saying a movie shot on 35mm 20 years ago cannot look as good as a movie shot on 35mm today.

It's like saying that someone making a drawing 20 years ago, cannot scan on digital as good as the same drawing drawn today. idiot.

No, I think he's totally right.

This guys is stupid. A 35mm frame is 4 to 8 times superior in resolution to 1080p video, HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT AND HIS ON DRUGS OR PAID OFF BY THE BLU RAY ALLIANCE TO SPEAK TRASH.
Even Leone movies, shot in poors man cinemascope, ARE TWO TIMES THE RESOLUTION OF 1080P VIDEO SO THEY SHOULD LOOK AS GOOD AS ANY OTHER MOVIE FROM RECENT YEARS IF THE JOB IS DONE RIGHT.

May be, but older films usually have unremovable scratches and marks...

You mean the "source" on IMDb? It's talked here: http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=3582.0 Unfortunately it's most probably a rumor, more specifically a hoax. I saw the original post on IMDb once (it's fallen over the edge long time ago), the poster claimed he had been to some event where Milchan announced this, that's why he couldn't provide any further evidents. I so hope this would be true, but probably isn't. But we will see next year.

PS. That blu-ray cover is just a wet dream, right?

The "Sergio Leone commentary" confirms that this just has to be a hoax.

Shame. :(

I think it was supposed to be joined from interviews or something like that.

It's gotta be a hoax. The footage for those extra scenes exists, but it has been the desire of the Leone estate not to reintegrate them back into the whole. On some future release we should see the additional material, but as stand-alone extras.

If there was some existing footage of a Leone interview i'm sure we'd already know about it but such footage wouldn't work as part of a audio commentary track and would be better served as a separate special feature. 

I've said this before: if this were true, I'm not sure how interested I'd be in buying it. Five+ hours is pushing it, even for me, particularly when the deleted scenes are of unknown quality.

I only know what has been reported in this thread. See Derbent 5000's post on the first page.

But Leone's vision may have included suppressing some or all of those scenes.

I would like the scene where Bugsy gets arrested, because it would explain why the gang is hired by the Capuanos, and why Bugsy is so keen on killing them later on. Maybe the Eve scenes too. But otherwise, I think I could live without most of teh cut footage.

The scene with Noodles in bed with Eve, pointing a gun, was another scene that might not jive with the film as such. Frayling recounts this scene in STDWD, saying that Noodles and Eve are together (I believe this is the scene where Eve reveals she wears "falsies") and Max and Carol burst in, telling them it's time to go to the beach.

In Oreste De Fornari's book on Leone there's a chapter entitled 'Leone on Leone' in which the director discusses each of his films. Writing in 1988 about the different versions of Once Upon a Time in America Leone said, "Then there is the very long one that has never been been edited and which lasts fifty minutes longer. Four and a half hours. But we rejected the idea of two parts on TV. It is so intricate that it has to be done in one evening. And besides, let's be honest: this one is my version. The other perhaps explained things more clearly and it could have been done on TV in two or three parts. But the version that I prefer is this one, that bit of reclusiveness is just what I like about it."

At one point Leone may have wanted to reinsert those missing scenes, but it sounds to me like he later changed his mind, and this could explain why his daughter has expressed reluctance about putting them back into the film.

 

Thanks for that information  O0

Wasn't there at one point a plan--subsequently abandoned, I gather--to produce a longer, TV cut of OUATIA, to air after the theatrical cut had finished its run? In that case, there would have been two different versions of the film, both sanctioned by Leone, but intended for different markets. Something like this now exists with the longer and shorter cuts of The Last Emperor, out on DVD from Criterion. The longer cut is being called the TV cut, and the original theatrical cut is being called the Director's Cut (and apparently, Bertolucci prefers the shorter version).

Sorry didn’t t want to rain on everyone’s parade - but I spoke to a nice lady recently at Warner Brothers West Coast Home Entertainment Dept. (SNR EXEC) she stated that she had heard nothing regarding a new Directors Cut DVD release of OUATIA.  She knew all about all WB’s forthcoming Special Editions and OUATIA wasn’t one of them!  Also she had been at the Venice Film Festival and stated she would have heard something.  Sorry guys & girls but that’s what she told me.

I'm perfectly happy with what I have at the moment, so no rain for me.  O0

But thats a very old documentary Derbent but i'm hoping that  Little Big Mans source maybe wrong as it would be out of this world to see an extra two hours plus of Leone footage. :(

Check this out

There's few evidence that longer version as two part movie original four and a half hour is exist  

http://www.lumiere2009.org/uk/actualites.html?actu_id=319

Arnon Milchan quote  "There's another half hour we're planning to put back and come with the full director's version. This time I know what to do" (he meant that is closest Sergio Leone intended version)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YEPHkP6DAk

Few days go I went to Central Library and read Sergio Leone Biography "Something To Do With Death" by Christopher Frayling also says that
270 Minutes is definitive version (But it's only rummors no one knew original version except director himself)

post you comments and tell what you think about this

Arnon Milchan says in the documentary about puting scenes back in, and also showing six cans of scenes with the each name on it, and says that makes full director's version, that means scenes allready been dubbed long ago, but he didn't mention about new transfer about color restoration anything like that, but i think personally to restore movie like this carefully frame by frame takes years in terms of running time, to restore not only additional scenes but to restore movie it self from start to finish for scratches, dirts, grain, to give movie descent quality better than first transfer to make fans happy

Arnon Milchan didn't mention anything about release just said "This Time I Know What to do" according to his interview hopefully will see release maybe in the public theatres and possibly on Bluray

Warner Home Video released DVD in 2003 to make movie fans finally happy to see with descent picture and sound

i hope will hear something new soon about future release DVD/Blu-ray

post and share you thoughts and comments

The "Once Upon A Time" is a very old documentary Derbent so i'm not overly optimistic that anything's gonna come out in a hurry.But in view of the new extra's on the GBU  Blueray disc we can be hopeful as i see no reason why all the scenes that weren't included on Leone's intended cut shouldn't be up to the quality of the current version and therefore should be incorporated into a new dvd.

Basically the longer definitive version of Once Upon A Time In America called TV version and has been show on Italian and German Television approx 4 hours and 30 something min for example that Bernardo Bertolucci extended version of The Last Emperor TV version 218 min, 160 min theatrical Ingmar Bergman Fanny And Alexander TV version 312 min, theatrical 188 min and Scenes From A Marriage TV version 299 min, 155 min theatrical and Wolfgang Petersen of Das Boot 209 min(called director's version) mini series 330 min, the 293 min uncut TV Version

but one thing i just don't understand the Lumiere Inst claims The film was originally planned as two sections, to be screened several days apart and totalling four and a half hours. after producers objected and Leone reduced it to a single screening of three hours forty minutes.

http://www.lumiere2009.org/uk/actualites.html?actu_id=319

so what is that telling us that scenes were allready dubbed and edited

what are you guys think about that?

share you thoughts and comments

Certain things are unexplained 229-minute version. Some examples:

1. We don't know when or how Noodles received the invitation to Secretary Bailey's party; we just see him telling Deborah about it.
2. Frankie (the Joe Pesci character) mysteriously appears at the end of the scene where Noodles & Maxie are in the hospital with Jimmy and then decide to go on a Florida vacation together. We never see the significance of Frankie's appearance.
3. Eve kind of appears out of nowhere, ie. we never see where Noodles meets her

I have heard that many of the scenes with Eve are among those that were cut.

So yes, I would love to see the deleted scenes.

I often wondered 'bout that as a kid.

yeah, I am sure that there is a significance to it that would be explained in the director's cut.

 And the scene with the old Noodles walking with the suitcase and the frisbee mysteriously flying over his head is quite possibly part of a cut scene as well.

Another thing I found strange is that once Noodles gets out of prison, he immediately begins going on jobs with the group, and voicing his opinion when he disagrees with them, and opening his mouth to Frankie, a big mobster. You would think that if he just got out of prison and suddenly sees that his buddies have been successful gangsters, that a) he would shut his mouth and not argue with their methods; and b) there would be some discussion and "practice" for them to discuss business with him, for him to practice shooting a gun, etc. It seems kinda weird to me that one night Noodles gets out of prison, and immediately he is doing hardcore jobs with them as if he is an experienced member, and arguing with them as if he is an equal member.

Yeah, even in the 229-minute version -- which I believe is one of the greatest movies of all time -- there are several instances where you can tell some scenes are missing. I would absolutely love to see the version Leone intended to release, which according to Christopher Frayling was between 250 - 265 minutes.

(In fact, they shot something like 6-10 hours of footage; Leone originally intended to release it  as a 6 hour/ 2-part movie, which the studio refused).

YOU DON'T MESS WITH A MASTER!

Noodles "met" Eve at the bank during the robbery, made a small deposit !!!  And they say that early withdrawal results in loss of interest - TRUE !!!

The detailed script outline Frayling provides indicates that Frankie had no additional scenes than what's in the finished film. His brief appearance at the hospital just seems a metaphor of the Mob coming between Noodles and Max, or foreshadowing of what's to come. I like how people read so much into this brief and, to me, obvious scene.


Yes, although one of the scenes would effect the finish film's continuity and may not have been filmed.

That's Carol not Eve.

It's perfectly understandable people are interested about everything shown in the movie Groggy.

As for Frankie's appearance in the hospital: the way he acts, it's not so hard to decipher Frankie had something going on behind Noodles' back, it's just that we'd like to see what, and when, and how much. ;)

Same here, I thought about that too more than once - it isn't very believable.

O0

Wouldja believe . . . they're conspiring to cut Noodles out and set him up to look like a stoolie?

Either that, or Frankie is a sanitary engineer.

Indeed, it is not very believable as it is; but perhaps the cut scenes explain some of this. Maybe there are some scenes of Noodles going on other jobs with them and being "indoctrinated" as a full member before he starts opening his mouth to Maxie and Frankie...?

btw, some people have cited the scripts as provided by Frayling as the full shooting script, but I wonder if the footage was actually shot from those scripts, or whether those were just early versions of scripts that were later changed? Or does anyone know whether there is a script out there that contains the full 6-10 hours of film that was shot?

Ooops !!! Now I have an excuse to watch it again, it's been about two years !!!  Thanks !!!

Once Upon A Time In America getting extended running time closest to the director's version

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=6007

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/new_cut_of_sergio_leones_once_upon_a_time_in_america_on_the_way_with_40/#

only 25 minutes has been reinserted instead of promised 40

if this is indeed happening, this is the absolute greatest news I have heard in a loooong time. YEEEEHAH!!!

btw, I never even knew that the movie has been released on Blu Ray till I read these links. I am wondering if anyone can tell me whether the Blu Ray has any features that the regular dvd does not have? Specifically, does the Blu Ray have a Frayling commentary?

I see it says that Leone's kids have acquired the Italian rights to the film; does this mean this new release will only be released in Italian? That would suuuuuuuuuuuuuck.

That might have just made my day!


Same as DVD

btw, earlier in this thread we were discussing whether the scene of Frankie walking into the elevator and the frisbee scene were part of larger, cut scenes. Well I just looked up the OUATIA chapter in STDWD again; Frayling has a script there from 1981. Though parts of it differ from the final script, those 2 parts are as is. So I guess they were indeed intended that way and never meant to be part of any bigger scene

OMG!   I am on the OUTIA wavelength.  What else would possess me to check this board out today!  My dream will finally come true!

I'm intrigued, but I'm also of the school of thought that OUATIA is long (and complete) enough.

I don't, and if you care to know why, I explained it at length on the bottom post on p. 1 of this thread http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=10151.0  ;)

I'm not saying the missing footage isn't of interest, but frankly I'd rather have it available separately as part of the special features. The 229-minute version is good enough as it is, even if a few minor points bug me.

That's what I've been saying!

I disagree, mostly because of the way Leone shaped the film. The long flashback structure allows for more episodes to be incorporated, possibly an infinite number, if such were theoretically possible. Another film that seems incapable of ever being too long is GBU: if tomorrow it was discovered that the long lost scene with Blondie and the whore had been discovered, I'd say, Get it in there. And anything else that comes along. The more adventures the better.

By contrast, I wouldn't add anything more back into OUATITW: it is perfect the way it is, has achieved its optimal length. Same with FAFDM.

Indeed, Groggy.  I give you props once in a while too!  ;)

I am very happy that Leone chose not to use Clint's scenes with the women in FAFDM and GBU. Woulda had no place in there  :)

Well you'll always have the option of viewing the 229-minute version separately.
I'm happy I'll have the opportunity to view the new 4.5 hour version as well. That's the version the Master wanted, and I can't wait to get my hands on it  :)

Could is not the same as should.

Also, do we know definitively what scenes from the script were actually filmed? (I guess we'll soon find out.) I have a hard time believing that the extra scenes with Danny Aiello's character, or Carol telling Noodles about Eve's suicide, would fit into the narrative.

bottom paragraph on p. 458 of STDWD:

"(Leone's) ideal running time would have been 'between four hours ten minutes and four hours twenty-five minutes'" but he very reluctantly excised between forty-five and fifty minutes worth of 'significant material.' "

Frayling indeed goes on to mention the specific scenes that were cut:

-- Background on the young Noodles, his impoverished family, and his rejection of their religious devotion
-- "certain visual leitmotifs - a black limo tailing Noodles, an ominous garbage truck"
-- Senator Bailey's dispute with the elderly Jimmy O'Donnell over the pensions scam
-- Noodles' opium-rich flashback to himself and the gang as children
-- all of Louise Fletcher's performance as the director of Riverdale cemetery
-- most of Darlanne Fleugel's as Eve (including her meeting with Noodles, and his revelation that she sports 'falsies')
-- "some of Elizabeth McGovern's work (including her Busby Berkely and Shakespeare routines)
-- Carol telling Noodles about Max's syphilis from her rest home


Additionally, Frayling says that Leone "had ten hours of usable footage in the can." (id.)  However, if the 40 minutes that will now be restored are indeed those scenes which Leone wanted in but "very reluctantly" had to excise, then we can know what to expect.

Leone wanted this extra 40mins in it and I would definitely like to see it the way he intended.

 O0

I'd like to see the scenes of Noodles's childhood (the scene with Bugsy getting arrested in particular) and Darlanne Fluegel's extra scenes if they exist. Maybe the 1968 scene between Max and O'Donnell.

Frayling does not have the scenes with Bugsy getting arrested as being one of those that were cut. That aspect of the story was definitely in a script, but I am not sure whether it was in the final shooting script or whether those scenes were actually shot.... That doesn't bother me terribly; we know that Bugsy didn't like the gang cuz they didn't respect him as "neighborhood boss," and cuz they took his job of being escorts for the Capuano brothers' bootlegging. Sure, having sent him to jail would even further explain Bugsy's rage, but I am satisfied without those scenes; I don't think that is one of the "loose ends" of this film.
 
But I welcome any extra footage  :)

Once Upon A Time In America 1984 is going to be restore to the closest directors version, some articles i found on web enjoy


http://www.latinoreview.com/news/-once-upon-a-time-in-america-to-be-restored-with-director-s-cut-12886

http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/03/11/once-upon-a-time-in-america-new-release/

http://www.filmjunk.com/2011/03/11/longer-version-of-once-upon-a-time-in-america-in-the-works/

http://www.flicksnews.net/2011/03/40-minutes-of-unused-footage-to-be.html

http://www.movieline.com/2011/03/sergio-leones-once-upon-a-time-in-america-is-about-to-get-even-more-epic.php

http://www.sneakpeek.ca/2011/03/leone-family-restoring-once-upon-time.html

http://geektyrant.com/news/2011/3/10/forty-minutes-of-unused-footage-being-added-to-sergio-leones.html

http://www.slashfilm.com/cut-sergio-leones-time-america-40-minutes/

http://www.filmshaft.com/sergio-leones-kids-planning-new-cut-of-once-upon-a-time-in-america/

http://thefilmstage.com/2011/03/10/sergio-leones-once-upon-a-time-in-america-getting-restored-with-40-new-minutes-added/

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/archives/new_cut_of_sergio_leones_once_upon_a_time_in_america_on_the_way_with_40/

all this articles claiming 40 minutes that just missleading info it's 25 minutes

Thanks for the links! btw, all the articles I have read say that the Leone children have bought the Italian rights to the film. Does that mean the restored version will only be released in Italy? (I may have asked that a couple of times before but I have never gotten a straight answer to that; if anyone knows I'd greatly appreciate it....)

You have to ask Leone's children ... ;)

But I'm sure if the one day version exists it will be sold to the whole world.

well I'd be mighty happy if they indeed posted on these boards  ;)

I am not worried about eventually getting my hands on a copy; these days, everything is available through one channel or another. I am just hoping that we'll get a full-scale (theatrical?!) release with official dvd's etc., rather than having to get a copied version off some guy in Italy!

But if it is indeed released only in Italy, I hope that the English audio will be available. (I have never seen any Italian versions of Leone's films, but I assume that since OUATIA was dubbed into Italian, then they'll probably dub these new scenes into Italian as well, rather than using Italian subtitles).

1. I am sure that the Italian company that is taking care of restoring these scenes and releasing the new movie has public contact information. Perhaps someone on these boards who speaks Italian could call them or write them a letter just to clarify this question (ie. whether the new film will be released in America) and maybe some others and post their reply here? That would be mighty cool  :)

2. While the articles that have been linked here have said that the the original audio exists for these new scenes, I wonder if Leone actually completed the full post-production for these scenes, including editing, and most importantly, scoring them? If not, then I guess the Leone children and the "restorers" they are working with will choose among the various songs from the film score and place them in the scenes where they believe it's appropriate?

Thanks.  O0

Judging from Frayling's description I doubt if this was filmed, since Carol makes reference to Eve killing herself with an overdose. Obviously that doesn't happen in the finished film.

Thanks for the rundown though.

Every time I watch this film, a new part of the plot bothers me. I just finished it again, and here is what I cannot figure out:

When Noodles visits Carol in the rest home, she tells him that on that fateful night, Max started shooting at the cops cuz he wanted to get himself killed, cuz he was afraid of winding up in a nut house like his father. (And in some of the extra scenes, I believe Carol also says that Max had syphilis).

  However, once we find out at the end that Max is still alive, it is never explained why he indeed started shooting that night? Some may say that he intentionally faked his own death so that he could run away and build a new life under a different identity, but I do not agree with that; there is no way that Max could have anticipated that by starting the shooting, there would be someone with a similar-looking body to him that would be burned up and people would think it was him and he would be able to get away (Sure, once that did happen, Max took the opportunity to run away and build a new identity, etc.) However, Carol was obviously wrong in her belief that Max was trying to kill himself that night, so I am wondering if anyone can answer me: now that we realize Carol was wrong about Max trying to get himself killed, why did Max start the shooting that night?

(Here is the only answer I can think of: Carol was right that Max indeed started the shooting cuz he wanted to die; however, once he realized he could get away and they'd misidentify his body, he figured that was even better than committing suicide: to get away and change identities. So Carol was correct in her belief about Max intending to die that night, but she was wrong about the final result...? Or perhaps Carol was wrong about the entire thing; Max was really never suicidal and did not really start the shooting that night... but that doesn't seem likely).... I'd appreciate if anyone would clear this up for me.

Thanks  :)

Thanks much. The part about Max getting a "body double" for himself is quite interesting. Everything you are saying seems right, though I wonder if this will be clarified on the restored version. I can't friggin' wait to see it!!!!  :)

Well, I always thought that the police were very much involved the case; that they saw that Max really gets away, that the others get killed and that a fake body is found. But this of course raises a bunch of new questions that lead to the conclusion that Max never (not in the end anyway) actually seriously thought that he was going to rob the bank - the whole robbery was just a way to cause a lot of noise so that Max could change scenery undisrupted. Naturally this scenario would imply that Max very clearly knew how much trouble and pain he was going to cause Noodles - maybe that was even a strong motivation for his act.

Just my speculation.

yeah, when Bailey meets Noodles in 1968 and Noodles says "you're crazy," Bailey responds:
"You said that to me once before, a long time ago. But my mind was never as clear as it was at that moment. I took away your whole life from you; I've been living in your place. I took everything. I took your money; I took your girl; all I left for you was 35 years of grief over having killed me."

So obviously this was something that Max had been planning.

There are plenty of possible scenarios for exactly how Max worked it out. I hope this is clarified in the new release (although perhaps Leone wanted this to be ambiguous)? Since we know many scenes of this film were shot but never released, I guess we can't know for sure which scenes Leone intended to explain and which he wanted to intentionally leave ambiguous...

Novecento posted this on main Sergio Leone News  O0


Great news  :)


“What a thrill, like a son who returns home after many years ...”
Andrea, son of the unforgettable film director Sergio Leone, along with his sister Raffaella at the head of Leone Productions, has succeeded in a task very dear to his heart. He has purchased from the producer Aarnon Milchan the Italian rights to Once Upon a Time in America, his father’s last film dated 1984.

“It was a long negotiation, difficult, but eventually we made it.” told a liberated Andrea “Now the film will go to the restored images lab of the Cineteca Bologna, directed by Gianluca Farinelli.” They are dedicated to the painstaking restoration of images frame by frame, dubbing the original, soundtrack, effects. “Especially” Andrea Leone continues, “to reassemble the pieces of film, which my father had to cut due to time restraints.”

Among these is the encounter at the Riverdale Cemetery between Noodles - De Niro - and Louise Fletcher (the unforgettable nurse in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest). Louise Fletcher plays the director of the cemetery, an austere and ambiguous character, giving an atmosphere of great pathos to Noodles’ first research of his past.

And also, the encounter of old Noodles with Elizabeth McGovern on stage in a theater as she recites the part of Cleopatra in Shakespeare’s ‘Antony and Cleopatra’. “The dubbing remains the original.” Andrea continues “So we will not dub the new components whose on-screen dialogue will be subtitled in Italian. There will be new and complex editing. To supervise the task we will use some-one exceptional. Like a Quentin Tarantino or Martin Scorsese, who understand the film culture of my father, and are expert in the restoration of old films. We wanted to show the new edition of the film at Cannes this year, but there is not sufficient time. Too bad because the president of the Jury will be De Niro. With Sky, we are studying plans for its launch. I do not exclude that the film will return to theaters in 2012."

But the surprises do not end there. “Rummaging in the drawers of my father’s study” Andrea Leone continues, “we found a screenplay that he wrote between 1960 and 1965. It is the story of a handful of fighters engaged in a battle of Ancient Rome. The film is inspired by ‘The Magnificent 7’. We contacted David Franzoni, screenwriter of 'Amistad' and from 'The Gladiator "and we're making a movie to be produced by studios or independents linked with Milchan. Franzoni is pumped by the idea of putting together a film based on an original script by Leone. He is an avid fan. In his study he has a giant poster of The Good the Bad and the Ugly.”

thanks  O0

I wonder why it took so long to reach an agreement.

 "There will be new and complex editing."    I wonder how different it will be.  I have seen hundreds of films.  nothing blew me away the way OUTIA did in Chicago in 1984.  It's so damned exciting, I can hardly stand it! 

Remember, Max made sure Noodles did not accompany the others that night, because his plan was already in place...

Good call O0 It's been years since I last saw the movie so I don't remember all the details. This pretty much confirms my theory.

Thanks guys for these great articles. O0

I don't see any evidence in the film as to where Noodles was at that time, and why he wasn't escorting the booze shipment, and how he made it out of there alive.

I have read that in a deleted scene (which will hopefully now be restored), the elderly Carol tells Noodles that Max didn't want to involve him in his suicide, but that he didn't give a fuck about Cockeye and Patsy. Of course, we know that Carol's version of the story is wrong (she still believes the story Max told her...) but I see no evidence to support the version that Max intentionally left Noodles alive to cause him grief...  I mean, if Max wanted to ditch his past life, change identities and take the money and move on, isn't it better not to leave anybody around?

I would really appreciate if someone can explain exactly where Noodles was on that fateful night and why he wasn't involved in the shooting....

Now I could be totally wrong, but didn't Max knock him out?

Yea that's what I thought.

we see Max punch him and he falls down; next thing we see is the elderly Noodles and Carol at the Bailey Foundation. not clear whether Noodles got knocked out...?

Wow, thanks for the script. O0

I'm reading through it and I have to say I really like the opening scene. The fight between Noodles and the Syndicate goons is really intense, though not necessarily Leone-esque.

Thanks for the scripts!

1. So this 1982 script is the final shooting script?

2. Tempted as I am to read the script of the missing scenes, I think I'm gonna hold off until the restored movie is released  :)

He definitely pistol-whips him pretty hard.

I'll advance a new theory re: this film: the movie is a dying vision by Noodles after Max cracks his head open.

Frayling talks about most of these scenes. In the extra dialogue between Noodles and his Jewish limo driver, the driver expresses his disdain for Noodles's way of life. The reason Leone wanted this in was to emphasize that the Jewish community despised Jewish gangsters (this theme is very prevalent in The Hoods as well, how the community looked down upon the gangsters).

Also, I wonder if one of the reasons Leone shot this scene (aside from it having a source in the book) is to emphasize another difference between his gangster film and the other gangster films to which it inevitably is compared (yeah, of course I am talking about The Godfather  ;)...)

hmmm....  I don't see how the German stuff fits; prior to Hitler's coming to power (which is almost certainly after this scene  takes place) German Jews were generally not persecuted

By the government, no, but the SA was performing goon operations well before then.

Really? Sounds like pretty good dialogue to me.

It sounds like it doesn't belong in the OUATIA I know.

Leone in De Fornari p25-6:

"Then there is the very long one that has never been edited and which lasts fifty minutes longer. Four and a half hours. But we rejected the idea of two parts on TV. It is so intricate that it has to be done in one evening. And besides, let's be honest: This one is my version. The other perhaps explained things more clearly and it could have been done on TV in two or three parts, but the version that I prefer is this one, that bit of reclusiveness is just what I like about it."

according to Frayling, it didn't seem like Leone was thrilled to have cut the 50 minutes. who knows...

is there an expected release date for the restored version? I can't remember ever anticipating anything more than this  :)

He wasn't.

He also said somewhere in The Conversations that OUATITW was "95% himself" and OUATIA (european cut) "99%".
So I guess he was cool with that.

Actually it was 80% and a 100% (p.136)  ;). So yes, I guess he was pretty happy nonetheless.

p. 458 of STDWD... Leone's "ideal running time, he said, would have been 'between 4:10 and 4:25,' but he  very reluctantly excised between forty-five and fifty minutes' worth of 'significant material.' "

Oh? I'm pretty sure I read other % somewhere. May be in the Cahiers du Cinema? I'll double check!

Yup, as noodles_leone put it:


I think noodles_leone's point is that OUATIA, in the version that most of the world outside of the US saw, allowed Leone to be 99% himself. If the whole world had only seen the butchered version, he could not have said that because no-one would ever have seen what Leone's vision was.

  O0 O0

http://bologna.repubblica.it/cronaca/2011/10/01/news/nel_laboratorio_di_restauro_dei_film_che_pure_scorsese_invidia_a_bologna-22504184/

Translation, please? Thanks O0

By Google but you can get the gist of it

It also works nights and weekends to meet deadlines. Now the picture they are restoring is "Once Upon a Time in America" ​​by Leone to be ready for Cannes 2012

"We have a lot of work, sometimes over night we respect the time and also from December on weekends, but we do not know what will be our future." The speaker is Helen Tammaccaro, between the leaders of the Image Laboratory found again that if the Municipal Film Archive will not be able to become Foundation later this year will close its doors. Yesterday the Mayor for Cultural Ronchi, in the City Council, confirmed that the transformation will occur. The workshop brings useful and is considered one of the centers of excellence of the restoration in Europe. These days it is restoring Upon a Time in America Sergio Leone, Martin Scorsese's Film Foundation and want ready for Cannes 2012.

In addition to that of Helen, at the risk of other places there are 32 people, including 15 and 17 employees hired. Professionals to bring back to life the film they are targeting film archives all over the world, including Hong Kong and Singapore as well as the now famous collaboration with Scorsese's Film Foundation and the French Gaumont and Pathé. "It's a gamble born in the 90s - remembers Gian Luca Farinelli, director of the Film Archive - Film Found from experience that made us feel first hand the lack of a place in Italy for restoration. With a course specially created and the first equipment funded by the Province began a limited company, then on the initiative of Mayor Cofferati became a company in cohousing with the City. " But the big problem today is cohousing.

"Thanks to a law wanted by Tremonti - explains Farinelli - from 2012 will no longer be companies within the municipalities. But the laboratory is difficult to sell, even if it's useful. Its value is not only economic, it is an asset for throughout the city. " A heritage of meticulous work and avant-garde technology, passion and a solid philological cultural background. "When a film comes to us to be restored - explains Tammaccaro - the first thing we do is to recover the historical memory. We have worked with directors of photography and operators such as Ennio Guarnieri for the sweet life, Daniel Nannuzzi for The Damned, or same directors as Vittorio De Seta for his short ". Then for each title is an ad-hoc path. "We do not just repair the damage, try to return to work its value."

A commitment that requires at least three months to film. Arrived in Via Riva Reno the film is over, frame by frame, to fix the flaws evident manually, then it is scanned in order to continue with the "clean" digital, then you are working on lights and colors involving the workers of the time. All the while in parallel it back to life sound. And, finally, it's back to film. So it was Visconti's Senso, for Sergio Leone's A Fistful of Dynamite, short for the Brothers Lumière and other dozens of masterpieces. So it is these days for America Loen, but The Great Illusion by Jean Renoir, End of Days by Elio Petri and Chaplin's The Gold Rush. And so we hope to continue to be from January onwards.
 
(October 1, 2011)

haha this shit cracks me up.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I'm hopin one of our European friend can provide a proper translation

does it say if it will be released in English? and anything about the rumor that Morricone will be composing new music for the deleted scenes?

Sergio is smiling in heaven  :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

if this new release ever gets screened in New York, we gotta have a major locations tour followed by trip to the theater. and I hope we can find the locations for the restored scenes  ;)

so it seems like the article was about the restoration company, which just so happened to be currently restoring OUATIA, so they mentioned the movie in the article; but the article was really about the restoration company, and not OUATIA per se, correct?

Yea that is the gist of it  8)

Well, yeah, but we may have to go to Canada for that. ;)

New York--Canada--Rome--Venice--Almeria

sound good for a summer vacation?  ;)

Sounds expensive, anyway. ::)

Tonight's Powerball Lotto is $78 million. Friday's Mega Millions Lotto is $135 million. If I win either one, I'll subsidize a group trip  O0

I've always dreamed of doing two major trips when I get rich, God-willing:

a) an international trip to all Leone filming locations;

and

b) an RV-road trip across America to all 30 Major League Baseball stadiums (plus a few minor league ones in small towns, those would probably be cool as well).

As the NY Lottery slogan goes, "HEY, YOU NEVER KNOW!"


I'll start the trip by taking a boat up the Hudson to pick up you and cj from upstate, and we'll turn off into some little river somewhere to do some fly fishing. (Maybe we can go on the Delaware or Lackawanna, and pick up Groggy on the way  O0)

D&D, have you ever actually DONE any fly fishing?

Anyway, I hope you win the lotto........

No! I am a big city boy. But there is always a first time for everything: both fly fishing , and winning lottos :)

Exactly 3 months away from Cannes. Wonder if we'll get any official news on the new cut soon.

I was just doing some Googling a couple of nights ago, trying to find something on this very issue!

unfortunately, all the articles are from that period in mid-March when the official story broke. I have not heard any updates since then. At that time, Leone's children wanted to release it either at Cannes or Venice, but who knows what's gonna happen. I am so excited I can hardly wait. I am anticipating this like I've anticipated nothing before!

btw, all the stories say that the Leones purchased the Italian distribution rights to the film, (and I believe that the extra scenes will be released with Italian subtitles). But does anyone know what that means for America? Will it be released in America on Region 1, or will we have to purchase the Italian dvd?

I think I'd be prepared to go either way.  8)

http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2011/12/15/2012-cineteca-portera-piazza-restauro-cera-volta-america/177676/

What does it say?

Google translation (first paragraph or so):

"The announcement is not official yet, but the microphones of Radio Alma , Gianluca Farinelli , the director of the new and contested "foundation" Film Library , as revealed during the next summer we could see, in Piazza Maggiore in Bologna, uncut and restored version of Once Upon a Time in America"

The rest doesn't' say much, other than a mention of an original 4 1/2 hour cut before being cut down, and obvious details on the back story of the film.

Thanks! So there is hope.

Yeah, this looks like it's really happening. I am just hoping that it is widely available and released on dvd/blu ray in America (not just shown a few times in one festival or another).

If/when it indeed happens that the dvd/blu ray is released in America, of the full version that Leone really intended (4:40 or so), it will be one of the happiest days of my life  :) :) :)

I think I will go insane if the new director's cut of OUATIA is at Cannes this May.  (the first time, they stood and applauded for 15 minutes!)
This is a life-long dream come true!  I must see it on the big screen!
The screen I saw it on in Chicago no longer exists.  They chopped up that old great theatre.  Anyway, I wonder if Ennio has written any new themes for the film.
There would have to be a new soundtrack released, right?  Please keep me up to date!   

I remember reading something on these boards about Morricone writing new music for it (though I am sure it will just be variations on the existing melodies rather than entirely new melodies), but I do not remember how accurate it was.

I get aroused every time I think of this new version of the movie that is coming out. But after all this anticipation, I just hope that I get to orgasm and don't get blue-balled. I don't think I could take it  ;)

Excellent news! O0

Sweeeeeeet......... boy would I love to be able to attend that Cannes screening  O0 O0 O0

If I had a Facebook page I'd be updating my status to Guardedly Optimistic.

Thanks for the link, once  O0

Yes, I believe Scorcese is wrong about the timing; I believe it'll actually be about 45 minutes restored, which, (as Frayling detailed on STDWD), was Leone's preferred version all along, around 4:25.

But this is indeed WONDERFUL news.

 cj & dj, I TOLD you it was real this time  ;)


Few things in the world excite me as much as this!!!!! I didn't know till now that Scorcese was involved in this, but knowing what a Leone fan he is -- not to mention that it is Leone's children that are leading this, from what I've read so far -- makes me optimistic that this will be done as close as possible to Leone's vision.

 :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

 O0 O0 O0

i might cry

and by cry I mean cum my pants.

That sounds incredibly painful, but I try not to judge the proclivities of others.

what if the longer cut only hurts the movie? think of Cinema Paradiso theatrical vs. director's cut...many people including myself agree that the director's cut fills in too much unwanted information and breaks the charm/mystery of the relationship between Toto/Elena/Alfredo. But then again Tornatore made it and he's probably a fucking dumb ass. Leone's a genius...hopefully we can trust that his 'preferred version' is the greatest

the fact that the (roughly) 4:25 version was Leone's preferred version (not to mention the fact that the 3:49 version of has some plot holes) makes me very excited about it.

Of course,  I don't know whether Leone prepared these scenes for release (editing, dubbing, score, etc.); or whether they are still the raw prints that others will have to prepare for release (or some combination thereof). Therefore, I don't know if these scenes will be considered "100% Leone."
 But the bottom line is that Leone wanted these scenes included, and the work is in the hands of his children (and perhaps others, like Scorcese) who seem to be doing this out of the pure desire to see the Master's vision realized. So I am very optimistic and excited about it all.

I just hope it will be released on dvd/blu ray in America soon after it premiers at Cannes. I can't wait to see it, and I'd prefer to see it on the official release rather than on some bootleg that will inevitably float around soon after Cannes...

How likely is that? Isn't it more probable that the new version will be released to cinemas first? Needless to say, that will delay the home video editions, which are at least a year away.

well I'd love to see it in theaters of course. I would have no problem with a delay of the dvd/blu-ray while it's being shown in theaters  O0

The director's cut of Cinema Paradiso basically adds a whole new third chapter on to the end of the film which fundamentally changes the nature of the film and its plot. This is very different from OUATIA where the extra scenes are just going to flesh out some details without drastically altering anything.


Me neither - I would love to see it in the theaters.

If it is shown in New York, we can take a big tour of the NYC filming locations that day, concluding with an extensive visit to McSorley's, before heading to the theater to watch the movie  :) :) :) :) :) :)

Sergio must be smiling in heaven  :)

There is a good probability the added scenes will slow down OUATIA, making it harder to watch (especially considering the film as we know it already lacks a few dynamic scenes during the adult period). But as long as they're in the same league as the rest of the movie, unlike GBU's added scene, it's more than ok with me. And, knowing the reason why they were deleted, they probably will be. At worst, we'll get one more hour of footage by the greatest director of all times at the very top of his talent. At best, the best movie ever will go from 10/10 to 12/10, making it virtually impossible to surpass.

No need to say, over-excited about all this.

Not my favourite Leone 8/10

I'm eager to see the long version, but frankly said the film is already too long for its substance.

Greatest movie of all time. It is not a minute to too long as is. There is not a moment where I forward cuz I say "this is dragging a bit." Not one single moment out of 229 minutes.

I agree with Noodles_Leone: at worst we get another hour of Leone footage; at best, the greatest movie ever gets even better. As it is, there are definitely some things that could use a bit more explaining (Frayling says how Leone cut 45-50 minutes of "significant material" to get to 229 minutes, and lists the scenes that were deleted. I've listed them at this post earlier in this thread http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=1302.msg146469#msg146469 We'll probably see those scenes, so we know what we can expect.

There are some plot points that could really benefit from using a bit more explaining (which IMO always made this movie a bit flawed -- but still my all-time fave).  
 
For example, The scenes explaining how Noodles meets Eve. Without it, it's pretty weird how we see Noodles head off to Florida, and then we suddenly see him with this chick and they're discussing business in front of her! So obviously, he has gotten pretty close to her. Explaining how they met helps us to understand that. (The parts with Eve are largely taken from The Hoods.  In the book, Noodles writes about how when he asks her out, all he could think of was her amazing tits; when they actually meet in the hotel, he finds out that they are falsies!


Also, there are two other points I've never quite understood, but it doesn't seem like there will be any explanation in the new version either:

a) when did Noodles receive that party invitation? He says to Deborah in her dressing room that he received this party invitation, but we don't know when he received it: Did he actually receive it along with the letter about the cemetery, but just never mentioned anything about it to Fat Moe? Or did someone deliver it to him while he was staying at Fat Moe's?

b) How the hell does Noodles figure out that Deborah is sleeping with Secretary Bailey? When she pretends not to know him, Noodles says (paraphrasing), "Why don't you just say that you're sleeping with him, and you're in love with him?!" Where in hell did Noodles get that info from? Did Carol tell him that off-camera?

c) and what exactly is The Bailey Foundation? Is it a nursing home (where Carol is living), which also has a theater, where Deborah is performing? Did Noodles visit Carol at The Bailey Foundation's nursing home, and then realized Deborah was performing there after seeing her picture? (Deborah, the supposedly big actress, is performing at the theater of The Bailey Foundation -- that is her big gig?) Does Noodles visit The Bailey Foundation in an attempt to discover who Secretary Bailey really is, or is Carol staying there and he decides to ask her to find out who Bailey is? Or is The Bailey Foundation nothing to do with Carol's nursing home, but she just happens to knows about it and explain it to him?

If the new scenes are the ones Frayling listed which i detailed at the link above, it doesn't look like any of these questions will be explained -- except possibly C). If anyone  can explain 'em, I'd be mighty grateful  :)

yes, but the movie should explain all the events in it that don't make sense otherwise. This movie probably did have all the answers within the 6-10 hours of footage that Frayling says exists (or at least within Leone's preferred 4:25 version which will soon be released).

-------

Anyway, regarding C), yeah Carol says that Deborah is the patron saint of Bailey Foundation, ok so that's how Noodles figures out she is sleeping with Secretary Bailey? ok, that makes sense. As far as the theater, one of those deleted scenes which may soon be restored is the one with Deborah performing, which is cut from our current version of the movie, which it seems that Noodles goes to Deborah's dressing room soon after his meeting with Carol. But in fact, you are saying that after he met with Carol, he then went to some theater where she is performing, and then met her in dressing room -- so in fact, that meeting may have taken place a few days after his meeting with Carol, rather than immediately afterward as the current version makes it seem?


(and btw, as discussed in this thread http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=10498.0 I do not believe that Bailey's anonymity was a flaw; I think it was certainly possible -- up till the point where he was involved in that scandal; at that point, he was finished).

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118052787.html?cmpid=RSS%7CNews%7CLatestNews#.T48D2lT2-i8.facebook

yeah, thanks for the link! Great news!

May 18th! That's really soon!  :o  O0

I think Sergio Leone would be really proud - especially considering all the battles he fought to get this one released in any form in the first place.

Here's another article - this also holds out the hope for a nice new remastered blu-ray:

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/restored-cut-of-sergio-leones-once-upon-a-time-in-america-with-40-more-minutes-to-premiere-at-cannes-film-festival-20120418?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed

50 min?

269 min is the theatrical version.

Back in the mid 80s Leone talked about the necessity to cut the film and that he wanted to release OUTA later in a longer TV version in several parts (probably with that TV version of The Godfather in the back of his mind). But I never read anything why this announced TV version never happened.

Frayling says Leone cut 45-50 minutes out of his ideal running time (for the 229 minute version). I presume those 45-50 minutes are what will be restored....

Normally nobody uses the Pal runtimes, except if a Pal version is the subject of the discussion.
OUTA was released in Europe with the aforementioned 229 min runtime. The German Blu runs 229:19 min, the Pal DVD 219:29

When Andrea Leone says his father's version was "four and a half hours," I don't know if that  necessarily means exactly 270 minutes, or if it's a general rounded term.

Anyway, I am sure we'll find out the exact running time (no later than) when it's screened Cannes.
 I am way too excited about this release to worry about whether the exact extra time is 40, 45, or 50 minutes 

(Should I get greedy now and hope that one day they will release all 6-10 hours of footage  -- at least separately on the special features section of a dvd -- that Frayling says was shot for what Leone was then hoping would be a 2-part movie?  ;) )

I've never heard of that book, and couldn't find it on Amazon or anywhere else (I tried Googling). Do you have a link where it can be purchased?

And is it basically just pictures? (That's the only way I'll  buy it, cuz I can't read Italian).

Once, that runtime in Frayling's book must be an error. Inside the book (pg. 458 -460) he only talks about the 229 min version.

I have a new German book on Leone which lists a lot of runtimes from several countries. And the uncut version always runs 228 or 229 min. In Italy, France, Germany, USA. The theatrical UK version was slightly cut, but still ran 228 min.

"No word yet on when this version will hit DVD or BluRay but we presume that's around the corner." An absolutely worthless presumption.

No doubt because of the horse falls.

I don't know what "around the corner" means, but I think it's safe to say that a dvd/blu-ray will be released at some point (possibly after a theatrical run?) That's the important part, but I've been dreaming of since forever.

And when the dvd is released, I hope they get Frayling for the commentary.

My point is that we've been given zero information. There is nothing to go on.

But let's see what I can pull out of my ass anyway, OK? 2014 will be the film's 30th Anniversary. Warner's loves to bring out special anniversary editions of films on home media. They may therefore decide to schedule their next DVD/Blu-ray release of OUATIA to coincide with that anniversary. And if there are going to be repertory screenings of the film first anyway, 2014 is none too late (remember, repertory is not general release--the film, in a sense, tours, arriving in different cities on different dates, which stretches the release period out considerably longer than those on general release). Of course, the new Italian DVD/Blu-ray might come out earlier, but that may not be of use to many of us.

Fall of 2013 might be close enough to the anniversary for Warner's, though, so it's possible we'll see a deluxe packaging job (in the tradition of the Citizen Kane and Casablanca releases) in time for Christmas. No doubt the Super Deluxe edition will include a facsimile bootlegger's whiskey flask and a pair of Eve's falsies. At 100 dollars, what self-respecting Leone fan will be able to resist? The cheapies who want to wait for the stripped down packaging (at 19.99) may have to wait until sometime late in 2014.


But as I say, at this point, it's all just speculation.

I hope you know what you're doing.

 O0

Do we still hang Once?

That's it, I will not worry or think about the running time until after the movie is actually screened at Cannes, and we hear about the dvd/blu-ray. We've already heard so many different things about this release, I ain't gonna worry about any one particular article, even if it is supposed to be the "official word" from Cannes. No use in worrying about something that I've heard so many different versions of, I won't know for sure till it is screened, and I have no control over. A few years ago, we would have killed to see this restoration; now, we are getting all worked up over the reported running time before we even know for sure what's happening. In one recent interview with Scorcese, he says the movie is 5 1/2 hours; in a Variety article, it says 40 minutes will be restored, and now this says 25 minutes. And that's just three articles posted on this thread in the past couple of weeks! So the bottom line is we don't know jack. Let's just take it easy till after the screening!

Remember, this restoration is in the hands of people -- including Leone's children and Martin Scorcese -- who are every bit as excited and passionate about this movie as we are, and every bit as interested in seeing Leone's vision realized in the best way possible. They are people who care about this movie in the same way that you and I do. I am sure they will do a damn good job with it.

So for now, I am just really excited about the restoration, and I'm going to chill out and not concern myself with the running time or anything else. After it screens at Cannes, I'm sure I'll enjoy reading the articles, and perhaps we'll find out the real running time. But I will withhold judgment until I see the movie myself :)

Then you must have other sources than I. Most of mine say 229 min, and anyway all uncut DVD, Blu Ray, VHS, TV versions I know about run 228 or 229 min.

http://www.ofdb.de/film/1657,Es-war-einmal-in-Amerika

But I'm sure the Cannes version will be longer than 245 min. Unless the film stock is damaged.
On the other hand for unknown reasons Scorsese has already failed to recreate the theatrical version of OUTW.

it's just that the final scene with the end music and the words "Once Upon a Time in the West" that were changed and the "Scorcese version" never fixed; but it's not that any of the actual movie footage from the original theatrical release is missing, no?

 I am very confused by what you mean when you say the the original theatrical release was 220 minutes. I never heard of any 220 minute version. Frayling, in the bottom paragraph of page 460 of STDWD, says the 229 minute version is what was shown at Cannes. And on p. 462, middle paragraph, he says "The film was released in Europe in a 227-minute version, approved by Leone..." (I think it possibly took out two minutes to tone down some violence). But Frayling says nothing about a 220-minute version.



So what do you mean when you say that it is incorrect to "assume that the running time of an NTSC version is the same as that of the original theatrical release"?  Can you please elaborate/explain that statement? If you believe Frayling is wrong, and the original theatrical release was 220 minutes, are you saying that 9 minutes were added to the DVD (cuz the DVD's are currently 229 minutes). IF that's the case, then if the the newly restored version has 25 extra minutes and totals 245 minutes, you're saying that it does not include the 9 minutes that were added to the DVD? Or does the newly restored version have all 229 minutes we have now plus the new footage equals 245 minutes, which would mean that there is only 16 minutes of new footage?



 I know that the comments on the Festival's official site seem clear. But we have seen so many other clear comments (eg. the Variety article said there would be 40 extra minutes). So I don't know if we can believe any of the reported running times with certainty, until after the movie is screened.

--------------------------------------------------------------

P.S.  what do you mean when you say "some errors and misunderstandings in other parts of" Frayling's book? Are you referring to the running time of OUATIA, or to other, unrelated material in his book?

Running times of DVDs, Blu-rays, TV & VHS versions are reliable sources as long as they contain uncut versions.

And NTSC is not slower than cinema, it is in fact Pal which is faster than cinema.

NTSC has a frame rate which in the end is identical with the cinema frame rate of 24 fr/s. The runtime of a 229 min Blu is identical to the theatrical runtime.

Pal has a frame rate of 25 fr/s and is for that 4 % faster than a theatrical or a NTSC version. But you can always detect the theatrical runtime by adding 4%.
Anyway all uncut releases from the 80s to nowadays contain a 228 or 229 min version (Pal versions running 219 - 220 min).


Frayling mentions, just like D&D said, always a 229 min version in the film's chapter. The 218 min in the data part of his book is most likely a typo.
I have a new German book which lists a lot of theatrical versions and DVD/Blu versions from several European countries and all have the 228/9 min runtime.

Here's an overview over Uk versions: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/AFF014538/
The theatrical version from 1984 ran 228 min and 20 sec ( and was cut by 16 sec).

A film guide from 1985 says also 229 min.
But Oreste de Fornari's book has also the 218 min.

I assume there was some misinformation back in the 80s, and then then some sources quoted from this.

True, Noodles clearly takes a bus, and I never understood why Frayling says "train."

Well, we had tried to make this clear somewhere in the OUTW section of this forum. There are about 70 sec missing in the first scene, from which Scorsese only restored 15 sec. And the so called Rising scene was never part of all uncut original theatrical versions.
And, yes, Scorsese not even fixed the obviously wrong music in the last 90 sec of the film.

Did Leone necessarily want all that in the first scene? Was all the extra time in the first scene in the original Italian release?

Why not? He never complained about the theatrical version.
And yes, at the moment there is no doubt for me that all released versions in Italy, France, Germany and other countries were the same version, which was also prepared at first uncut for the USA and the UK before the film was cut down to 144 respective 145 min.


Here's a scan of the detailed article which explains how it could happen that the Paramount version is not exactly identical to the original theatrical version
http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=10564.0

http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/fashion-news/newsdetails.aspx?news_id=110538

the jist of which is this paragraph:

The film, Leone’s last, originally premiered out of competition at Cannes in 1984, at 229 minutes, the same version of which was released in European theaters that spring. The newly restored version to premiere this year at Cannes brings Leone’s masterpiece back to life, featuring roughly 20 minutes of additional scenes that have never before been seen by audiences. Through the work of The Film Foundation and through funding by Gucci, Cineteca di Bologna and L’Immagine Ritrovata are restoring the 229-minute version utilizing the original camera negative held by the US rightsholder, Regency Enterprises, along with the over 20 minutes of additional footage found and preserved by the Leone family.

sounds like a total of 40 minutes, hummmmmm. :D

Sounds like a total of 20 min ;)

Its says: "featuring roughly 20 minutes of additional scenes that have never before been seen by audiences."

then below : "along with the over 20 minutes of additional footage found and preserved by the Leone family."

Its either poor writing or 40 minutes. Take your pick  ;)

so withoput getting into all the technical stuff about the difference between PAL and NTSC, is it correct to say that, in a nutshell,  the movie that was shown at Cannes and European theaters in in 1984 was basically the exact same version as what we currently have on region 1 dvd?

if so, and assuming it is correct that only 25 minutes will now be restored, can we assume that when the restored version is released on Region 1 dvd, it will be 254 minutes?


--------------

As we've discussed many times, Frayling cites Leone (pp. 458-456 of STDWD) saying that his ideal running time would have been "between 4:10 -- 4:25" but he very reluctantly cut 45-50 minutes of  "significant material."
The math seems a tad off: 45-50 minutes added to 3:49 would make the movie between 4:34 -- 4:39, not 4:10 -- 4:25. Be that as it may, at this link http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=1302.msg146836#msg146836 I listed the scenes that Frayling says were cut, and I think we all believe the restored scenes will be from those scenes, if not all.

Anyway, (assuming Frayling's story is correct,  and assuming that there aren't technical problems like damaged tape) it seems strange to me that Leone's kids and Scorcese, et. al. would want to restore the movie, yet not to the full amount that Leone would have wanted it. I mean, even if theoretically they believe that some of those scenes are bad and don't belong, wouldn't it make the most sense that they would want to advance Leone's vision of the ideal version of the movie, rather than their own opinion of the ideal version? Even if let's say there are a few bad scenes among them, I think they would want to show it Leone wanted it, without regard for their own opinions of those scenes.

p.s. In that post I linked to above, where I made a numbered listed of those scenes that were cut, and mentioned the ones I think are most important to be restored are 2,3,5,6, and 8...  

Well I want to know your opinion of that: Write the numbers of  the scenes from the list list that you feel are most important to have restored! (probably so that you can set yourself up for disappointment when those turn out to NOT be among the restored scenes  :'()

(yeah I know that about 2 minutes were removed from the movie in England prints due to violence; according to Frayling, Leone himself oversaw the removal of those 2 minutes. But I am not worried about that essentially considering that 2:27 v version).

I just want to ascertain is what the running time will be when it is released on Region 1 dvd: If that official Cannes article is correct that the restored scenes will total 25 minutes, and if the dvd will have the exact version of the movie that is shown at Cannes, then we can expect that when that glorious day comes that we get the dvd and stick it into our players and finally begin watching it, we will have a 4:14 movie

Yes ...



Leone's statements about how much was cut and what the ideal runtime is shouldn't be taken too verbatim. In the end he never made that ideal version, so he himself may only have guessed how much was lost if he had the chance to fine-cut the stock.

I have here an interview which was made in Germany in 1984. Leone mentions again a 270 min version as his favourite length and expresses his hope that "in 2 1/2 or 3 years the Italian TV may show it", but he does not know if this is possible because of the film's producer. Well, it never happened.

I'm definitely sure that reinserting only 25 min is much less than Leone wanted. But with so much different statements about the new version we won't be sure until it actually was screened at Cannes.

I read it without any doubt as twice naming the same 20 min.

What I’d like to know is why a year ago Raffaella was saying that adding 40 minutes would constitute the “director’s cut” and now, when it appears only 25 minutes have been added, she’s still saying “it will be wonderful to see the restored version on the big screen and with the additional footage of the original director's cut.” Did Leone’s ghost appear between then and now and instruct her to remove 15 minutes?

Of course, I don’t think the Leone children can be trusted when it comes to what constitutes the “director’s cut”, considering that 2 or 3 years ago when all of this was first announced Raffaella said “in collaboration with Sky we want to restore forty minutes of new scenes that we have found. Mind you, we will not reassemble the film; it will stay what my father did. We’d love to show, however, perhaps in a screening at a festival, this interesting footage.”

So, originally they weren’t planning to insert the 40 minutes into the existing film at all, then a year or so later suddenly the plan was to insert the 40 minutes and declare it the “director’s cut”, and now, when all is said and done (maybe), only 25 out of those 40 minutes actually belong in the “director’s cut.”

Apparently Sergio’s ghost can’t make up his mind.

the second sentence says "... along with the over 20 minutes of additional footage..." So "the" means it is referring to the footage that was just mentioned previously. I have no doubt that this article is referring to a total of 20 minutes of new footage, not 40.

Anyway, if it really will only be 20 or 25 minutes, I hope they'd put the other 20-25 minutes (comprising the rest of the 45-50 minutes that Leone wanted to have in the movie, according to Frayling) on the dvd, at least as an extra. But I won't expect that.

I am really befuddled as to why after all these years, when this great moment happens that they will restore Leone's movie, they wouldn't restore all the scenes Leone wanted in it

Yea, there are a lot of possibilities and conundrums that the restores will be dealing with, maybe the 25 minutes is the limit of what they can do with what they got without changing the integrity of the film.  I guess we'll see.

(Firstly, I just wanna say that the bottom line is that the only version we currently have on dvd is 229 minutes. I don't know about the 220 minute version that may or may not originally been shown at Cannes and/or in theaters, whether it was less time or just due to PAL/NTSC differences. But the bottom line is that the only version of OUATIA that is currently on dvd and that all of us are familiar with is the 229 minute-version. So just a respectful suggestion, I'd refer to it as the "current version" or the "229-minute version" rather than continually referring to it as the 220-minute version, which may continue to confuse everyone and perhaps continue the conversation about technical differences between running times of PAL-NTSC, but doesn't affect the continuing discussion of the upcoming restored version. I think the main issue is how many minutes will be added to the new version from the current 229-minute version version we have on dvd, not how many minutes were or weren't in the European theatrical version in 1984. I am not saying I am doubting your sources; I am just saying that I think that since our concern now is how many minutes will be added to the version we have on dvd, it may be more easily understood if we simply refer to it as the "current version" or "229-minute version," rather than the "220 minute version." Just a respectful suggestion  O0 )

--------------------------
Anyway, that's enough out of me about the running time of the current version. Moving on.....

 are you sure that the scene where Carol tells Noodles that Eve died alone -- I think by overdosing with pills -- was shot? I know it was in at least one version of the script, but obviously makes no sense cuz we know that Eve is shot in the first scene. [Theoretically, you could take it all a step further  and say it is not impossible to explain it away by saying that Carol was mistaken about Eve's death; that Carol is an unreliable storyteller -- eg. we know she is wrong about Max --; or that the discrepancies are all part of the opium dream, but I think that may be too far. It's probably best to say that the script changed; or perhaps Leone deliberately shot it different ways, cuz he wasn't sure how he wanted it to be, and intended to deal with it during editing.
Heck, I just thought of something else: maybe Leone really wanted to have it that Eve died alone with the pills, but when he realized he wouldn't have money for his fancy credit sequence and that he'd be using very simple credit titles, he decided he needed to open with a BANG and changed the script to have a shocking killing in the opening scene!! ;)]

Of course, considering that "Leone had ten hours of usable footage in the can" (STDWD, p. 458), it is very possible that different versions of certain plot points were shot, again either because the script was re-written on set, or because Leone deliberately intended to leave himself many options in the editing room. So even if a different version of Eve's death was indeed shot, that wouldn't bother me in the least bit. (On p. 459 when Frayling lists the 45-50 minutes of "significant material" that Leone cut to get the film down to 229 minutes -- which we have presumed will be the footage that is at least partially restored -- he says that among the scenes that were removed are  "Tuesday Weld as Cariol, telling Noodles about Max's syphilis from her rest home."Frayling makes no specific mention of Carol telling Noodles about Eve's death; while this doesn't necessarily mean it's not there, cuz Frayling doesn't quote those scenes word for word, it seems to me that it doesn't make much sense that Leone would have ever intended to include that scene in the final cut, considering that we see Eve getting killed in the opening scene.

Therefore, although the scene with Carol talking about Eve's death may have been shot initially, I am pretty confident in saying that by the time Leone was ready to release the movie, that part would not have been in there, even if the studio had allowed Leone to release as long a movie as he wanted to

I had never heard of a 220-minute version before, and the reason I wrote "we" is because judging by the comments here, it seems like none of the others have, either. But of course I am not saying that you are wrong about it.

According A1's website which you posted the link to, it seems the difference between the 220-minute and the 229-minute versions is entirely due to PAL vs. NTSC. So it's the exact same version of the movie, ie. there is nothing that is in one version and not the other, right? That's fine.

But in your initial post re: this, http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=1302.msg156003#msg156003
you said that most "reliable sources contradict" the assertion that the version originally released in Europe was 229 minutes. I took that statement of yours to mean that according to reliable sources, the version originally released in Europe was different than the version we in America currently have on dvd. ie. There are some things that are in one version and not in the other, and not simply that it's the same version but with a different running time due to PAL vs. NTSC. But if I am wrong, and you meant that the film looks exactly the same, just different run times due to PAL vs. NTSC, then sorry I misunderstood  :-[

Once, the DVDs you have are Pal versions. All runtimes in books and papers normally mention only the theatrical runtime

So again, even if in some books the theatrical runtime is given with 218 -220 min, I have never come across any uncut version shorter than the 227 -229 min. And in most sources I have the runtime is already given with 227 - 229 min. And I have never read anything that there was any difference in any country between the theatrical version of 1984, the than following VHS versions and the current DVD and Blu versions. Maybe there are some small differences how long the film runs after the credits or if there was some intermission music which one version has and the other not. But only maybe.

Well, you never know, but I'm 99% sure that there never was any uncut 218 or 220 min version (except the Pal ones, but which are then not different in their content)

Either way, if the difference between the 220-minute version  and the 229-minute version is entirely due to the PAL/NTSC, and there is zero difference in content, then I wouldn't even refer to as "different versions of the movie"; the bottom line is that it is the exact same movie  :)

However, I just checked what ONCE cited, p. 541 of STDWD the "Complete Filmography" section, and it says:

"Running Times: It 218 mins, GB 228 mins, US 139 mins; US restored print 227 mins"

But if the shorter running time of the Europan version was due to the PAL/NTSC, then why is only the Italian version shorter, while the GB version is the same as the American? Does GB use NTSC? (If UK and Italy both use PAL, then this would indicate that the Italian version was indeed shorter than the UK version, so the are in fact two different versions of the movie, and not the same version just with different running times due to PAL/NTSC).


(p.s. I am not gonna focus on the difference between 218 min vs. 220 min., or 227 vs. 228; that sort of shit can be attributed to the cutting of  a minute or two of violence, or perhaps not counting the credits, or counting what is actually 228 minutes & 40 seconds simply as 228 minutes or 229 minutes. So I am not in any way concerned about on 227 vs. 229; or 218 vs. 220, etc. we're just focusing on what we are calling the 220 minute version vs. the 229 minute version  :) )

We're not talking here about Pal runtimes. All the sources of Once are mentioning a theatrical runtime (identical to a NTSC runtime). In that case there must be 2 versions of OUTA. But I have never heard of any differences between the released versions.

... and the running time quoted on the PAL DVD.
But yeah my guess is that we're actually discussing about the exact same version:
220 x 104% = 228.8 (also known as "229 min")
(104% is the coefficient of the infamous PAL Speedup)

No, there are not such differences. Except for the silent film area all film run with 24 pic/sec. All runtimes of Italian films are identical to those which were screened elsewhere.

Then again. We have here 2 different possible runtimes which were quoted in books, interviews, magazines etc. . But, except for obviously cut versions, I have never read anything about 2 different versions of OUTA. Conclusion: one of the 2 runtimes is most likely wrong.
All the versions we have on VHS, DVD, Blu are in the end the 229 min version. And if we have a runtime based on the actual lenght in meters, it is also the 229 minversion. All books say that the Cannes version was 229 min, and that this version was released in every country which presented the film in its entirety.

As there is no actual evidence of this 220 min I can only assume there was some confusion of the actual runtime back in the 80s, maybe due to a simple typo (218 instead of 228) or something like that.

Once, why not just assume there is only the 229 min version we all know until we have an evidence for a shorter version which was also approved by Leone?
And btw (before I'm getting confused) which version was shorter in your opinion? Only the Italian release version?

Once again, 220 min PAL = 229 min in 24fps or NTSC.
So what are we debating about?

Once thinks there was a 2nd theatrical version with a runtime of 220 min cause there are several books claiming it. A 2nd version which was approved by Leone .

Once, still if there was such a version there must have been some discussion anywhere about the differences to the 229 min version. But I never came across such a discussion, while every small difference in the other Leone films is widely discussed.  
Frayling has a 218 min version in the data part of his book, but he doesn't talk about such a version inside the book. It's always the 229 min version.
I never have read anything about differences between the Cannes version, the theatrical versions of 1984 and the actual DVD and Blu versions .

Harald Steinwender has researched the runtimes of the film from several key markets. But all the theatrical versions in France, Germany, Italy, GB and the USA have a 227 -229 min runtime. As have the DVDs. He also has the German VHS runtime of the late 80s and the TV runtime from the mid 90s (both were directly taken from a German 35 mm copy), and both also have the 229 min runtime.
The only explanation is that all the 220 min runtimes you have quoted are taken from a source which got it wrong. E.g. Cahiers du cinema surely haven't checked a theatrical copy, they took the information from another source, and that source must have made an simple error. It's the only explanation which makes sense to me.

so you are saying that the version shown in Cannes and Italy in 1984 were 9 minutes shorter than the version we all now have? (If so, do you know which scenes were removed? And more importantly,) if the Cannes article about the upcoming release is correct that it is 220 min + a new 25 mins. = 245 mins. total for the upcoming release, that means that in the upcoming version, those same 9 minutes will be removed. And that makes absolutely no sense. Even if it were true that the version released in Cannes and Italy in 1984 had 9 less minutes than the version we all now have, I find it very hard to believe that the new, restored version will add the new 25 minutes but remove those 9 minutes

you just said that PAL vs. NTSC is only applicable to tv/dv, not theaters!

So if the 1984 theatrical version was only 220 minutes, and in theaters the shorter length cannot be attributed to the PAL vs. NTSC, then it has to be that scenes were cut. How can you say that the PAL/NTSC is only applicable to dvd's, yet say that the shorter length of the theatrical release was due to faster frame rate or skipped frames? Isn't faster frame rate referring to the PAL/NTSC issue? Or are you talking about faster frame rate that has nothing to do with PAL?

I am no expert in frame rates. However, I am 98% sure that movie projectors in cinemas and big festivals have shown movies in 24fps and nothing else since this format became the norm in the 20's. I'm not saying it's technologically impossible for them to do otherwise (I have no idea, although the analog ones I saw when working in a theater a few years ago certainly could not), but I can tell you that if a film had been shown inn anything else that 24fps at Cannes in 1984, there would have been lots of talk about it. Just look at what happens with The Hobbit right now: it's the first feature film shot in 48fps, and journalists who have seen the 10min projection ONLY talk about the frame rate right now. I'd add that most wannabe film makers that are going for the "cinema look" right now all try to shoot in 24fps because it looks much more filmic to our eyes (because features have been shot and shown in 24fps for 100 years now, while other frame rates like 25 or 30 have only been used for TV and video). There is a lot of talk about frame rate right now in the movie business and the general concensus is that 24fps looks much more filmic than anything else. I'd be very surprised that someone like Leone, who definitely cared a lot about his images, would agree to show his baby in anything else than 24fps just like that. Of course, he might have preferred 25fps to 24fps because higher frame rates are more lively and more modern... But I don't buy it AND he would brag about it everywhere (just like Jackson is doing right now).

So I would be very very surprised if the version shown in Cannes in 1984 was shown in anything else than 24fps, which would mean a running time of 229 if they had the very same version we all own on DVD/BD.
Which leaves the question brought up by Once totally unanswered: what about these "3h40" running time that Leone and everyone else was talking about at the time?

Was there a beginning Overture, was there an Entr'acte/intermission in the original release that was later omitted?

Ah that's interesting: I just found a review of the 2 hours version, published in 1984.


http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9801E1D6143BF932A35755C0A962948260

They can, but they aren't. As Noodles has already said. This would be the first time ever that I have heard such a thing.

There are astonishingly much sources for that 220 min runtime, but there also as much sources for the 229 min runtime for the Cannes version. One must be wrong, and as we all have a 229 min version, and there was never any talk about added scenes to a 220 min version, or cut scenes from a 229 version (except censorical cuts), the only conclusion can be that all 220 min sources are most likely wrong.

Yes, but that relates only to the choice of the aspect ratio. Many films were made in these days in that aspect ratio because VHS and TV versions could than be shown in an open matte 1,33:1 aspect ratio.

The only thing worse than the bastardized version flunking miserably with critics and at the box office, would have been if the bastardized version had actually done well, which may have caused people to actually think it was a legitimate version. As shameful as the bastardized version was, I am so glad that it was such a colossal failure at the box office and with the critics, for that ensured that there was zero doubt as to how completely illegitimate this version was, and that the 229-minute version would come to be seen as the only version with any legitimacy. So once the miserable human filth who will rot in hell bastards at The Ladd Company destroyed this film, it is wonderful that it failed so miserably.

I have never seen the bastardized version (and don't like even being reminded that it ever existed  >:(), but whenever I do think about it, it makes me so sad for Leone. Can you imagine how heartbroken he must have been after spending a decade and a half or so dedicating himself to what is basically his life's project, and having his work destroyed by the sons of bitches in the studio?? I just hope that he knew how much everyone loved the real version, despised the fake version, admired him and loathed The Ladd Co. And that he is smiling in heaven now at the upcoming release  :)

But as we've mentioned, Frayling says, in the same line (in the Filmography on p. 541), that the Italian version was 218 mins., the UK was 228, and the USA restored print was 227. I find it hard to believe that in the very same line, he would get the USA and GB running times correct, but the Italian running time would (conveniently for us) have a typo -- especially considering all those other sources that Once provided for there being a 220-minute version.

Frayling also says in the OUATIA chapter of STDWD, (on the bottom of p. 460), that the version that screened at Cannes was the 229-minute version.

Therefore, I think it is reasonable to say that ten minutes must have been removed for Italian theaters.

So I will propose that the 1984 releases of the movie were as follows: (this is all a guess, but I think it makes sense):

The bastardized version was released in America;
The "Full Version" (ie. 227-229 mins.) played at Cannes and in the UK;
while for the Italian release, ten minutes were removed from the Full Version.

However, when the film was restored to the Full Version for release on home video, they decided to released that full version on all home video everywhere, including Italy, even though though ten minutes had been removed for Italian theaterical screenings.
(Considering that they released the Full Version on American home video even though the American theatrical version was 85 minutes shorter, is it hard to imagine that they would release the Full Version on Italian home video even though the Italian theatrical version was 10 minutes shorter?

I think this is all a very reasonable possibility considering everything we have discussed... but there is one thing that bothers me about it: The only place that Frayling mentions this 218-minute Italian version is in the Filmography; it is not mentioned anywhere in the OUATIA chapter, even though that chapter has extensive discussions on various running times; Frayling even specifically mentions that for the UK, two minutes of violence were cut (overseen by Leone), so the running time was slightly shorter than the "Fulll Version"; it was 227 mins. Now, if my proposition above is correct, it is very hard to imagine that Frayling would not have specifically mentioned that ten minutes were cut for the Italian release. Even though he does mention in the Filmography that the Italian version was 218 mins., the Filmography is just a brief source for reference, and he certainly should have mentioned it explicitly in the body of the book. That is way too important a point for Frayling to neglect to mention it in the OUATIA chapter, and therefore it makes me seriously doubt whether my proposition is correct.

Phew, now things get pretty tricky.

I have asked an Italian, but his answer adds probably to the confusion:

"I've only ever heard of the 229 min. version, but some bibliographic sources report a 227 minutes runtime and according to the website videoarcheologia.it, usually quite reliable, unlike the Warner Blu-ray and Region 1 DVD the redubbed Italian DVD edition - distributed by the same company - would have an actual runtime of "only" 224 minutes (215 PAL). But I cannot confirm."

Steinwender has researched the Italian version with 229 min.

When I check the www most articles still mention the 269 min version for Cannes this year.

as I said in a previous post, I wouldn't concern myself with the 227 mins. vs. 229 minutes issue. Frayling says a couple of minutes was cut for the UK release, just to trim some violence, but overseen and approved by Leone. So that's why some are 227 mins. And it's actually 228 mins and 40 seconds, so some may refer to it as 228 while some may use 229. The point is, I am not at all concerned with the issue of 227 vs. 229. I consider that ONE version. I am concerned over the issue of Version A (227-229 mins) vs. Version B (218-220 mins).
(Once you start focusing minute by minute, there could be ten different versions, cuz each country could have cut a different minute of violence). I think the focus should just be on the 227-229 minute Version on the one hand; and the 218-220 minute version on the other

+1 for D&D
Especially since NTSC is not exactly 24fps so on such a long movie the difference exists:

229min in 24fps = 227.7min in NTSC

Noodles, we are not talking here about NTSC and Pal runtimes.

We are only talking here about cinema runtimes.


Normally you are right, but in that case is the explanation that Leone simply got it wrong the most likely one.

Frankly said I'm a bit confused now. If there ain't a 2nd version, than what's the point? We definitely have a 229 min version. And despite your sources, most if not all other sources only have that 229 min version.

??????

Once, where do you live?

Yeah but some of the figures quoted here and there throughout the topic come from DVD running times, or versions watched on TV.
Anyway the point is to say there might be a 229 and a 220 version, but we don't care about 227 and 218 micro changes.

I swear I first saw this on a flat letterbox DVD. I definitely saw it before the special edition that's currently in circulation cmae out. Can't recall the run time though.

Drinkanddestroy - "And that he is smiling in heaven now at the upcoming release."


On the other hand, he may be frowning upon the upcoming release, given what he wrote shortly before his death:

“Then there is the very long one that has never been edited and which lasts fifty minutes longer. Four and a half hours. But we rejected the idea of two parts on TV. It is so intricate that it has to be done in one evening. And besides, let’s be honest: this one is my version. The other perhaps explained things more clearly and it could have been done on TV in two or three parts. But the version that I prefer is this one, that bit of reclusiveness is just what I like about it.”

Notice also that he said the extra 50 minutes were never edited.

Mat

Actually earlier plan was a film consisting of 2 parts with a 180 min runtime each. That's 360 min. Oh well ...

Thanks Mat - where's the quote from?

It's from Oreste De Fornari's 'Sergio Leone: The Great Italian Dream of Legendary America.' Leone discusses each of his films in a chapter called "Leone on Leone." The comments come from an interview De Fornari did with Leone in 1988.

Mat

I hope you’re right, Once. Were that true I’d feel slightly better about this restoration. But I have my doubts. When Leone says the footage “has never been edited” I’m not sure what else he could mean other than that the footage has never been edited. And Leone’s children didn’t say they found a “270 minute cut” or a “four-and-a-half hour cut.” They said they found 40 minutes of additional footage. When this was all first announced a few years ago, Raffaella said, “we want to restore forty minutes of new scenes that we have found. Mind you, we will not reassemble the film; it will stay what my father did.”

The common perception that Leone actually assembled a 270 minute cut might be a myth. Once upon a time, in 1984 to be exact, Leone planned to edit the 50 minutes into the 229 version at a later date, but he never got around to doing it.

At least that’s what it sounds like to me.

Mat

That's what I think too. The 270 min version was never constructed. And all of Leone's claims about that version are only a rough guess how long the longer version would be after the fine-cutting. Which also means there was no music for these scenes. Which also means if re-constructed by someone else, different choices would have been made for the final version.

Like with the Seydor-cut of Pat Garrett. Some of his choices would nobody else have done except himself.

based on what Frayling says, it seems that the 45-50 extra minutes Leone would have preferred to keep in the movie were complete, not unedited. We've quoted that p. 458 of STDWD many times, how Leone said he had to cut 45-50 minutes of "significant material" to get the movie down to 229 minutes. It would seem to me that cutting 45-50 minutes of "significant material" would means "significant material that was ready for release," and NOT "significant unedited raw footage which may only be 15-20 minutes once edited for release."
of course, that gives no indication one way or another as to whether those extra scenes were scored; and if necessary, dubbed. But IMO it definitely seems that the picture was in relatively, edited, releasable condition.

On the other hand, on the same page, just before saying that Leone had to very reluctantly cut between 45-50 minuted worth of "significant material," Frayling quotes Leone as saying that "his ideal running time would have been between 4:10 and 4:25"

Now, if his ideal running time would have been between 4:10 and 4:25, then in order to get down to 3:49, he would have had to cut between 21-36 minutes off his ideal running time, and not the 45-50 minutes!! When I brought up this issue a while ago, someone  it may have been ONCE, don't remember for sure) suggested that at that point, Leone was just giving very approximate numbers of the running times.

However, I'd prefer to think that Leone (and Frayling) were being accurate about the number of minutes. So perhaps we can answer that question along these same lines of the issue of raw footage vs. edited footage: Maybe we can say those 45-50 mins. of "significant material" was actually not edited footage, but footage that was in the raw stages, and it would have yielded about 21-36 minutes of final, usable footage.

So had he been able to actually use those 45-50 minutes of "significant material," that he ideally would have wanted to use, that amount of raw footage it would have would have yielded 21-36 minutes of final, usable footage, equaling a final cut of 4:10 - 4:25.


Of course, this is a very, very, very unsatisfying answer: when Frayling says that Leone had to cut 45-50 minutes of "significant material," I imagine he meant final, releasable material. So (assuming Frayling is reporting it accurately), I really don't know how Leone could say his ideal running time would have been between 4:10 and 4:25, had he been able to use those 45-50 minutes. Adding the 45-50 minutes to 3:49 should have equaled an ideal running time of 4:34 -- 4:39, and not 4:10 - 4:25. Neither suggested answer  -- that their numbers of minutes mentioned were approximate; and that the material was unedited and not final, releasable material --  is very satisfying. (Heck, maybe I can't accept those answers cuz deep deep down, I am sooooo badly hoping that somehow, there is some 5-hour version or sumthin  ;) )

--------------


Anyway, We really need someone to get in touch with someone IN THE KNOW and find out what's going on.... ;)

Good point!

I'm definitely not a fan of this kind of tinkering unless the instructions by the director are very explicit (as in the case of Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" for example) and at least some kind of approximation can be made. For me the definitive version of Pat Garrett is Peckinpah's rough cut (i.e. the TCM '88 version with the scene with Garrett's wife added back in).

Ah right, thanks. I must have read it myself then at some point, because I have read and very much enjoyed that book - the library near where I used to live happened to have a copy.

I prefer the Seydor cut, despite some big flaws.

Was there anyone more in the know than Leone?

"Then there is the very long one that has never been edited and which lasts fifty minutes longer."

 Straight from the lion's mouth, so to speak.

Mat

yeah, but is that necessarily  the one that is going to be released now?

Which one else?

All in all, why not simply stop speculating and wait until it was screened in Cannes? Which is not that far now.

Agreed the speculations are now driving me nuts  :D

we've tried that a few times, but it didn't take. We're gonna keep speculating till the movie screens at Cannes. Then we're gonna speculate about the dvd.... ;)

we are just beating a dead horse at the moment.

wtf are message boards for?  ;)

but its getting redundant and boring.

too bad you're a moderator and have to read every post....  ;)

so all this excitement for just 16 extra minutes?

That would be about this biggest downer I could ever imagine   :'(

Going from 50 to 16minutes is a huge downer. But don't forget the main point: 16 unreleased minutes shot by Leone/delli colli would still be the greatest news of the year :)

So you mean the very worst case scenario is that we could only get 25 minutes of unreleased scenes that does not works very well with the version we know? I'll still buy the BD and dance naked in the streets if that's what happens (as long as the new scenes are better than the grotto scene).

Once - my comments had not a whit to do with running times. My only concern is whether the new footage, however much there is, had already been edited. Leone's comment explicitly states it never was.

Mat

true, if we'd been told a few years ago that we'd get an extra 16 minutes, we'd say it was the best news of the year. But after expecting 45-50 minutes, 16 minutes is a downer. o well, we'll have to wait and see.

Once, you may want to kill me, but despite all what Leone had said about the film's runtime, and despite all that sources which claim a 218 -220 min runtime, I'm still 99 % sure that there was never another uncut version than the 229 min version we all know.

If such a shorter version had existed and was then extended to a 229 min runtime, this would have been documented in all the books written by about Leone.

And it would be totally absurd now to delete these 9 min again. Why should they do such a stupidity?

Most of my sources only claim the 229 min version, cause there wasn't another one.

Sure one should think that the director should know it best, but such things happen, and maybe it was Leone himself who got confused himself about the various runtimes for which the film was conceived, and was himself the only original source for all these mistakes.

There is lot of doubtless evidence for the existence of the 229 min version, but none for the shorter version.

either way, I am sure that whatever extra material we get with the new release, it will be in addition to the 229 minutes we currently have; they will not be removing those 9 minutes under any circumstances. I'd be willing to bet any amount of money on that at 10-1 odds

The only way that removing 9 minutes would make sense is if conflicts with some of the newly restored material.  :'(

Link from The Independent with a little information on added scenes.


http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/martin-scorsese-breathes-new-life-into-gangster-classic-once-upon-a-time-in-america-7746578.html

I'm excited to see McGovern perform Cleopatra. Should be nice seeing Louis Fletcher in there too, not sure how much that will add to the movie though. Pretty disappointing that it's still not Leone's preferred version though.

this article also says 25 extra minutes for a total of 245 minutes.... who knows wtf the truth is....

 ::)

245: http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/festival/CannesClassics.html (http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/festival/CannesClassics.html)
253: http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/11255488/year/2012.html (http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/11255488/year/2012.html)

I really want to withhold judgment until I see the movie.

With that said, it seems as if they may not restore all the scenes that Leone had to cut to get down to 229 minutes (Frayling lists those scenes on p. 458 of STDWD).

I really hope that they restore the scenes with Darlanne Fleugel as Eve. I think those are really important. Noodles is mourning losing Deborah, and the next thing you know he is on the beach with Eve, and Noodles and Max are talking business in front of her. It is very jarring to see that without their meeting and relationship first being introduced. (Yes, it is slightly less jarring cuz we already saw Eve in the opening scene, and in the speakeasy on the final night. But it is weird nonethless).
Nice to hear that the scenes with Louise Fletcher at the cemetery -- which should explaining more about the mausoleum and recording of Cockeye's Song.


And btw, before we get too worried about this not being Leone's preferred version, let's remember that Frayling gets his math a bit muddled: First he says that that Leone preferred a cut between 4:10--4:25, and then he says that Leone had to cut 45-50 minutes of significant material from his preferred cut. Well, 45-50 minutes added to 3:49 = between 4:34 -- 4:39 minutes, not 4:10--4:25 . I don't know which of the two statements by Frayling (which occur in the same paragraph on p. 458 of STDWD ) are accurate. However, if the statement that Leone's preferred cut was 4:10--4:25 is the one that is accurate, then we may indeed be getting something very close to what Leone ideally wanted: 25 restored minutes added to 3:49 = a new version of 4:14.


I'd add that on that page, Frayling lists 8 different "items" that were cut, which means a total of much more than 8 scenes (eg. McGovern's performances are listed as one item, even though it is two different performances, one from 1933 and one from 1968). I listed those cut items at this post http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=1302.msg146469#msg146469

Based on the pace of the movie and Leone's style of filmmaking, I'd have to guess that there is no way that all the material that Frayling lists will be able to be restored in only 25 minutes.
But I hope that Scorcese and the Leone children restore the important scenes

This is translated from this site (http://www.rbcasting.com/eventi/festival-cannes/2012/05/16/c%E2%80%99era-una-volta-in-america-di-sergio-leono-sequenze-inedite-a-cannes-65/)... (FIXED link)

Thanks for that.

FYI that link you posted to the site doesn't work

If I understand that article correctly, it says they've restored 26 minutes to the film. Subtracting 26 from 4 hrs. 19 minutes doesn't quite get me to 229, but it's pretty close.

Then we have now 4 "officially" announced runtimes: 270 ; 259 ; 253 ; 245

Terrific

May be the difference between the 245min and the 270min versions is only the intermission.

so in other words, we don't know shit, and the last 5 pages of this thread have been a complete waste of time........

well, the movie screens at Cannes tomorrow night. I am sure we will hear more reports over the weekend, though I am not confident that they will all necessarily be correct, or the same. The reporters will probably list whatever "official" time is listed on the program or whatever, rather than timing it themselves. So we may not know anything for sure until the dvd is released ;)

There's a cut scene in which Noodles catches a glimpse of Deborah sitting at a table in the train station and then follows her along the track (before she leaves for Hollywood). I remember reading that Leone was very fond of this sequence. I thought it was mentioned in Frayling's book, but I can't find it. Anyone have the reference?

Mat

Hello People

Does anyone know if the new cut will be given a widespread run in cinemas, at least arthouses and their like?

I'd love to immerse myself in  darkened theatre for 4 hours ( or thereabouts!) and gaze on a full size projection of the masterwork for a second time .

we are hopeful

In the meantime, if you are in the New York area, you can immerse yourself in a darkened theater for a month and watch Leone's and other spaghetti westerns, which are playing at the Film Forum in Manhattan throughout June 2012 http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=11250.0
But from the way you spelled "theatre," I take it you are not American?

http://trovacinema.repubblica.it/multimedia/copertina/cannes-cera-una-volta-con-26-minuti-in-piu-scena-tagliata/31846181

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6Ss-jUGbl4&feature=player_embedded#

Leone: "I prefer is this one, that bit of reclusiveness is just what I like about it.”  I saw the scene with Louise Fletcher.  It only answered very obvious things.  Sergio created his masterpiece by being to forced to whittle it down to the utmost important scenes.  And it give it that "reclusiveness" or sense of mystery that keeps us intrigued and using our brain throughout the movie.  Also, I dislike the razor-sharp focus of the new scenes.

From this comment it sounds like a re-run of the GBU "restoration," adding scenes that aren't strictly essential to the film because they exist. I'm still inclined to pass.

Yeah, that Fletcher scene doesn't do much for me. But I wonder if the scene of Noodles following Deborah in the train station is in there. The whole sequence (from the date to intermission) is probably my favorite set of scenes in any movie ever. Absolutely perfect.

EDIT: http://blogs.indiewire.com/pressplay/cannes-2012-once-upon-a-time-in-america-restored#

Great description of the added scenes. I'm interested in seeing Deborah's Cleopatra performance, and especially the additional scene after the car flies off the dock. Sounds great.

Doesn't sound like the train scene is there. No big deal. Thinking about it, I don't think changing a thing about that sequence could make it any better...probably just worse.

Yes, it is. I've got the breakdown of the scenes here:

http://notesofafilmfanatic.com/

Thank you, amazing article. However I'm worried about the break to meet Eve between the rape and the train scene. The transition from the limo leaving to the brief train station scene to the intermission is, like I said, absolutely perfect. The extra scenes might ruin that flow for me.

Thanks! I know what you mean. I've been watching the 229-minute version for over twenty years, so I suspect this version is going to take some getting used to. Did you see this in the comments section - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ

Great article Mat! I'm not so sure about the "The common perception among fans that Leone assembled a 270-minute cut back in 1984 is a myth." part (since the common perception among fans (probably depending on what you call "fan") seems more to be "I WANT TO SEE THE 270min director's cut!!!!"), but once again, great great article with lots of insights. I had lost track of what the deleted scenes are and what the players said about it at the time. Thanks!

Awesome - thanks! And great article too  O0

So, the re-inserted footage is all of inferior quality to the surrounding elements, and we get a noticeable drop in image quality every time we move from the standard cut to the newly-added scenes? That being the case, I would have preferred to have the scenes as extras and not as re-inserted footage.

Not an apt comparison. The scenes (except for the one in the grotto) were all Sergio-approved and always existed in the Italian cut. So the scenes weren't actualy "added" back in, just the new audio for the scenes that were never originally dubbed in English.

However, the fact that the Grotto Scene was taken out of the Italian cut by Sergio himself is by itself a powerful argument that it should not be in the film.

Morricone looks amazing! I guess he's going to live forever.

Matt - Thanks for your great article yesterday.

I really should avoid knowing anything about the new scenes and wait until I see the restored movie in theaters or dvd. But I sure don't have that kind of self-control, so now that I've read all about the new scenes (and seen some clips already) I will give some preliminary thoughts about each of the restored scenes, though of course, I am reserving final judgment until I actually see the entire restored movie.

Here goes:


--------------------------------------------------------
CEMETERY SCENE WITH LOUISE FLETCHER AND LIMO, AND LIMO BLOWING UP OUTSIDE BAILEY ESTATE

The parts with Louise Fletcher are good. The explanation about the construction of the mausoleum and the recording of Cockeye's tune was definitely helpful; it's one of the elements in the movie that -- while it certainly works as is -- probably could have used a but more explaining, and this helps. Fletcher's performance is perfect (as expected), and the added part about her trying to sell Noodles a plot in the cemetery is very good; it enhances the themes passage of time, and how this is all a dance of death, etc.

As for the part with the limo tailing Noodles, who then sees it blow up outside the Bailey mansion (before watching it on the newscast at Fat Moe's): One the one hand, maybe it tells you a bit too clearly that Bailey is involved with Noodles's return? In the 229-minute version, that part isn't yet that clear at that point, and I am not so sure that showing all that is necessary. But on the other hand, perhaps it is good that we see the limo following Noodles and then blowing up; it explains why Noodles is following this story on tv. In the 229-minute version, it just cuts from the car in the river to Noodles watching this broadcast, with no explanation as to why he cares about it. Once we know that he has seen the car following blown up, we know why he is following the story, and why Fat Moe asks him "Did you know those guys?" I suppose that it works as is, cuz Fat Moe knew that Noodles knew union guys back in the day. But once we see the limo following him, it clearly establishes that this Bailey story has something to do with why he is back (earlier than we knew it in the 229-minute version), and this newscast about the Bailey story seems more relevant to us, and doesn't seem like it comes out of nowhere


-------------------------------
EXTENDED "SWIMMING" SCENE AFTER CAR PLUNGES INTO RIVER
This scene is nice: though not necessary for the narrative, it serves as a counterpart to a similar scene with the boys in the river as youngsters, and it is a further depiction of the friendship between Max and Noodles.

-----------------------------------

NOODLES'S CONVERSATION WITH THE CHAUFFEUR

This is definitely good. While not in any way essential for the narrative, it is a nice bit explaining how the Jewish community despised Jewish gangsters (which is mentioned in The Hoods; and also distinguishes this movie from The Godfather, which I am sure was very important for Leone); and also discusses how in Noodles's mind, the choice was to become a gangster and get rich, or go to school and take the straight path and hope that one day perhaps you will be able to make a half-decent living. That point, about gangsters justifying the choices they made, has been made in so many movies involving gangsters that come from poor backgrounds (an early scene in The Public Enemy comes to mind as just one example, where the young Cagney says of his older brother, "he's going to school... he's learning how to be poor!), and in that sense is another piece of the homage that OUATIA is to gangster movies.


----------------------------------------
NOODLES'S MEETING WITH EVE

These scenes are extremely important. the fact that Eve just seems to show up out of nowhere, and is obviously so close to Noodles that she is there when they are discussing the Federal reserve job, is one of the most glaring problems with the narrative in the 229-minute version. So it is great that they added these scenes in.

I am just not sure why they did not include ALL the scenes with Eve? In the scenes that are restored, Noodles and Eve just have that one night together, where Noodles passes out before anything happens, and the he find the note she leaves him in the morning, saying THANK YOU, signed, Deborah. But that's all. Next time you see her, she is on the beach with them, as they are talking about the Federal reserve job. That is MUCH better, but not as good as if they'd have restored all of Eve's scenes:

What actually happens is this: Noodles initially notices Eve's great cleavage, and then brings her back to his hotel, in the restored scenes.... In unrestored scenes we see that on his way out of the hospital after leaving Jimmy, Noodles is in the elevator and sees girl with this great cleavage -- it is Eve, who is visiting the hospital. He then makes up to meet her again, and they go to his hotel room, where he gives her this gift of a bunch of large-cupped bras, and then Noodles finds out that... Eve is actually flat and  wears falsies! (This scene appears in The Hoods, btw).
 Then Max and Carol walk into the room and invite them down to Florida.

I think they should have restored ALL of these scenes, because: Max is always interfering with Noodles's love life: as a kid, he interrupts their making out, then when Noodles gets out of prison and he meets Deborah at the speakeasy, Max calls Noodles into the side room to discus business with Frankie and Joe. (Both times she teases him, "Go on Noodles, your mother's calling you!") In the scenes with Eve, Max interrupts him for (what he thinks is) vacation not business, but still, the point is that Noodles is a romantic, and he basically has to choose between Max and his love life. Furthermore, on the first night Noodles met Eve, he was just using her as a substitute for Deborah; in the later scene, we actually see them becoming close as a couple.

So the restored scenes with Eve are IMO the most important of all the restored scenes, though I wish they had actually restored them all. But at least restoring the ones they did explains how eve came into the picture, and therefore that is great news.

----------------------------------------------

DEBORAH IN RESTAURANT BEFORE SHE GETS ON TRAIN

Well, it's 35 seconds, and once they are doing the restoration, why not? But it doesn't seem to be all that important for the narrative.

----------------------------------------------

ELDERLY DEBORAH PERFORMS SHAKESPEARE, AS NOODLES WATCHES

Elizabeth McGovern didn't think this scene was appropriate, and that it just slows down the action (She also doesn't seem that confident that she was able to do Shakespeare well, so who knows if the reason she is happy the scene was cut from the 229-minute version is cuz she didn't give a good performance in that scene?  ;))

I think it is helpful to make a break between Noodles's meeting the elderly Carol at the Bailey Foundation's rest home, and him meeting Deborah at her dressing room. In the 229-minute version, it seems as if the theater is in the same place; we just see Carol talking to Noodles and then it goes straight to Noodles in her dressing room. So I like this scene if, for nothing else, separating the scene in Carol's rest home with the scene in Deborah's dressing room, which were NOT in the same building.

I just don't understand why they wouldn't restore the scene of Noodles watching Deborah perform in 1933 before their date; while it may not be important for the narrative, wouldn't it be nice as a "counterpart" or contrast" to the scene of Deborah performing 35 years later?

---------------------------------------------

THE ELDERLY JIMMY O'DONNEL AND BAILEY TALK IN BAILEY'S STUDY

I don't think there is anything that would not be understood without this scene, unless you want to get into the "moral" aspect of it, how O'Donnell avoided mistakes, but Max screwed up, etc. So it is not necessary strictly from a narrative point of view, but it may bring out some of the movie's themes (which are certainly more important than the narrative in a Leone movie!)

Actually, I wonder whether this may weaken the meeting between Noodles and Bailey? In the 229-minute version, we have no idea what is going to be said at that meeting; only then do we find out that Bailey brought Noodles back to kill him. But when we see the scene with O'Donnell telling Bailey to kill himself, I wonder if that may be bad for two reasons: a) when Bailey announces that he wants to die, it is not shocking anymore; and b) if Bailey has been planning his death all along -- bringing Noodles back for it -- then why the special mention of it by O'Donnell? In other words, isn't O'Donnell's mention of Bailey having to die meant to be a surprise? if it turns out that bailey had been planning it all along anyway, then what is the big deal? That O'Donnell is saying it has to be TONIGHT? Well Bailey had already invited Noodles to the party, so he intended it to be that night anyway, no? I just do not see what this does.

-------------------------------------

3 more thoughts on the restored version:

1) Of the scenes that were NOT restored, the two that bother me most (in addition to the ones with Eve and Deborah's performance that I mentioned in the previous post) are:

     A) the ones with Bugsy's arrest -- that explains why he wants to kill the gang, and why the gang takes over his job; and
      B) some of the ones with elderly Carol -- some of the elderly Carol's dialogue discusses a wrong version of Eve's death, and is therefore inconsistent with Eve's death as portrayed in the opening scene. But i wonder if they could have at least kept some of it in, like the part when Noodles first goes to the rest home. That would explain more of how he came to meet Carol, and The Bailey Foundation, rather than having it appear out of nowhere as it does now. If it is possible to include some more of the scenes with Carol without including the parts where she says Eve killed herself, then they should have. (I am not sure if those parts where Carol has an alternate version of Eve's death were shot before they wrote the opening scene showing Eve's death; or if perhaps it is meant to be there, showing that Carol doesn't know wtf she is talking about; after all, she was wrong about Max's death too! Or if perhaps it is meant to question the opening scene's truth, and therefore make the point that we never know wtf is going on?!)

-------------------------------------------


2) My general feeling is that you want to include any possible additional scenes you can get your hands on, unless you know Leone did not want it there. (Like the Tuco in the Cave scene, which Leone himself removed and Cocksucker John Jerk of MGM put back; that never should have been anything other than an extra feature on the dvd). The more we can see that Leone wanted, the better.

Of course, even if Leone had indeed been allowed to make a version as long as he wanted, we do not know with 100% certainty what footage he would have kept. But I think I can say with confidence that the restored version is closer to what Leone would have ideally wanted than the 229-minute version.

---------------------------------------

3) The picture quality looks awful on the clips we have seen: the color is terrible. everything looks very dark, kind of like those color videos of World War 2 fMGM chose not to restore the full-length Tuco Beating Scene in GBU due to the picture's poor quality; I just watched that clip, and it is FAR better than the quality of the restored scenes of OUATIA that I have seen in these clips).

Whether or not you prefer the restored version of the movie, the fact is that if the quality of the restored scenes on the dvd will indeed be noticeably different than the rest of the movie, then I don't know if fans will ever be able to consider the restored version  to be "the definitive version." In your mind, it has to flow seamlessly and blend into a single piece in order to have a chance of actually being considered "a version of OUATIA" rather than just  "a version of OUATIA plus a few added scenes." i mean, if they were to actually like 50 minutes or so, then it's enough that it would be considered part of the movie; those scenes would be like 1/6 of the movie, so it wouldn't be as jarring when those scenes come on, cuz it would be more often. But as it is now, with these restored scenes being less than 1/10 of the movie, it will be too jarring when they come on here and there to ever consider them a real part of one movie. So if on the dvd, the quality of the restored scenes will never be better than what it looks like on those few clips that have been posted to Youtube, and no new scenes will ever be added, then I think you can probably ever forget about this ever actually being considered a legitimate single "version" of the movie; rather, it'll just be, "the 229-minute  version plus a few added scenes."

Perhaps you're right in making that distinction. Let me put it this way: is the English GBU missing anything in its 161 minute version?

It depends what you mean by "missing." As for the narrative, let's say nothing is missing. (IMO the Angel Eyes at the fort scene is the only part that is essential, but you think that is not essential, and I will concede that point momentarily for the sake of argument).

But especially in a Leone movie, narrative is not everything. It's the cinematography, the way scenes are shot, the editing, the music, the themes of the movie, the pace, a piece of satire, etc. (Eg. even if you deleted the entire Ecstacy of Gold sequence and the entire Triello sequence except the last 5 seconds of each, you could also make the argument that the narrative is not harmed in the slightest way -- yet those are probably the 2 most important scenes in the movie, and also in cinema history).

A few examples from the deleted scenes in GBU: the Angel Eyes at the fort scene A) has a beautiful versio of Morricone's civil war theme, and puts a little humanity in even an SOB like Angel Eyes; you see that even he is shocked by the carnage. I just watched Frayling's commentary again yesterday (it is simply amazing) and during that scene, he mentioned a reference to a Charlie Chaplin movie where a mass murderer says at his trial that yes he killed, but nothing like Roosevelt and Stalin. So as evil as Angel Eyes is, it is nothing compared to the brutalities of war. The deleted scene of Blondie and Tuco traveling in the coach after leaving the Mission San Antonio has some dialogue about the corpses not being worried about anything; again, some themes of the civil war. The deleted scene between Angel Eyes and the commandant of Union camp has Angel Eyes making some of the very same arguments in defending his brutality as the head of Andersonville did when he was brought to trial -- we were understaffed and underfunded, brutality was necessary to keep order.

So it depends what you mean when you ask whether that version is "missing." Even if it does not harm the narrative one iota, Leone's scenes have much more than just narrative, and the scenes are mostly enjoyable to watch. And while I think a couple of the added scenes are still useless, the fact is that several of them are important; and I will take the extra 16 minutes even if it means that 8 of those  minutes will be useless.

Furthermore, I think the 161 minute version is missing simply cuz it is not Leone's preferred version. Nobody is perfect including Leone, and any one of us has every right to disagree with him on anything, so of course you may believe the 161-minute version is preferable. But especially in the hands of a Master like Leone, I believe that it is inherently deficient if it is not his preferred version, unless there is something so glaringly terrible in there, (like if he had chosen to keep the Cave scene in there, then I would say yes, it is better without that scene. But the fact that he voluntarily deleted the Cave Scene, the Socorro Scene, and the Harmonica Rising Scene from OUATITW, shows that he is being honest in editing, and putting in what he believes is best for the movie, and not just pushing for all of his material to be used). IMO there is certainly enough to be gained from those extra scenes  that make it worthwhile to have them in there. I am certainly happy that we have the version of GBU that Leone wanted us to see.

Except the added scenes mainly serve narrative, or at least explanatory purposes. Only the cuts to the desert scene are strictly non-functional.

As i discussed in the post above, the scenes with Angel Eyes at the Fort, Blondie & Tuco traveling after they leave the Mission, and Angel Eyes speaking to the commandant of Betterville, all serve important functions related to themes (and in some cases, musical themes) about the Civil War.

Themes already present in the shorter version.

the shorter version does not have Angel Eyes witnessing -- and being saddened by -- the destructiveness of war, nor does it him excusing the brutality to the commandant.

btw, maybe you should copy the posts from this thread and the other OUATIA thread and post them all in a single new thread in the GBU Board? (I don't know how to do it, but i am sure you do). I don't wanna clog up the OUATIA board with discussion about GBU.

I will happily concede that the GBU restoration is (aside from the grotto scene) closer to Leone's vision, though that's not my main point. I think the discussion here is at least loosely germane to the general topic, no need for a new thread.

So I think we can agree on this:

Groggy's Preferred Version: old dvd (with 161 minute feature, other scenes as special features)

Sergio Leone's Preferred Version: new dvd, minus the Cave Scene

Just in case anyone's gonna be in France in September:

http://www.lefilmfrancais.com/109841/il-etait-une-fois-en-amerique-de-retour-dans-les-salles


"Once Upon a Time in America back in theaters. Carlotta Films will release the new version, extended and restored, the masterpiece by Sergio Leone in French theaters in September."

How does the sound remix factor into your theory?

Can't speak for Drink, but here's how it lays with me: When watching GBU, I prefer the shorter cut; when watching BBC, I prefer the standard (longer) cut.

So now the playing of Cockeye's tune in the mausoleum is diegetic? That isn't an audio memory that Noodles is experiencing, that the audience gets to share? Noodles is actually hearing it playing through some kind of amazing-for-1968 sound system cleverly hidden in the "haven"? Well, that right there ruins things for me. Not to mention the fact that its presence is "explained" in a way that raises more questions than it answers. Max had a tape of Cockeye playing his theme? A tape from a performance from 1933 or earlier? Did Cockeye cut a record once and Max saved it and committed it to tape once that format became generally available? Or was Max able to remember the tune so well that later he transcribed it for a musician who was able to perform just as Cockeye had all those years ago? And all just to be able to get to Mr. Williams' poise at the proper moment. I call BS on this whole element.

The black limo also raises questions that aren't answered: so, later, Noodles sees it blown up. So what? Do we ever find out who was inside, why they were following Noodles, who they were working for? If not, then it's just there to be mysterious and menacing? Like we need that?

Contrast this with the frisbee scene, where less is explained, but we get plenty of mystery and menace, to say nothing of a bit of Noodles' paranoia.

I don't know Jinkies, the music always seemed diegetic to me. You'll notice that it starts and stops when Noodles opens/closes the crypt door.

You're dead right on the plausibility issue though. Too much exposition tends to undermine credibility. In the shorter version the music's a nice style touch, without much reason to think it over. Having a deadeningly literal explanation of it ruins the effect.

As for the limo it's just too obvious a touch for me. Maybe the initial shot of it lurking in the background could have worked. The prolonged bit with it slowly creeping away, in plain daylight, for everyone in New York to see? Come on. Someone like Max who's made a life being discreet isn't going to be that brazenly stupid.

yes, the music is definitely playing in the mausoleum. Cockeye's Tune is rather simple, don't think it would be too hard for someone to make a recording of it.

I agree that the limo tailing Noodles perhaps makes things a bit too literal, and too much into a detective story; this story is more about Noodles exploring his past, than a detective story with cars following you and blowing up. So maybe the limo as shown is too literal. But I do like some explanation for why Noodles is so interested in this Bailey scandal. As it plays in the 229MV, there is really no reason for why Noodles is so interested in that story, and we get the idea that it somehow has to do with his quest, but with no justification for it.

A) It's not "my theory." I've yet to find one person who disagrees that Leone's preferred version of GBU is the one shown in the MGM SE minus the Cave Scene.

B) I'd tried avoiding discussing sound cuz I really don't know anything about it at all. My understanding is that you can choose the old mono track, if you want the movie to sound exactly as it did in 1968; and that they changed the gunshots for the SE cuz John Jerk says the old gunshots wouldn't fit with the new remastered sound. I really don't know much about audio so I've never discussed that. (Though from what i understand the DYS dvd absolutely butchers the audio, and that bothers me, knowing that eg. the musical cues are wrong).

I don't know that the limo necessarily syncs up with Bailey. Was there an additonal scene with him tracking down the plate number? It's a cool idea but done far too obviously.

Yes.

There is another added scene where Noodles sees a limo with the same plate number blow up outside the bailey mansion. That is why he is so interested in the newscast of that story -- he knows that the limo that blew up has been tailing him, and that this unfolding Bailey scandal therefore has something to do with why he was brought back

Okay, cool. That makes sense.

Mat Viola has a breakdown of all the added scenes here http://notesofafilmfanatic.com/ the one in question is 2b)

truth is, with this limo element, this becomes more of a detective story. As it is now in the 229MV, sure Noodles has come back to find something, but he is more clueless as to what it is, and it is more internal -- coming to terms with his past. With the limo element added, it becomes something perhaps a bit closer to the classic PI story.
That may well have been Leone's intention -- Leone said that OUATIA is meant as an homage to film noir (though I believe he was talking more about the gangster movies than the PI movies). But it does change the story of Noodles's return. To that extent, I am not so sure that this is the best way to do it. What I mean to say is, I think the story makes a bit more sense now that we know why Noodles has become interested in the Bailey scandal; but I wonder whether this was the best way to do it.

Also, as Mat explains, this changes one of the visual transitional elements: in the 229MV, we cut from Noodles driving the car into the river in 1933 to the newscast of the car being blown up.

But in the new version, here is how it works:

 after Noodles drives the car into the river, the boys get out of the car and play around in the water, until Max becomes frantic because Noodles has pretended to drown -- a parallel to a scene from their childhood. Then, we cut from the car in the river to the car blowing up outside the Bailey mansion, as Noodles watches; then, we cut from that car blowing up in front of the mansion, to the shots of the car on the tv newscast. Makes a bit more sense in the visual transitions.

---------------------

There's no doubt that this new version will take some getting used to. I, for one, am willing to give it a serious chance at being the "definitive version" ... but only once I see it. Maybe I am subconsciously just trying to put a brave face on something that deep down I am afraid will disappoint me. Who knows. All I know is that this may be the last time we ever get to see Leone footage for the first time. (That sentence makes about as much sense as Raquel Welch in Bandolero, but what the hell  ;))

a) Yes that's definitely the Leone version, but as most of us have lived so many years with the 161 min version (without missing anything) it is only natural that people are less tolerant to the Leone version. I prefer the Leone version (175 min), but would be glad if Leone had cut 2 of the "new" scenes. The others I like very much.

b) The problem with the audio is that you cannot chose. The mono track isn't added, and that's not excusable. They shouldn't have the right to alter the audio track, and if they still like to do their 5.1. games, they should have at least also remastered the original mono audio. And it is a big disappointment that the Blu still does not contain the mono track.
Adding new noises to a film (only to make the film compatible to modern audience's likings = to sell more DVDs) is like saying present-day audiences want that the sky looks yellow, let's change the color, or that there should be more blood, let's add some digital blood splashs, or smoking is not pc any more, let's get rid of Eastwood's cigarillos.

Are you making that assumption from the material that's on YouTube or has somebody actually confirmed this? I don't know why they would release inferior material on the Internet but that's always a possibility.

And concerning the shortness of the added material, I hope you all have read this: http://www.festival-cannes.fr/en/theDailyArticle/59209.html So basically they added all the cut material they could find.

I'm sorry if I'm repeating something brought up earlier in the thread.

Some more clips... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ

so do you think this means that they put back in all the footage they could find?

That would explain a lot. I couldn't understand why they would only restore 25 minutes, but if that's all they could find, that makes sense. I sure hope that they put back in all the footage they could find

Thanks. O0

According to what one of the restoration guys says (excerpted in MatViola's article above):

Looking at the clips on Youtube the loss in quality is evident. At first I didn't think the Youtube stuff was an accurate representation of the final images, but after reading the quote above it is what I now fear.

if the difference in quality is that different, then I don't know if anyone will ever truly consider the 4:15 version the "definitive version." The only way it could possibly be is if it flowed seamlessly, and this sure does not.

I wish that woman who is talking over that YouTube clip would shut the hell up so we could see the scenes!

On Twitter I asked the guy who wrote that glowing review on Indiewire, Simon Abrams, if there was a discernible difference in the visual quality of the new scenes or if they were seamlessly integrated and he said, "discernible, for sure."

Not good.

Mat

The recent Metropolis "restoration" did something similar, intercutting footage of markedly inferior quality into the standard cut. The contrast was jarring, making the viewing experience really unpleasant.

Apparently there was title card shown stating that the newly restored material was originally printed for reference purposes and that they cleaned them up as much as they could.

They'll looks less distracting by the time they make it to DVD but still...

I'm happy to be finally seeing these scenes and at least they didn't need to be re-dubbed!     

Still, they should have been supplied as extras on a new DVD/Blu-ray, not re-integrated into the film.

For those who will always consider the 229MV as the definitive version, and these new scenes just as extra features, worry not: they will always sell dvd's of the 229MV; this new version will not change that.

Did you want them to issue new dvd's with the 229MV of the movie, plus these new scenes as special features? No way would that happen. As soon as they did that, unofficial "fan edits" would be made, of the whole movie with those scenes added in the appropriate places. And I would try as hard as I could to get one of those fan edits.... Once you are going to buy a new dvd just to get these scenes, why not have them put back in so you could watch what the movie looks like with these scenes? even if this version won't be the "definitive version," issuing a dvd of the entire movie including those scenes is the only sensible thing IMO.

I think that having dvd's of both the 229MV and this new version works just fine. Just like GBU, where both versions are available on dvd, which should satisfy fans of both versions

Since I seem like a close-minded ass through this thread, I'll clarify my position. I'm not uninterested in seeing the restored version. However, based on evidence presented, I'm very skeptical that it will be worthwhile.

Thanks. A sad story, to be sure. It's incredible how people (in 1984!) or Leone himself did not preserve the original negatives.

However I gotta disagree with you here:
I've only seen the movie once - the 2010 restoration on a big screen with live music - so I can't really compare it with the better known version, but I didn't mind the newly added material so much. Sure, I noticed the huge difference in the image quality but it didn't really bother me. I'm sure though that the case will be different with OUATIA as I've seen the picture before (and the color is such a huge factor).

Anyway, I'm happy if I can see the restored version as a whole because I want to see how the added scenes fit into the story/flow of the movie. If/when this version is released on DVD/BD, you can always watch the added scenes separately and still have the old version on another DVD.

I think that is a very fair position to take. I'd would just try to really, really keep an open mind until I see the new movie; otherwise, there is no chance that you will like it. And while I am very happy that this material was released, that is basically what i am trying to do: keep an open mind about the possibility that I may or may not view it as the definitive version, and not make any decisions until I see it.

-----------

As for the discussions on the quality: I don't know anything about this sort of technical stuff, film deterioration and preservation, and where these prints of all the footage was supposed to be stored. So I am speaking out of my ass, but for whatever it's worth I will say that I can't imagine how the hell they fucked up the preservation of the film this.

For films made decades ago, in which the belief was that after it ran in theaters for a few months it would never be seen again, I understand. Even after television came in, I don't know if they ever ran extra footage from a movie, so I understand that studios would feel no need to preserve extra footage. And even after home video began ( was it in the late 70's?) the videotapes only had the feature film and no extra features or "director's cuts," so I understand why they never felt a need to preserve the extra footage.

But with OUATIA, the running time issue is part of the story of the movie. The discussion about longer versions has been around since the day the movie was released! They have been talking about this in one way or another since forever! So how the hell they allowed it to deteriorate like this -- and not even to keep a copy; they had to track the copies down from various crazy places -- seems crazy.

Okay, I think I'm about to make d&d's day. I found the following article (in French) which has some very interesting info, including a quote from Scorsese saying he knew Leone wanted these 20 minutes added back in. It also mentions the possibility of adding another 20 minutes to it in the near future. Alas, the article also talks a little about the graininess of the footage (though the translation isn't so good).

Here's the link: http://www.ecranlarge.com/article-details-22911.php (http://www.ecranlarge.com/article-details-22911.php)

Here's the translation:

Announced for many months with varying lengths of time, assembly of novel Once Upon a Time in America was projected with great fanfare as part of Cannes Classics including the presence of Robert De Niro, James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern and Jennifer Connelly ( who made his film debut at 13 years for this film).

Sergio Leone's film, restored by the Cinematheque of Bologna, has been discovered for the first time in a version of 4:13. So it's 24 minutes that were uncovered novel with a careful integration even if unable to work on the material of the first generation makes it perfectly detectable new sequences. Blame it on a grain, a calibration and a definition necessarily different mounting film that we know.

Very active in this restaurant since it is its foundation, The Film Foundation, which funded the transaction through the generous donation of $ 2 million from the fashion house Gucci, Martin Scorsese told our colleagues in the World: "In the case of Once Upon a Time in America, I know that Leone wanted those twenty minutes are restored. "

We are thus dealing with the version closest to the present time - Scorsese mentioned the possibility in the near future to add another twenty minutes - of what is now called the director's cut of Once Upon a Time in America. If, again, the visual changes between the sequences is detrimental to the aesthetic harmony of the work, it is undeniable that some of the new scenes provide insight essential to the story.

If the appearance of Louise Fletcher, so far only credited in the credits, as director of the cemetery, was far more the media's failure, it is far from that was most lacking in the story. Unlike the character of Eve, the prostitute Noodles (De Niro) meets in a bar, after raping Deborah (Elizabeth McGovern) in the car. A long sequence vital to discover the dismay of Noodles, regretting his act in a night of love almost pathetic when he tries to imagine Deborah instead of Eve - he even gives his name. Right after, we also discover Deborah have a coffee before catching his train, with his face still shocked by the tragic event happened. A tragedy of the two characters who suffer in their own way and the drama that gives meaning to the much heavier exchanged brief look on the station platform.

In the final moments of the film, we discover a scene now essential to understand the impossible situation in which there is the Secretary of State Bailey (thus verily Max played by James Woods). The footage shows James Conway (Treat Williams) forcing Bailey to sign papers making him almost lose everything and suggesting starting to end his days to avoid scandal unborn awaited his appearance in court. The desire to end Max and by the hand of his old friend, is so much more understandable. And the scene to show that the big winner in history is the character of Conway, obvious metaphor for an America where workers control anyone, holds the real power.

Among other additions, less vital to the enrichment of the story, we remain skeptical about lengthening the sequence where the dips Noodles car into the sea showing his friends worried about not seeing him rise to the surface. It is not known whether the sequence was originally intended to hear what the actors were saying, but then rise in the state, only the music of Morricone is present and the minutes are not the most successful.

The sequence of discussion between Noodles and his driver (played by the producer, Arnon Milchan) before they go out to dinner with Deborah, can show a big difference in perspective on life between the two men and a rising tensions that will resonate in the driver's reaction when he condemns rape by her boss.

Finally, the reunion between Noodles and Deborah are now preceded by a scene where we see Noodles discover the actress on stage in the process of interpreting the role of Cleopatra.

The discovery of this new version of Once Upon a Time in America, was in any event, a highlight of the festival. And especially the opportunity to realize, if any were needed, how the last movie of Sergio Leone is a monumental work and may be the best film to be screened at the festival this year. When you think that the reception was lukewarm at its first presentation in May 1984.

 

Some studios don't take film preservation all that seriously. If you read about the restoration of Lawrence of Arabia (what else am I going to talk about?), you'll see Robert Harris and Co. found much of the missing footage in beaten-up cans or stored in poorly-heated rooms. Some of it was so bad the film actually crumbled when they tried to work with it. And this for a movie that was a major box office and critical success. Maybe after OUATIA tanked Warner Bros. or whoever just threw the extra footage in the nearest vault and ignored it.

Thanks Mat. O0

With all this talk of film preservation, there is one point I have to make that is not really related but I have been thinking about it a lot lately and I feel it is at least somewhat related. Here goes:

It is great that with the advent of dvd's and widescreen tv's, movies are now generally being released in their original aspect ratio.

But what really irks me is that usually when I watch a dvd for a movie whose original AR is 1.85:1, the picture fills up the entire screen of my hdtv. Since hdtv's have a 1.78:1 AR, this means that they are chopping a bit off the sides of the picture! I know, the difference between 1.78:1 and 1.85:1 is very little; we "only" lose 4% off the sides. So 2% off the right side and 2% off the left side seems to be no big deal (and it is certainly far better than pan and scanning, which completely destroyed a widescreen movie). But it just irks me why then studios do this. Showing the full picture of a 1.85:1 movie on a 1.78:1 tv requires putting TINY black bars on top and bottom of the screen -- just a small fraction the size of the very large black bars that we are happy to live with horizontally for 2.35:1 movies, and vertically for 4:3 movies. If we are happy to live with the huge black bars for letterboxed or pillarboxd movies, then why do they think we wouldn't be happy living with tiny horizontal bars for 1.85:1 movies?

I think anybody here would prefer the full picture + tiny horizontal black lines, rather than filling the screen at the cost of having 2% of the picture chopped on each side. But I guess they care about mainstream idiots more than real fans like us.

What makes this even worse is that the studios should have learned their lesson by this point: how over time, formats of viewing technology continuously change; and that changing the original features of a movie for the sake of "accommodating" a particular time period can lead to permanently screwing up a work of art.

For example, what if in 20 years from now, the AR for tv's change to 2:1. For movies that were released in 1.85:1 but the dvd's in 1.78:1, will they have preserved the original theatrical aspect ratio for future home viewing formats? What will they do now  to accommodate these theoretical 2:1 tv's -- will they say, "the difference is too big, we can't cut that much to fill the screen; rather, we will live with the black bars on the sides"? or will they say, "let's just cut a bit off the top and bottom to fill the 2:1 screen"! Will they use the real 1.85:1 version as the reference print, or will these butchered 1.78:1 dvd's become the reference print?


Bottom line: home viewing in general these days is amazing (especially compared to what we had just a few years ago ; no choice except pan and scanned VHS's). With new dvd's and blu rays being released every day, mostly in original AR's, we have great access and it's wonderful. I am very thankful for that, and I know that if the worst problem we ever have is having 2% chopped off each side of 1.85:1 movies, we'll be in good shape. But I still think it is wrong; studios should have learned by now to follow a simple rule in all situations: JUST KEEP THE PICTURE AS RELEASED; WE ALWAYS WANT TO SEE THE FULL PICTURE THAT WAS SHOT, SO KEEP IT IN EXACTLY THE INTENDED ASPECT RATIO, AND WE WILL HAPPILY ACCEPT THE BLACK BARS THAT COME ALONG WITH IT. JUST KEEP THE MOVIE IN THE EXACT ASPECT RATIO IN WHICH IT WAS INTENDED, PERIOD!

Mat,

thanks for your awesome work.

here is how I understand it, and let me know if I am wrong:

RE: the 24 minutes that were added: Scorcese knew that Leone preferred that the movie have those 24 minutes.
And there are an additional 20 minutes that may be added soon as well, for a total of about 45 extra minutes, right?

Then the question is, why were those additional 20 minutes not added in already? Is it because they weren't found? Too damaged for restoration? Scorcese wasn't sure if Leone wanted them in? Scorcese thinks that 4:13 is a decent length, but 4:35 is too long?

I just hope that when the dvd is released, it includes all the footage that they have and are able to restore. I would really hate it if after all this, they release a dvd that has this 4:13 version, with another 20 minutes of scenes in the Special Features section of the dvd. (Fan edits, anyone?  ;)) I just hope they release it ALL, once and for all!


(p.s. another advantage that releasing all the material would have is this: if a very small portion of the movie is of bad picture quality, it is jarring and there is little chance that it can be viewed of as a single film; rather, it will be viewed of like its just some "deleted scenes" or something. But if a significant chunk of the movie has the poor quality, it may actually have the paradoxical affect of making it all easier to accept. if less than 1/10 of a movie is bad quality, you don't consider it part of the movie. But if 45 minutes -- ie. a full 1/6 of the movie -- is of poor quality, that is a very significant amount of footage; it is hard to mentally consider so much material as "deleted scenes." 24 minutes can be considered "deleted scenes"; 45 minutes is a part of the movie; that's too long to be considered "deleted scenes."So IMO, the longer the new material is, the easier it is to accept this restored version as being a single version of the movie, as opposed to merely being some "deleted scenes."  I guess I am focusing here on the subconscious. Who knows.....  ;)

They might use seamless branching like the OUTITW blu-ray.

Actually they usually (but not always) open the image up slightly from 1.85 to 1.78 so you are actually getting a little more information top and bottom on the DVD/BD release.

d&d,

I don't know any more than you do. I'm sure we're talking about the same 40 minutes as before, but why it wasn't already restored, I can't say. I'm sure that if Scorsese "knows" that Leone wanted to restore the first 20 minutes, he must also "know" that Leone wanted to restore the other 20 minutes. Otherwise, he wouldn't be thinking about adding it back in. Maybe the footage is more degraded and it's going to take longer to restore it. Who knows?

But I'd like to ask Scorsese how he "knows" Leone wanted it restored. Does he "know" what Leone himself said about it in 1988? Can someone get Marty on the phone please?

Mat   

so you are saying that when a movie is released in theaters at 1.85:1 but the dvd is 1.78:1, it is because they ADD more on top and bottom rather than removing from the sides?

Why would they not show the full picture in theaters?

Well Frayling says that Leone very reluctantly cut these 45-50 minutes, which he called "significant material." And I am sure that Scorcese spoke to many people originally involved with the making/editing of the movie, who probably confirmed this.

yes, you have the statement that Leone made a while later that the 229MV is the best version. But I am sure many people involved said that Leone really wanted those 45-50 minutes in. Who knows what Leone would say if he were alive today. But I think it is pretty safe to say that during the time of the movie's release, Leone really wanted those 45-50 minutes in. (Although in the very same paragraph, Frayling says that Leone's preferred version was between 4:10 -- 4:25; so somewhere, Frayling got his math wrong; 3:49 + 45-50 minutes = 4:34 -- 4:39, not 4:10 -- 4:25). Either way, I think Leone preferred that these scenes be included. Besides, even if we had no way of knowing Leone's opinion on the matter, I am still happy they are doing this restoration: let them put back whatever they can find, and then let each fan decide what to consider as his definitive version.

------

So we know that according to Frayling "Leone had 10 hours of usable footage in the can." I don't know what "usable footage" means; I can't imagine that it means enough footage to actually release a 10-hour movie; I mean, how many more elements could there be to this story???? But he did have thoughts of releasing a 2-part movie, so I think there is enough footage for something like a 6 hour movie (he only cut it down to the 4 and a half hour version, and finally the 3:49 version, once he realized it was only going to be a single movie, and not two parts). I'd love to get my hands on all 6 hours of footage. I mean, how much more could there be to this story? Does Noodles meet Max in hell, and God tells them that as atonement for their sins, their souls are forced to return to Earth? Do Old Deborah and Old Carol start having a lesbian affair (actually there is no such thing as "elderly Deborah"  ;)) From the shooting script that we have, all I hve seen are those scenes that would comprise the extra 50 minutes (Frayling lists those scenes, and they match up to basically the rest of the shooting script). I have no idea what material there is that would equal 6 hours. Though I'd sure love to find out, if it exists  ;)

d&d,

Now you're just getting downright greedy.  >:D

Mat

when it comes to Leone, I certainly am  :)

They wouldn't have got funding to do so if that's all they were doing. They needed to added them back as a so called "Director's Cut" in order to get the movie into cinemas to recoup the cost. They did a similar thing with Close Encounters and Alien.

Correct!

Another interesting article:

http://www.forgottensilver.net/2012/05/21/il-etait-une-fois-en-amerique-la-restauration-du-film/


Between wanting to honor the memory of Sergio Leone by providing mounting Once Upon a Time in America as he had designed, and the technical constraints of such a project, there is a gap that is sometimes difficult cross. In announcing nearly two years will give 40 minutes in the editing of the film to finally do make that 25, the Leone family seems to have encountered some technical problems.
The preferred mounting of Leone lasted over four hours, Scorsese explains in the press kit. "He had to make cuts douloureus itself, to bring the film to 3:49 in 1984. But finally, today, some sections missing equipment was located and reinserted into the film under the supervision of the Leone family and colleagues still with us. "
So it seems that everything could not be found or exploited, making this new assembly version closer to the intentions of the director, but not assemble hoped two years ago. Indeed, Scorsese does not hide his desire to return one day, in the interview given last Saturday in Le Monde: "There we found the twenty minutes that I hope to add another twenty minutes later. When you really like a director, you want to see everything in a film. You want, for example, watch twenty minutes of 2001: A Space Odyssey-cut editing, even if it's Stanley Kubrick himself withdrew them. In the case of Once Upon a Time in America, I know that Leone wanted those twenty minutes are restored. "
One could of course call for opportunism, a common process to marketing, but Scorsese is one of the few to show interest in preserving works and it would make him a mock trial.

Gian Luca Farinelli, director of the Cinematheque of Bologna, already responsible for the magnificent restoration of the trilogy of the Man with No Name (unfortunately reserved for the Italian market) explains how they did it to reinstate the deleted scenes: "The images and early end cut scenes have allowed us to determine their exact position before they are cut and the new assembly is 4 hours 15 minutes. "

"The restoration and reassembly of the film are made in Italy," explains Davide Pozzi, director of the laboratory found the image (Immagine The Ritrovata). "Today, the film negative and other elements are kept in Los Angeles in the vaults of 20th Century Fox. The negative was scanned at 4K Warner Bros. Motion Picture Imaging (MPI and files were then recovered by our laboratory where a full digital restoration was the height, frame by frame. Phase longer and delicate restoration of this is undoubtedly the color correction, to recreate the atmosphere of soot and smoke from the 20s and 30s, and the colder the late '60s. As reference, we used the positive copy belonging to Martin Scorsese and is held at MoMA in New York. We also benefited from the experience and memories of many people who worked with Sergio Leone on the wire. The main challenge was the desire to reinstate the deleted scenes by Leone. A research group has worked for many months to this task. Special thanks to Franco Ferrini, one of the writer who gave us the shooting script, which was our main reference for the inclusion of deleted scenes, and the executive producer Claudio Mancini, editors and Alessandro Patrizia Ceresani Baragli, and Sergio Leone's assistant, Fausto Ancillai. These scenes were also considered lost. And technically, the homogéinité of these scenes was our biggest problem, because the negatives of these scenes no longer exist. The only material available were positive copies that were very poorly preserved. More difficult still, these copies were fired without any particular care because it was working copies for sound editors and assistant editors. Images in these coils were severely damaged, not only because of poor preservation conditions but also by their use as a working copy.

It is obviously still many gray areas on the elements found and restored, and the press sometimes tends to contradict the absence of details. As might be expected, the presentation in Cannes is the height in a certain indifference, as too often with the wonders presented in Cannes Classics but hopefully learn more in a future operation of this circuit, starting in June at its second showing at the festival in Bologna. We will return.

Cool find.
The guy in the first comment said that DeNiro looked very moved. Which is cool, because DeNiro is not someone who shows his feeling offscreen.

It isn't a question of recouping costs, it's a matter of creating a new property that generates revenues now and into the future. In the case of OUATIA, we are now 28 years into the life of its copyright. Copyright laws vary from country to country, of course, but I don't think there is anyplace where copyright is granted in perpetuity. Copyrights always expire. Rights holders are therefore happy when a new property is created that effectively extends the life of their copyright. The new "Restoration" cut or whatever they're going to call it is going to have a copyright life that begins in 2012.

It is naive to think that the 229 minute version will always be available to us. Anyone who has watched what Beatrice Welles has been up to with her father's films knows that rights holders can suppress earlier versions of a film in favor of a later "restoration." In our future world of streaming video, when DVD players are no longer being manufactured, the version of a film that you will be able to watch is the one the rights holders will have chosen for you.

Scorsese Interview:

http://www.lemonde.fr/festival-de-cannes/article/2012/05/18/il-etait-une-fois-sergio-leone-et-martin-scorsese_1702964_766360.html


Save movies from the ravages of time ... The Film Foundation, the body created by Martin Scorsese in 1990, a new survivor has to his credit: after, among others, The Red Shoes, Michael Powell and The Leopard by Luchino Visconti, now the American director moved at the bedside of Once Upon a Time in America. For this reason, clôturait Sergio Leone, in 1984, opened with his trilogy Once Upon a Time in the West (1969) and Once upon a time the revolution (1971). Long by 3 h 49, the story of two Jewish gangsters is a funeral elegy that owes as much to Proust and La Recherche du temps perdu at the Hollywood tradition. This was the last film by Sergio Leone, who died in 1989. The restored print, loaded with twenty minutes of deleted scenes, was selected at Cannes Classics, a program created in 2004 with old films and masterpieces of film history. On this occasion, Martin Scorsese returns to his meeting with Italian filmmaker, this masterly work, which deals with the end of the world - the America of Prohibition - and marks the end of a kind, one of the great epics the cinema.

When did you meet Sergio Leone for the first time?

It was at Cannes in 1976, during a dinner at the Oasis, the year when Taxi Driver was competing. There was Costa-Gavras, Sergio Leone, both members of the jury, I, Robert De Niro, Paul Schrader, the screenwriter of Taxi Driver, Jodie Foster, Michael and Julia Phillips, producers of the film. Paul Schrader had toasted Leone to thank him for having toured with Once Upon a Time in the West one of the greatest westerns in cinematic history. We had arrived two days earlier in Cannes and depression we had earned. Tennessee Williams, the jury foreman, told the press he did not like at all Taxi Driver, he was too violent. At dinner, Sergio Leone and Costa-Gavras told us they liked the film. We thought Taxi Driver could still win a prize, perhaps for his screenplay, or its actors. But it took the Palme d'Or! And that is thanks to Sergio Leone.

How has your relationship with him?

I lived partly in Rome between 1978 and 1981. I saw him regularly. Particularly at a luncheon at his home December 31, 1979. I met his wife, his family, met the set designer Dante Ferretti, with whom I will work later on The Age of Innocence, Casino, Kundun, Gangs of New York, Aviator and Hugo Cabret. He knew how much I loved Once Upon a Time in the West, he gave me his copy of the film. It is this copy that I projected in 1980 Film Festival in New York. It was the first time I spoke publicly about the crucial issue of the preservation of films, and more specifically the question of color, which happens if the coils are not kept properly. When Sergio Leone came to New York, I offered to come to dinner with my parents who still lived on the Lower East Side in a building without elevator. We went with Elio Petri (the director of The Working Class Goes to Heaven, Golden Palm at Cannes in 1972). He especially liked the Sicilian cooking from my mother, very different from Roman cuisine to which he was accustomed. And my mother was sensitive to his knife and fork!

At that time I was working on The King of Comedy with Robert De Niro. The film was produced by Arnon Milchan - would become the producer of Once Upon a Time in America. Leone had turned over ten years since it was once the revolution, and De Niro had not seen any of his films. As I still had a copy of Once Upon a Time in the West, he asked me if I could plan for De Niro. The latter discovered the film at the Museum of Modern Art, and he immediately accepted the role of the Jewish gangster.

What was your first impression face Once Upon a Time in America?

The film was released in the U.S. version of slaughtered 2 h 15, when that of Leone, released in Europe, lasted 3 hours 49. De Niro had organized a screening of the original Museum of Modern Art for my parents and friends and me. We were all impressed with the quality of images and saddened by the situation of the 1980s no longer allowed to produce such a work. Moreover, the film has nothing reported at the box office. I remember being struck by the accuracy of staging. Details of the sound and movement of actors. The sound triggers the memory. This is a very literary process, particularly in the opening sequence with the phone ringing that never ends.

How have you seen the first films of Sergio Leone?

I admit I was baffled by The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. French and English critics placed very high American westerns, those of Howard Hawks and John Ford in mind. And for a kid's Lower East Side like me, prone to asthma attacks, the horizons of the western addition corresponded to a specifically American. Suddenly, an Italian westerns, Sergio Leone signed ... I did not know what to think. When I saw Once Upon a Time in the West, I did not understand it either. Its slow me destabilized. There I had to revisit the film two years later on television to understand that Western did not need American roots. I got to his images, his music.

Leone did not fall as in the tradition of Western theatrical tradition in Italy is that of opera. He had his own way to deal with the archetypes of the genre. As in the commedia dell'arte with Harlequin, Punchinello, his characters wear masks, these masks and hide many others. This is actually a Russian doll. In Once Upon a Time in the West, each character reveals a different face in the course of history. Once Upon a Time in America has a comparable system. The film is constructed like a dream within another dream. It no longer relies on the archetypes of Hollywood cinema criminal, but on the codes of a myth, that of America in the 1930s, when it goes from anarchy to order.

Before making his westerns, Leone had signed epic films, The Last Days of Pompeii, The Colossus of Rhodes. He often told me jokingly that his great inspiration was ... Homer! His love of mythology into a passion for the myth of America. For him, the films of John Ford was a variant of classical myths. I think he felt that his films were slices of American history, like chapters in a textbook. In jest, he was fond of saying that He was once in America should have been entitled Once upon a time a certain type of cinéma.Le film takes place in the neighborhood of the Lower East Side, New York, where you grew up. This is one of the last to be filmed there.

The Lower East Side was a Jewish neighborhood and also Italian. The two communities lived side by side. My father found his own childhood. It was not that of a gangster, of course, but he recognized buildings, driveways, the street life. The scene where the kid prefers to eat his cake rather than giving it to the girl to sleep with her ... Personally, I had a problem with the last shot, the one with Robert De Niro lying in an opium den, which begins to smile. I did not understand, but my father, he had everything seized. He was very touched by the film and I could not understand why.

Maybe he grabbed the lead character in this film is not as Robert De Niro that death is omnipresent?

Absolutely. He was already old and it got him. How De Niro is disguised as old man, his approach: it is clear that the next step is death. The film is a long elegy. It is as if Leone had foreseen that this would be his last film. This may explain his side hieratic. We learned the death of Leone the first day of filming of Goodfellas. I had seen for the last time at the Venice Film Festival in 1988 at the screening of The Last Temptation of Christ. He was very emaciated, he asked me news of my parents.

Continued:

What is the twenty extra minutes added to the restored version of Once Upon a Time in America presented in Cannes, May 18?

I think, very often, there is a difference between the original film and one that the director wanted. The original version depends on the producer, censorship too. I am always very curious to see the vision of the director. There we found the twenty minutes that I hope to add another twenty minutes later. When you really like a director, you want to see everything in a film. You want, for example, watch twenty minutes of 2001: A Space Odyssey-cut editing, even if it's Stanley Kubrick himself withdrew them. In the case of Once Upon a Time in America, I know that Leone wanted those twenty minutes are restored.

Can we discern the influence of Sergio Leone in your film?

I worked as editor on Shutter Island when I participated in the restoration of Once Upon a Time in the West. By dint of seeing the same scenes, to check color calibration, I found myself crying because I was so moved by the faces of the actors in close-up, by the movements of the camera, the simplicity of the dialogues. The faces are filmed as landscapes, in planes very close. The same thing happened with Once Upon a Time in America. I think we see the influence of Sergio Leone in Taxi Driver. My film is rather claustrophobic, but the framing is "Leone".

Gangs of New York is heavily influenced by Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time in America. The boy who opens the door and discovered the city covered with snow in my film is an evocation of the boy's early Upon a Time in the West who fled the farm when he heard shots fire and is killed. The camera moves around a circular comedian, so typical of Leone, are among the effects that I have fully integrated. In my mind, Gangs of New York should have lasted five hours. Finally, we made the film we were able to do with the budget we had ... I believe that the days when you could do these great epic movies is over. That's probably why I've done for Boardwalk Empire television. The series draws heavily from Once Upon a Time in America. We are in the third season and already we are talking about a film of 42 hours. I have not done any. But I oversaw the whole.

(Intellectual Property Law never interested me and I don't know anything about it. Anyway...)
 
I truly believe that the motivation of the people involved in the OUATIA restoration -- Leone's children, Scorcese and the Film Foundation -- is to truly restore this film to what Sergio Leone wanted. Scorcese has made film restoration his life's work (in addition to his own filmmaking, of course); his Film Foundation has restored over 500 films already. I'd doubt that they make much, if any, money off it. It is Scorcese's passion, as a lifelong lover of the cinema. They even needed contributions from Gucci; if this was a project that would have been believed to be profitable, they wouldn't need charitable contributions; they would have gotten funding from a major studio. The fact that no studio wanted to get behind this as a business venture, and it instead had to be done through charitable foundations dedicated to film preservation, should tell you all you need to know about how financially profitable they believed this venture would be.

 And Leone's children knew how this was their father's life's work; it took up more than a decade of his life, and he put his entire heart and soul into it, and I can't imagine how devastated he must have been when the movie was butchered. Yes, I believe that the people involved in this restoration are motivated by the desire to restore the movie to what Sergio wanted.

Of course, there is a need to recoup costs. Of course, I am sure they would love to make a profit on it if possible, and there is nothing wrong with that. As much as you may be interested in a project, you don't have limitless funds for it; there is no way the Film Foundation could have restored over 500 movies without I guess getting some money back, and through contributions and donations from outside parties; even if something is a labor of love, it can't bankrupt you.

So the bottom line is that while in a perfect world, of course they would love to make back the money they put into it, or perhaps even make a profit, I believe 100% beyond any doubt whatsoever that what motivated Scorcese and the Leone children to do this was the interest in seeing this great movie restored to what Sergio wanted. If anyone believes that the reason this restoration was done  was just to get a few bucks, what can I tell you, I can't possibly disagree with you more on that.

------

As for the issue of whether the 229MV will always be available: it's true, we don't know what the viewing formats of home entertainment will be in the future. But I believe that as long as there is a market for a product, it will be available commercially. (And as long as there are those with a big enough interest in a product and the willingness to support it charitably, it will be available even if not economically profitable). I don't think that this restoration -- whether it remains at the current 24 extra minutes, or whether they find another 20 minutes ultimately bringing the new version to more tahn four and a half hours --  will completely supplant the 229MV anytime soon, especially if the difference in quality of the restored scenes is as drastic as we now believe it is. And even if some format like video streaming completely overtakes dvd's sometime soon, you can always keep your dvd player and the dvd's you own. I still have a VCR for some videotapes that i had when i was younger; one day maybe I'll be able to transfer them all to dvd, but for now I still have the tapes and the VCR. They are still selling VCR's -- only in combination with a dvd player, but still, they are selling them. Many people still have records and record players. Even when a new format overtakes an old one, it takes decades and decades for the old one to completely vanish. And as time goes by we get more and more video technology that people can do in their own home, more and more "fan edits," and anything that is not available commercially is still available to hardcore fans and anyone who makes an interest in it. Nobody can know the future, but dj, I would be happy to make  a bet with you right now that the 229MV will be available to anyone who wants it in 20 years from now. If we are still on The Sergio Leone Web Board and on speaking terms on May 22, 2032, let's check back with each other and see if the 229MV of OUATIA is available. The loser has to buy the winner a copy of the version of of OUATIA of their choosing, in the format of their choosing, from all the versions and formats available at that time  :)

scenes has been allready reinserted in to the new reconstructed extended version  approx 255 minutes long (i think this is closest to the director's version i am sure his version much longer than this)

scenes has not been yet recovered includes

A love scene with Deborah as a young girl

Garbage truck scene from 1930s

A crane dredging the river bringing the movie back to 1968

there is more scenes

scenes that has been found and reinserted in to the reconstructed extended version

1) 3min 49secs
Noodles and the director of the cemetery in Riverdale (Louise Fletcher)
Appearance of an ominous black Cadillac

(http://www.forgottensilver.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Once-upon-a-time-in-America-5-fletcher-600x805.jpg)

2) 1min 17secs
Extended scene where the car driven by Noodles sinks into the lake.
The gang struggling between the waters and a crane dredging soil and debris.
Anxiety when Noodles does not resurface.

mounted together with: 1min 56sec
Noodles walking outside Bailey's mansion sees a car exploding after a few meters

3) 2min 6secs
At the entrance of the theater, Noodles communicates with the driver before the arrival of Deborah (1933)

(http://www.forgottensilver.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Once-upon-a-time-in-America-5-cut_theatre-600x413.jpg)

4) 2min 25secs
Eve meeting with Noodles in speakeasy, then they embrace in hotel room (1933)

mounted together with: 2min 30secs
Bedroom scene Eve and Noodles

(http://www.filmreference.com/images/sjff_01_img0364.jpg)

mounted together with: 0min 30secs
Noodles awakes sees Eve's thank you note signed Deborah

mounted together with: 0min 35secs
Deborah drinking coffee at restaurant next to Railway Station

(http://www.forgottensilver.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Once-upon-a-time-in-America-5-cut_bar-600x766.jpg)

5) 2min 18secs
Deborah plays Cleopatra in Shakespeare's theater. Noodles is present in the audience (1968).

(http://www.forgottensilver.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Once-upon-a-time-in-America-5-cut_cleo-600x467.jpg)

6) 5min 8secs
While the guests arrive, Bailey has a discussion in his private study with Jimmy O'Donnell

(Quote) Martin Scorsese interview we found these scenes, I hope later add more scenes to make it as closest as director intended, when you really like a director you want to see everything in a film

I really would like to see the additional love scene between Young Noodles and Young Deborah.

This is another plot point that IMO is seriously flawed in the 229MV, though I don't think I ever mentioned it here: So we see Noodles and Deborah making out in the store, where she tells him that although she loves him, he will always be a two-bit punk and therefore he can never be her man. And indeed, then Max calls him out, he gets beaten up, and then she refuses to open the door to let him back in. So she has made the decision: as much as I have feelings for him, I will not live my life with a gangster, and I am locking you out of my life. Okay.

The next time we see Noodles and Deborah is when he gets out of prison: she comes to see him in the speakeasy, and says she had been counting the days for him to get out of prison. And later on their date, she speaks with great emotion about how he is the only one whom she ever truly cared about or something like that.

This is very inconsistent: first, we see Young Deborah locking Noodles out of her life; then, once he gets out, suddenly we see that she really had great feelings for him????!!!!!! That is really a major hole for me.
Therefore, when, on their big date, she speaks with great emotion about how he is the only one that she truly cared about, I never ever found that convincing. I always say to myself, "come on, you locked him out of your life long ago!" it makes no sense why after locking him out of her life, she would be counting the days for him to get out of prison and then speaking about how much she cares for him. So while I always understood how Noodles had this crazy obsession with her for all these years, I was never convinced as to her having the same deep feelings for him. IMO A major flaw on an important point of the movie.

HOWEVER, if there is a love scene with the two of them as children that occurs after the part where she locked him out of her life, then this all makes sense! That would show that even though the rational side of her said she was finished with him, she had these deep feelings for him and she went back to him; so at the time he was arrested, they were indeed together. So IMO having another Young Noodles&Deborah love scene occur after the scene where she locks him out, is extremely important for me.

As we've discussed many times, there are many plot points that aren't quite explained properly in this movie, and some of them are fixed with the restored scenes: (eg. how Noodles meets Eve, why Noodles cares so much about the Bailey scandal on the news, etc.) But this point I've discussed here about the love between Noodles-Deborah is as crucial as any of the other holes in the 229MV; without it, I never saw any justification for shy she would care about him so much. So I would be absolutely thrilled if this scene will be put back into the movie. It is not among the scenes that were shown at Cannes, but it seems quite possible, based on the quotes by Scorcese I've seen in the articles posted and translated here, that they may restore more scenes (if they can find them). While I hope that they find and restore all of the approximately 25 minutes that are still missing from the version shown at Cannes 2012, this love scene is IMO one of the most important.

(I'd also like to see ALL of the scenes with Eve; some were restored so far, but not all. It works better if they are all restored).

What's the source of those pics?

here

http://www.faubourgsainthonoreguide.com/mode_/gucci-sheds-light-on-sergio-leone (http://www.faubourgsainthonoreguide.com/mode_/gucci-sheds-light-on-sergio-leone)

it's production pics i don't know what is real restoration look like i guess we'll see upon release on bluray

there is also video (scenes doesn't look that good my guess is that the best they could done because scenes itself was in bade state)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a2anLcFXeo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a2anLcFXeo&feature=related)

Without being cynical, I don't what to think of this, to tell you the truth.  It's always nice that a great film gets attention so it's not forgotten, but sometimes I wish they would just have these extra scenes as a bonus on the DVD.  "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly"  is kind of ruined for me with the new scenes they put in (thankfully, you can skip right over them).  From what I've read (and who knows what to believe) Leone was happy with the 4 hour version of "America" as is.  If he was still alive to do this stuff himself, I'd probably feel a little more positive about it.  Such a great film...why mess with it... 

But I guess I should keep quiet until I actually see the new version...maybe it'll surprise me. 

the long version of GBU is actually Leone's version (besides the Cave Scene); United Artists cut those scenes for the American release. If you have a problem with the longer version, don't blame the restoration, blame Leone.

Let me explain what I meant - how can you blame Leone, dead for 14 years or so by then, for bringing back actors 35 years later to overdub their voices, and come up with a guy to imitate Lee Van Cleef's voice after he's dead as well?  That's what I'm talking about,,,it's not the scenes, it's the older/different voices that have a jarring effect to me.  And since they weren't overdubbed to begin with because they were cut by UA, I would think Leone's hardly the one to blame. 

there's now way to know what Leone would have wanted if he was alive today. But considering that he wanted those scenes in the movie when it was released, I am glad they released those scenes now. (Even with the dubbing; that's better than nothing). Just like I am glad they released the scenes from OUATIA, even though the quality is significantly different

Much as I like all the stuff that's going to be put in, there's something which I hope they take out, which is on the DVD and Blu-Ray editions. Namely the lame flashback during the last meeting between Noodles and Senator Bailey at the party. This was put in for the TV showings I believe, but never featured in the European cinema release. It always irritates me and I'm sure it was added by 'other hands'. I'm lucky to have the 'original' version on Laserdisc (having got rid of my VHS copies some years ago). It's inclusion works directly against Noodle's dialogue and the intimate nature of the scene, with it's quiet conclusion. Does anybody know? BTW I'm equally annoyed by the scene of Charles Bronson getting up after the opening gunfight in 'Once Upon a Time in the West'!

Very interesting point. Is the fact that the flashback is a later insert confirmed anywhere?

If it is true that the studio inserted that flashback and it was not done by Leone, then it indeed should not be included, just like the Harmonica Rising scene should not be included in the dvd's of OUATITW. (Once Paramount cut out the trading post scene, then I guess it was necessary to add in the Rising scene; but once the trading post scene was restored, no doubt the Rising scene should have been removed, and included only as an extra on the dvd.

But are you sure that that flashback was not included in Leone's 229 minute cut of the movie?

Throughout the discussion of the restored scenes on OUATIA, there has been a lot of interspersed discussion about the restored scenes of GBU. I realized that as far as I know, we do not have a thread that is dedicated to a scene-by-scene breakdown of all the restored scenes in GBU, and therefore I created one http://www.fistful-of-leone.com/forums/index.php?topic=11287.msg156676#msg156676

As I have said before its a great privilege to see any scenes that have been rediscovered and put in the film Once Upon a Time in America. I would say that the flashback scene where Noodles seems to be contemplating whether to shoot 'Mr Bailey' was a beautiful touch. We have just sat through four hours of sumptuous images and music. Its seems only correct to insert a flashback showing past scenes of childhood (remember this is a film where 'time is the protagonist' as Leone put it) Regarding the scene where Charles Bronson gets up from the shootout, again I am happy to see the elegance and artistry of the camera movements(the close up of Charles Bronson's eye as he wakes out of consciousness etc) On another subject, watching the RV version of the scene where James Woods and the rest of the gang pop up out of the water I am praying that there is Morricone's theme 'Once upon a Time In America' over that scene as is played on this Italian clip. It is so rich and full of meaning showing their childlike behaviour which is so poignant in juxtaposition to their life of crime.  I know that earlier in the scene when Max asks if Noodles wants to go for a swim 'Photographic Memories' is heard in the background.

No, it was always there from the beginning on, at least if it is in the 229 min version, which I haven't checked yet.

But it destroys some of the film's narrative brilliance. For that alone it is a very "bad" scene. I wish Leone had never shot it. It wasn't in the shooting script.

well the fact is that Leone did not put that scene in the movie's final cut. I am all for having every foot of film that was shot as an extra in the dvd, but the feature film should be exactly as Leone intended.

Original Negatives and Restored

there is more information on all four sides in restored

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal1-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal2-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal3-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal4-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal11-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal12-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal5-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal6-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal7-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal8-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal9-gucci.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal10-gucci.jpg)


I just hope they going to release movie on bluray in the intended original aspect ratio 1.85:1

restored scenes

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIuLFIm2mQQ)

(scene) Noodles and the director of the cemetery in Riverdale (Louise Fletcher)
Appearance of an ominous black Cadillac

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a2anLcFXeo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a2anLcFXeo&feature=related)

The Noodles and Max flashback scene was in the original version shown at Cannes in 1984.  it was restored with the first DVD release.  It was mostly violent scenes that were cut from the Cannes version.  I don't know why they had cut the flashback.  I think the scene will work better with the other restored scenes, especially Treat Williams.   

So that final flashback of Noodles and Max as children -- which occurs in the minds of of the two of them in Bailey's office -- was definitely put there by Leone?

That is good to hear. When someone mentioned here that it was added in later by the studio, that was the first I had ever heard of it. So it's good to hear that that is not true, and that it actually belongs in the movie  O0

1) Aren't all of these shots already in the movie? I don't see why they are included in the restored negatives.

2) These restored shots look damn good. On the youtube videos we've seen, the restored scenes look much much worse than the rest of the movie.

3) Don't get your hopes up about having the movie released in 1.85:1. Almost all dvd/BR of 1.85:1 movies seem to crop it to fit the 1.78:1 hdtv screen. It's totally ridiculous; I think any real fan would prefer tiny black bars on top and bottom rather than having a bit of the sides of the picture cut off, but the fact is that that's what the idiots  do. So I wouldn't get my hopes up about actually getting a 1.85:1 version of the movie  >:(

That's again wrong. Most films which were shot for 1,85:1 are on their DVDs in 1,85:1. My OUTA is in 1.85:1, and that's basically the same DVD Warner sold in the whole world.

But that does not necessarily mean that your TV show the complete 1;85:1 image.

But frankly said in theatres you also often don't see the complete image of a film.

And besides the difference between 1,85:1 and 1,78:1 is only marginal.

I just watched the scene in the mausoleum again (the scene in the 229MV, not the restored scene). The music of Cockeye's Tune is definitely playing in the mausoleum. It starts when Noodles opens the door, stops when he closes it, then since he is looking around to see what the hell is going on, he opens the door again, it starts again, and finally he shuts the door again and it stops.

So it was definitely playing on some sort of sensor -- it played when the door opened, and stopped when the door shut. Noodles doesn't know what the hell is going on and is looking around for the source of it. In the restored scene we find out that a tape of it was sent to the cemetery to play in the mausoleum, but in the 229MV it remains a mystery, just like the whole mystery of who erected the mausoleum. Whether you prefer the 229MV or the restored version, the music is definitely playing in the mausoleum.


I noticed another interesting point -- as the music is playing, and Noodles is looking at the names on the tombs of each of his friends, at one point the music switches from Cockeye's Tune to the Main Theme of OUATIA. Obviously, the theme was not playing in the mausoleum! I guess the theme playing there is meant imply that Noodles is recalling his childhood: as Cockeye's song is playing in the mausoleum and Noodles is looking around, he is recalling his childhood, symbolized by the playing of the main theme. Maybe the fact that Cockeye's Tune turns into the Main Theme is also a reference to the whole idea of the mixing of dream and reality, Noodles's real past with his present dreams, and the whole idea that cinema is a dream

Thanks for checking  ;)

1) I never really picked up on that point of the music playing in the mausoleum until I read it somewhere (I believe in STDWD). Perhaps they should have used a different audio track: I mean, when music is diegetic is sounds different, but in this scene it is sounds like it's on the same audio track that  rest of the score does (and the same track that the Main Theme -- which is definitely not diagetic -- is playing in the same scene). I am not sure if I am using the right words, but you know what I mean, how the music sounds different when it is diegetic/internal/playing IN the scene, as opposed to playing OVER the scene as most of a film score usually does. So maybe you can argue that Cockeye's song in the mausoleum should have sounded different than the rest of the score. But I guess that Leone had De Niro open and close the door multiple times in order to emphasize the point.



2) On an unrelated note: The more I think about it now, the more I realize that if Leone had indeed been able to release his preferred 4 and a half hour version of the movie -- with these scenes with the limo, etc. -- this movie perhaps would be considered more of a "Mystery" movie, it almost plays like a PI movie or something: (put differently, the Noodles character is as much Philip Marlowe as Little Caesar  ;)) But in the 229MV, all these questions about who brought Noodles back are really just peripheral to the major themes -- (the Gangster stuff being a vehicle for the themes of) Time, Dreams, Fantasy mixing with Reality, Cinema being a dream, etc. Maybe it's better as is, without turning into too much of a literal detective story?


3) And finally, I just read that interview with Scorcese that Mat Viola was kind enough to translate. Looks like Scorcese may hbe looking at restoring another 20 minutes, in addition to the 20-25 minutes already restored. (I guess this would combine for the 45-50 minutes of "significant material" Leone wanted in the film). It's not clear whether they have found those additional 20 minutes or not, and if they do put it in, what's going to happen to it: are they going to have yet another showing at some festival, this time with ALL the additional restored stuff? Why did they rush it to Cannes 2012 if they may soon have more material? I guess this may delay wide theatrical and/or dvd release, till they decide on what their final version is. I just hope that when they do release it on dvd, it includes EVERYTHING. Even if the film quality is drastically different: let's just get everything once and for all  :) As long as I know that there are people out there like Scorcese and the Leone children with the interest, capability, access, and money to restore The Master's works, I have hope that we may eventually get the best possible versions  :)

I am so glad the extended version clarifies this. I had always found the music rather awkward in this scene because there seemed to be no explanation for it other than background music.

well you do see Noodles turning his head back and forth and looking for something. He is actually looking for the source of the music, but that is not made clear. It seems like he could just be looking around in general confusion about the whole mausoleum. I understood that he was looking for the music, but only because I read it in STDWD (Frayling was familiar with all the deleted scenes)

It does not destroy any of the film's narrative brilliance. Admittedly, it would have been more of a shock to hear Harmonica's instrument in the tavern after not seeing the scene where he 'rises from the dead' at the station,  BUT I am happy to see every reel that Leone shot. And to be honest I am sure he if he was around will smile indulgently knowing that people want to see every inch of film he shot. I remember  reading in Christopher Frayling's biography where he quoted Leone as saying that when he was dead Leone would want to be remembered as entertaining people. Lets not split hairs too much abt what Leone wanted or not wanted. He wanted to entertain, mesmerise and fascinate us with his masterful mise en scene and elegant camera angles :)))

Oh it does. After seeing the film 15 or 20 times without that scene it was quite a shock to see it as part of the film.

I copied my explanation from another thread:

"
It is mainly because I think the film loses some of its narrative quality in the first 40 min because:

1. It is indeed superfluous and it is not very remarkable the way it is filmed. (But not a bad scene either)

2. Without the scene comes a direct cut from Woody Strode crushing down to the close-up of McBain's shotgun which then blazes. A beautiful cut to connect the 1st with the second scene and similar to the harsh cut from Fonda's shooting gun to the shrieking of the train which connects the 2nd with the 3rd scene.

3. Without the Rising scene you don't know what had exactly happened as it seems that all 4 which were introduced to us are dead or could be dead. And remember that at the end of the 2nd scene the whole McBain family, to which we were introduced for several minutes, got shot too. It is very daring and irritating that you don't know for over 20 min what had happened to Harmonica, and for even a much longer time what the film could be about. And I like this unusual way to tell a story very much.

4. Without the Rising scene the moment of Harmonica's 2nd appearance in the film which reveals that he is still alive (remember Bronson wasn't a star back then) is much more fascinating. When you for so long don't know what happened in the first scene the eerie Harmonica sound out of the dark and the thrown lamp which brings his face into the light is much more effective.

Believe me, if you have seen and enjoyed OUTW for 20 years without the Rising scene, it is very disappointing to see it now in. It destroys some of the greatness of the long and slow beginning. Somehow the including of this scene really bugs me."

I also liked it to see this scene, but not as actual part of the movie.

I don't know if it is a Leone thing or an Italian film industry thing but this kind of thing comes up a lot in SL's films. I remember watching the trading post scene in OUATITW for the first time and enjoying what was obviously the non-diegetic harmonica music, only to have the camera suddenly reveal that Harmonica was playing the harmonica in the scene. An American film would never have done the scene like that; American soundtracks always assign different "sonic values"--for lack of a better way to put it--to diegetic and non-diegetic sounds. Thus it is never possible to confuse the two in American films. I've often wondered whether Leone was even aware of the diegetic/non-diegetic issue in the trading post scene, or if he was in fact aware of it but was purposely playing with audience understanding of where the music was coming from.

In the case of the crypt scene, there is no performer to pan to, and there is no visual representation of where the sound might be coming from. But it is now obvious, due to the inserted footage in the scene, that Leone intended us to understand that music was playing in the vault. I have seen the film many times since 1985, in cinemas and home video, and have never read the scene that way. And I have to say, the scene has been diminished in my eyes because of this over-explicitness. Until Groggy told me how he read the scene, I was happy to believe that the sene was about something else--that Noodles is having an epiphany of sorts, that he is contemplating the Ineffable, perhaps, or the Thingness in things, or whatever. But to find out that he's just checking out the sound system in the crypt is rather deflating. Without the new footage, it could still be a matter of interpretation. Groggy could read the scene his way, and I, while acknowledging the validity of the possibility of that reading, could have still read it my preferred way. But no more. Possibilities are closed off by the explicitness, thus impoverishing what had been a very rich scene.

As I've mentioned before, the film's 30th anniversary is in 2014. Getting it to Cannes this year makes it possible to get out a new DVD/Blu-ray to all markets by 2014. If there is then additional material that can be used for a "restored-restored "version, there is still time to make the deadline for the 35th anniversary of the film.

Drink, Warners and the Leone family don't love you, they love your money. They are very happy to sell you the same title as many times as they can.

Or the other scenes are in an even worse condition.

Restoring a film in pieces would be indeed a new idea to sell films. Perfect would be every year a new Blu with one additional scene.

the Leone family and Scorcese love Leone's works

Yeah, Jenkins. How dare you accuse artists of wanting to make a buck! Obviously they're above base concerns like money.

I really don't think that Scorcese's Film Foundation was established for money-making purposes. Not that there would be anything wrong with it if it was

More likely they're trying to find a happy medium between art and commerce, like everyone else in the movies.

Extended Scenes (before restoration)

(http://lostpic.net/images/9712f1db0319ba30963cb75f5705de67.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ca78c139ae0ccf745b5d355dc46dbe18.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1318561e012357279ab8aaece5b83d84.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f65efe740735f091ded2c8182fb7b85b.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/3d009f2422bab82d2eada1f5182c53b8.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/dc683d62e92aab41ab8521d54da25983.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/eaae912995f868a4777408c388a400ff.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/58959709a236c675ca281787f8cd734d.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/2ee99baaad0136e06797a60b1cda2d24.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/c0e6c916718a87bef459b65c327509ac.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/3606c2b34020b60172f0e7a0af509cbc.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/60a1b9e9352609b9addcf6082171de13.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ed6e9bc601506bedef4fe49152ffc76b.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/e8d3cf8678566851f5d976b93b1e106f.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/4777843fecc6de68ddca60c1470f1e55.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ee435b59d926f0c6d84ce36cdb4289b6.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/139f970bce5697894e2235384e20f5e1.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/0a28c7fe3e3eb596f8c3b0197da63943.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/cdbe7a48b95c4e01b96011abdd13d84a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/3a28761b14042af86057f52215585359.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/b3050eaf29bc5351398207ac2797a8d6.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/9396e998510e57d32c5c5ebeb9e24bce.jpg)

well i guess you can see condition of the scenes, but i hope maybe when releasing on video blu-ray they might highlight these extended scenes fix up liitle, color, contrast, and other things so it will mathch up with restore print a bit, with today software and technology anything is possible, but even if not i am still glad that we going to have longer version, story is now have more to explane than it was before

if the color of the new scenes is so bad, maybe they should just release the whole movie in black and white  ;)

I don't think Leone was trying to trick us into thinking the music in the mausoleum was non-diegetic; I think Leoen tried to make it clear that it was diegetic all along, with the bit with the music starting and stopping on what was some sort of sensor as De Niro opened and closing the door (and as he looks around I think he sees some sort of vent where it is "piped in.") And Leone couldn't know at the time of filming that he'd be forced to cut the scene with Louise Fletcher (explaining the origin of the tape) due to timing concerns. Therefore, I don't think Leone ever intended to make it ambiguous as to whether the music was diegetic. Maybe for just a moment, yes, as it started as soon as Noodles opens the door; but as soon we realize it starts and stops as Noodles opens and closes the door, it's clear that it is diegetic, so I certainly don't think Leone intended it to be ambiguous enough that we wouldn't figure it out by the end of the scene, cuz he figured we'd see the scene with Louise Fletcher.

Either way, if he was trying to make it ambiguous, it's a careful line to straddle between making these ambiguous, and breaking the rules. And Leone may have landed on the wrong side of that line when he made the music in the mausoleum on the same track/"sonic value" as the rest of the score. And more importantly, what is really unfair is how that music of Cockeye's theme segways into the main theme of OUATIA -- on the same track/sonic value -- as Noodles is looking at the names on the graves of his buddies. Since that music is definitely not playing in the mausoleum but is just meant to represent Noodles's memories (the same music was used during Noodles's flashback to the his childhood in Bailey's study), it should not have played on the same track/sonic value as the diegetic Cockeye's Tune.....

But THEN AGAIN, I guess this only applies if you look at everything as really happening as we see it ion the screen.
Once you consider the whole fantasy element of OUATIA, you can really argue that in fact, this whole merging of the music represents the point of this miovieo: the mixing of fantasy and reality, of dreams and cinema and time. etc. Just like the famous shot of Noodles looking at the 30's cars just after the garbage truck passes in 1968.... or is it 1933? That scene where it seems to be 1968 and 1933 at the same time basically sums up the theme of the whole movie. Well maybe the music in the mausoleum is making the very same point in sound that that the scene with the 30's cars in 1968 is making in visuals: the diegetic Cockeye's Tune merging into the non-diegetic Main OUATIA Theme as Noodles looks at the names of his friends, representing the jogging of Noodles's memories)... the mixing of dream and reality, of fantasy and truth, of memories of time. The dream of cinema  :)

Restoration process

(http://lostpic.net/images/5f64d1f06f6a0a8dfc19be4e08b6ca51.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/11924d177701283d56acfa5160a55c57.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/9c66e5745ef69738352f46d4f9bb41dd.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/7981cb1db3d7f4ba4fc466f8e8890f78.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/0af3b1c1913a9adaed221596318feade.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/92e82ba685d6fb17af09c5b7f864579e.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/b6409c9802f8d78d62ed87e9bc0db6b7.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/5d6ebd8df0b1e91ac51e34518ee6bd41.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/880200e95baab8377ffabc7d3f77b643.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/333368bd974f121f743f44dc93a03a97.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1bad37b76605541bbd40bf0c005163a7.jpg)

The extended scenes doesn't look that bad after all, they highlighted new scenes color corected brightness contrast and all that, well all we have to wait for the blu-ray release and see.

Actually I'm glad that it has been clarified (although I am of course yet to see the restored scene). Without any real indication (apart from Noodles looking around) otherwise, it has always come across to me as an artificial and quite stilted use of background music. Happily this is now clearly not the case.

I agree.  There was a really great thread on the mausoleum and that amazing door.  We talked about how Noodles kept handling that door.  Sometime after that I rewatched the film and this scene clicked for me.  You're right that there is visual evidence within the scene that makes it very clear that the music is diegetic.  When Noodles looks above at various angles, he actually sees the speakers that are built in the columns in at least three different locations.

(http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/818/ndvd009g.jpg)

(http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/4049/ndvd008c.jpg)

(http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/2351/ndvd007l.jpg)

That being said, I really don't care for the Fletcher scene. I'm not a big Louise Fletcher fan and really don't find her acting in that sequence too impressive.  I like it the way it is.  It's very clear that Noodles has been summoned back and that he's thinking through everything right from his first contact with Moe.  The Fletcher scene takes away from the subtlety of Noodles' process of understanding and piecing everything together.  I think with the editing issues of the last three films, one of the things that resulted is that SL has quite a bit of things happening off camera.  I think it's a brilliant consequence. It makes his cinema more interesting and involves the viewer more and allows for different interpretation.

Whether or not you like that restored scene in the cemetery, I think Louise Fletcher's acting in that scene is wonderful.

---

With the part in that scene involving the limo and the license plate (plus the later scene with it blowing up), this movie really seems more like a PI story; in the 229MV, while there of course is the whole element of mystery involving who sent Noodles the letters, I think it seems like much more of the internal, dream-like mystery. For some reason -- maybe it's just cuz I am not used to that scene -- I feel that maybe the limo and writing down the license plate makes it too much of a regular, literal PI story. There are other elements of the scene that I feel are important (eg. some of the stuff with Fletcher,  and the limo blowing up explaining why Noodles cares so much about the news story on the tv at Fat Moe's), but maybe that part with writing down the license plate is a bit overdoing it.

I'd still like to see every minute of deleted footage put back into the four and a half hour or so version of the movie that Leone originally wanted  :)

Where did you find these pictures, Derbent5000?

Another thing to consider: in 229, immediately after Noodles takes the key that's hanging on the crypt wall, there's a cut to him opening the locker in the train depot; this transition is now spoiled by the inserted material with Fletcher.

premiere posters in europe

Rome Italy GUCCI

(http://lostpic.net/images/5ff44dd93d80b95ee1ce30c465b67dcd.jpg)

Paris France restore version premiere for the public

(http://lostpic.net/images/ee8de6e615b49763589b2be4682842e3.jpg)

if they are releasing it to the public so soon after Cannes, I guess it is safe to assume that they will be showing the Cannes version, and they have not (yet) restored any more footage? (In the French interview that Mat Viola translated on this thread, Scorcese mentioned something about the possibility of restoring  20-25 minutes in addition to the 20-25 minutes that was already restored for Cannes, which would coincide with the 45-50 minutes of extra material that Leone wanted in the movie).

As was previous anounced Sergio Leone children found 40 min of footage, 25 min were restored other scenes have technical issues according to the article, approx 15 min scenes still left, According to Martin Scorsese only copies were founded they could not found original negatives of the missing scenes according to the interview, I believe there is more scenes somewhere lying on the shelf and one day i hope they see the light

I hope they when they release it on dvd, they have all 45-50 minutes of missing footage dvd. But I am certainly not confident of it.

The initial articles that announced this restoration (in March 2011) said that the Leone children bought the Italian rights to the film. I hope that the the restored movie will actually be shown in American theaters and American dvd/blu ray, but am holding my breath until I actually see it announced.

I love the way Leone shot Louise Fletcher. It seemed that she might have something to do with the whole mystery. It was done in a very subtle way. But her acting was a bit stilted.

Wow, June 22nd is really soon.

Any French member interested in going to cinema for this? I'm around Paris.

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA 1984 Restored Extended Version

Italian premiere Piazza Maggiore Bologna

(http://www.cinetecadibologna.it/imageserver/locandina/files/festival/CinemaRitrovato/2012/CR12_Slide_En.jpg)

thanks  O0

Say what? ???

Italian premiere

(http://lostpic.net/images/2d2eaa175cdce43cbd56d269824aa2ec.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/0851659c7f14179a9d5d20786bf363d6.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/baa8cbfd67c811577d1b82d5bc6a7243.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/c2f0932c2fafc56893f7feca56b29626.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/30d79b3e8bb641a06b17c946b3ce9e0c.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/c38281ff00318dc1a2fd266925d89bf6.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f0babc108ec6303ed95bbc54eaf9ce6b.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/6e8772d717b2e1120505b58b1301848f.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ce5ec9b6493c3c7cafbcf89a7f589226.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/fe4998723398539bea2b361faed4ce1b.png)

(http://lostpic.net/images/a6b05aaac561a43bfcdae3ca8e39caf7.png)

poster

(http://www.hotel-portasanmamolo.it/upload/img4fbd0bfdc2214.jpg)

oh wow, that is awesome!!! Thanks for sharing  O0 O0 O0

I hope we get some similar experience here in New York. But I am not holding my breath. (I'd be happy with just a normal theatrical release. But considering that all the articles said the Leone children purchased the Italian rights to the film, who knows if we'll even get a theatrical screening here in America).

Man, could people there actually read the subtitles? Some of those folks were sitting pretty far away.

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA 1984 RESTORED EXTENDED VERSION Premiere At The Piazza Maggiore A Bologna 2012

C'ERA UNA VOLTA IN AMERICA 1984 Restaurato Piazza Maggiore A Bologna 2012

(http://lostpic.net/images/f18b1445f8b7bc6456ca1cfc94343ba3.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f62696d56bc2084a0064ce2c95002842.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/5f907033aa00858a0eaacc3d0acb0a06.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/e5f6f2273f2b975e07fbb53d608dbf99.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/b31b14ae2dcf0144f91c650331c879a2.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/c7b3e2f2057d9d8b5789cd039cbfd1ea.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/aa62ba55465ccd7cc268f96f42a5dbb7.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/172e987a1167f8216cc54bd18e99e4bf.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/5de21900654d2daaed6081112d81e9a3.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/8ad6dc9d20ace2749fd6de96b468653e.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/18b2ea959da516753448d770c1fa1232.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/cee6650777f6f175e4b2f8387c151d5e.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/337ab4122731757f89f044ef47fe613a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/b3429590c97cbf293db36fcdcd3eb8c7.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/4804b2cf1eba50867823d50469118bbd.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ae588ee2c88dff3237b0e21b4165498e.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f788d6e42b723bd4c3881b5b16c4e06d.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/064a2af391cde4d5ff6baf73a962a86a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f05cdfa005cf84324081f18a6e3c46b3.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/fa51545e52c469959013f86a2ddc5364.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1bc9fb77e9f7d743d18d5468e19c2284.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/6fe243ec6ea49ba924f256c8e542eb54.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/39acfc10390de0624d585a36cbc904f4.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1dd3b05511acfb9593042cec4e46911a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/8d71c538eb6da90e0bffe1b22187a053.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/5290cf515be296e595e8f4737184d4c2.jpg)

Only disappointment is that it's not in the original aspect ratio 1.85:1 left and right sides are still crop i compare my DVD and HDTV versions to the early restored studio preparation version and the one premiere in italy, sure you can see the difference

Comparison between HDTV - DVD and early Restore Extended versions and Italy premiere

I analyze images measures the first and third image in 1.78:1 the second image in approx 1.93:1

May be it's to early to say i guess theatrical and video release can be different we'll see upon Blu-ray release later

(http://lostpic.net/images/6222e93f3510593d5086080ee1aa13d8.jpg)

(http://www.sportetstyle.fr/uploads/visuels/thumbnails/gal2-gucci.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1fe7e5b4854b35ebea7f78f20ef8843a.jpg)

-- Thanks for sharing these images. as for the aspect ratio:  the dvd of the 229MV  takes up my full hdtv screen, with no black lines on top and bottom, which means that the aspect ratio is 1.78:1, or perhaps it is 1.85:1 but the tv masks a little of the image (according to the experts here, you can only be certain you are seeing the full dvd image if you watch on a computer).

-- How can you tell the aspect ratio from measuring images from the photos on the screen?

-- Although the movie's intended aspect ratio is 1.85:1, some folks here have said that it was actually filmed in 4:3 (but with the intent to crop the top and bottom, to 1.85:1). So if the image is any LESS WIDE (Is "narrower" the correct term here? ;)) than 1.85:1, I guess it's possible that we may be seeing more information on top and bottom, rather than seeing less on the sides.

-- Some people will argue that 1.93:1 or 1.78:1 are only a tiny bit different than 1.85. That's true, though I still don't like studio execs messing around with the image in any way; I want to see it as exactly as the director intended.

But I would not worry about it until the dvd is released  ;)

 
The video clips look pre-restoration and it'll be interesting to see what the restorers have been able to do about the transitions for all the additional scenes.

Regarding the Fletcher scene, when Noodles hears somebody entering the mausoleum, he hurriedly puts the key in his pocket. I think the idea was that at the end of the scene Noodles writes down the car's license number on a slip of paper, puts this in his pocket and rediscovers the key.

There is a YouTube clip, presumably a screen cam at the Bologna screening, showing most of the chauffeur scene. At least with that scene there's no transition problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jrPtFJQL0U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jrPtFJQL0U)

  

So I don't know if this has been asked, but does anyone know when the new extended version of OUATIA will be available to us proletariate??!!

Regarding a new Blu-ray or DVD some are guessing at 2013 but at this stage nobody knows for certain.

Announcements have been made that the extended version will be shown in Switzerland, in theaters in France in September and possibly Bangkok.


In the meantime available video clips relating to the additional scenes include:


Mausoleum/Fletcher scene - whole scene

Gang emerging from car in water looking for Noodles - extracts

Exploding car outside Bailey's mansion - extract

Noodles and chauffeur -  whole scene (?)

Noodles and Eve - extracts

Deborah at restaurant next to Railway Station - whole scene (?)

Deborah as Cleopatra  - whole scene

Bailey and Jimmy in Bailey's study - whole scene

 

dvd and newly restored studio production preparation extended print

(http://lostpic.net/images/28ff56dff5edd3faa473ca6423bdf3d2.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/8ca8685bd779873b8113cd53f3c59f02.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/cc0ec0d519da5ce734a01cf3f97265e2.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1adf5e6bcf1fc81cbd0658e8958729b3.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/e129316a1b6963aad9aad11988612421.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/4349ed8b60e8fa23c651c53f15f083cd.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/cba23fe076a0eeb60c9caf092dfbc0d8.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/bd9b1cfa7c7215be7f636eeddd214f2f.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/721a1eeb04013809f4659eacc4203bea.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/2f0e0d3171cdda51ef10c13caae00d33.jpg)

first image from dvd and the second newly restored extended print studio preparation without color corecttion and other effects, more information on all four sides newly extended print

What's the source of those pics?

Are there final screen captures available from the new restoration? All these pics show us is the full 1:1.85 image, but nothing about the actual image quality.

Thanks for the post and images, Derbent 500. I'm sure most of us would love to know a bit more and any more information you can supply would be greatly appreciated.

I noticed that in May 2012, prior to seeing the extended version at Cannes, Robert De Niro gave an 8 minute interview in English to TV5Monde.

He reveals that Martin Scorcese gave him (and probably others) a low quality DVD of the additional scenes.

In the interview he talks about

The Restoration
The Hoods (Arnon Milchan gave him a copy to read and he then realized that he had read the book many years earlier when he was a child.  He found the book very interesting and real with a ring of truth)
Working with Sergio Leone
Jewish gangsters


http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xr8rjc_robert-de-niro-on-tv5monde-the-french-speaking-international-channel_fun (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xr8rjc_robert-de-niro-on-tv5monde-the-french-speaking-international-channel_fun)

 

Thanks for the link! The questions are asked in French but De Niro responds in English!

I didn't understand the interviewer's question about Meyer Lansky but Robert De Niro seems to have ignored it anyway and instead talked about the book.

Thanks for posting  O0

For anyone who is interested and has not yet seen some of the additional scenes here are a couple of links before they are deleted:

Whole scenes (Fletcher/Cleopatra/Bailey and Jimmy):

http://tinyurl.com/bmr8hst (http://tinyurl.com/bmr8hst)


Extracts (Exploding car/Eve/Cleopatra/Deborah at restaurant etc):

http://spettacoli.tiscali.it/spettacoli/video/L-inedito-C-era-una-volta-in-America/530/117508/ (http://spettacoli.tiscali.it/spettacoli/video/L-inedito-C-era-una-volta-in-America/530/117508/)


There's quite a bit more to the Bailey and Jimmy scene than I first thought.  Bailey obviously has health and digestive problems - he drinks milk throughout the scene.  I used to think that Jimmy persuaded Bailey to sign the papers by promising that, after Bailey's death, his family would be able to keep some money.  However it's now made clear that additionally if Bailey doesn't sign the papers, his son would be murdered.

I also appreciate Robert De Niro's acting in the following scene better.  The bit with the pocket watch wasn't in the original script.  It may be my imagination but when Noodles sees the watch, a meaningful item from the first time the two met, and he realizes that his former friend has kept this memento for over 45 years, his expression softens from contempt to almost a smile, then to sympathy and affection, then to pity and then back to hardness and sarcasm.

WOW

This is a scene like the one in the grotto cut from GBU--interesting to see, but unnecessary. Just as it isn't important to know where Tuco found his three friends--or even that they are in fact "friends", or at least acquaintances of long standing--it isn't really necessary to know the details of Bailey's deal with Jimmy--or even the fact that there IS a deal. The important matter is, as you rightly suggest, what occurs between Bailey and Noodles in the following scene.

I kind of like seeing Jimmy come back into the picture at that point, to see how, over the years, the ass-kicking shoe has moved to the other foot, but the scene plays like molasses in winter. Not even important exposition could justify such weak dramaturgy.

But that the Treat Williams character just vanished was always one of the narrative mistakes of OuTA.

Agreed. But solving one problem by creating another is a zero sum gain.

Jimmy does not vanish in the 229MV! we see himon the tv in Fat Moe's during the newscast after Bailey's car was blown up. so we see  that he is still around and involved with the union-political shit in 1968.


For me, this restored scene I guess explains why a man as powerful as Bailey is surrendering and killing himself. With all the money he has, couldn't he just run away to some other country and live out his life in peace and quiet? But now that he knows that his son will die if he doesn't "cooperate," it makes sense why he has no other choice but to commit suicide. (To be sure, the question of why he isn't running away did not occur to me previously).

Also, there is an interesting point about anyone who gets involved in the dirty games of mobsters-unions-politicians: you can manipulate the system for whatever you can and make it rich, but once you step outta line, you are done. So many big mobsters make it big and wealthy, but they make a wrong move and then are whacked and done for. There is a line in this scene where Jimmy says something like "yeah I didn't make mistakes. You screwed up" a very loose paraphrase but that's the point. In this dirty game, you can "succeed" and have everything work out, until you screw up; once that happens, it's over in an instant. Everything you built up for years. Kind of like what happened to Noodles and the rest of the gang: they made it very successfully during Prohibition, but in that one fateful night, they were done for.

I am not saying this is an essential scene, but I don't think it's useless or hurts the movie in any way. Although I guess you could ask, if Bailey is first being informed now, during this party, that he has to die, then how do you explain the fact that he already gave Noodles a contract on himself? Nothing that Jimmy says at that meeting should surprise Bailey. Bailey already made the effort to find Noodles and bring him back to kill Bailey; then when Jimmy tells him on the night of the party that he has to die, he really isn't telling him anything that Bailety doesn't know or hasn't been planning for. So perhaps that scene doesn't make sense after all?



p.s. I still think that, as I've maintained all along, that the most important restored scenes are the ones with Eve. (The restoration includes the scenes where Noodles meets her, but not ALL the scenes between them before we see her on the beach in Florida. I hope that if they do restore more scenes, they include all the scenes with Eve). It's important that we see Noodles meeting her and being with her, so that she doesn't just show up on the beach out of nowhere, in love with Noodles

Yes, but that's not enough. in the 229 min version his role is either too big or too small.

we see that he is still around, that his original idealism for workers' rights has become the familiarly corrupt union-politics-mobster story, and that he is obviously involved with the Bailey scandal.

There are lots of narrative stuff that IMO is missing in the 229MV, but Jimmy is not one of them

Exactly. We don't need explanations for things we never wondered about.

You are going to follow one scene of two guys talking in a room together with ANOTHER scene of two guys talking in a room together--and it's the same room! Man, am I glad that you aren't directing movies.

Any editor would tell you that one of those scenes has to go. It's easy to choose in this case--cut the one that doesn't play.

Yeah, that's never happened before in a movie ::)

I do think that the scene raises a different serious problem, which I described in the earlier post: Bailey's been planning his death for a while now; so there's no reason that Jimmy informing him that he's gotta go should be any revelation to him. He's obviously made the decision to kill himself, already, why NOW does he begin this argument with Jimmy, telling him that he brought him to his position, etc.

There are a couple of nice parallels (idk if that's the right word) though, between the two scenes: In the scene with Jimmy, Bailey turns on his 4 video screens; in the scene with Noodles, he shuts them off (symbolic I guess for the fact that he's done for). And while Jimmy walks out the main door of the study, Noodles in contrast walks out the side door, as always.


Furthermore, I was never really sure what the purpose was of showing Bailey's son in the movie -- except to tip off Noodles (and the audience, in case we didn't realize it yet) as to the identity of Bailey. Someone here once said that the purpose is to show Max "looking at" himself, which is one of the themes of the movie, people making sense of their past and Time. Also, showing his son leaving with his friends to the party  provides some justification for the partiers in the car at the end of the movie (which is meant to be a surreal scene anyway, and the summation of the themes about dreams, time, and cinema). But I guess that after seeing this scene, perhaps there is one other explanation: showing the son gives it a greater effect when Jimmy threatens his life, as opposed to if he had threatened some anonymous, faceless person.

I have to see the actual scene and how it works in the film's context before I can judge it. But so far it seems to me the only new scene which could improve the film.

Maybe the Eve scene, but not for Eve, only for Noodles.

Otherwise, frankly said, I would prefer a shorter, and not a longer version of OuTA.

as far as the Eve scenes go, they are vitally important, I don't know what you mean by "not for Eve, only for Noodles." Do you mean that it's important to show that he's recovered from his obsession with Deborah?

Being a gangster with lots of cash, Noodles can always pick up a dame. But the fact that he and Max are discussing what would be the greatest heist in the history of the world in front of her on the beach, and that she is very distraught on that fateful night when Noodles informs her he won't be coming home for a while, shows that there is a very close relationship between them. There is no way that the movie can get away with just showing her on the beach. (even though we were introduced to her in the opening scenes, those occur after the beach scenes. We have to be introduced to her).

I still haven't seen the scenes with Eve (except for brief moments in a montage), but my understanding is that the scenes that are restored show Noodles walking into a club, miserable after his night with Deborah; Eve is a dancer in the club and she walks over to Noodles; he is attracted to her tits and accepts her offer, on condition that he can call her "Deborah." And he pulls out a thousand dollar bill and gives it to her without looking at it; she says "I've done more for less." He asks her how big the bill was, she lies and says it was a hundred dollar bill. They go to the hotel room where he lives (probably the same room where Eve is killed in the opening scene of the movie), where he is all miserable over Deborah,  asking Even "Do you love me Deborah,"  and he falls asleep before they even do anything; Eve doesn't even take her clothes off. The next morning Noodles wakes up and sees a note from Eve, signed "Deborah." Then comes the scene where he goes to see Deborah at the train station as she is heading to Hollywood....


But there are actually more scenes with Eve that were cut but not restored: At this point, Eve was just supposed to be a one-night stand and that's it. But in scenes that have still not been restored, he meets her again by chance, and that is when they fall in love: Here is how that goes:

when Noodles leaves Jimmy's hospital room, he gets into the elevator, and his gaze falls on a pair of tits.... they are Eve's tits; he says hello to her, and that he'd recognize those tits anywhere; I think she was visiting the hospital for some medical tests. She asks him if he's been cured of his "Deborah-itis," he says yes! Then she admits to him that he'd given her a thousand dollar bill. They make up to meet again, and then Noodles gets out of the elevator, where we have that scene where Max catches up to him and says he wants to go with him to Florida. Then, we have another scene with Noodles and Eve at his hotel room. Noodles has been enchanted with her abundant cleavage. So when they meet in his hotel, he has bought her a gift of some very fancy, large bras. Eve opens her top, and reveals herself..... to be wearing falsies! He'd been crazy about her cleavage, but now realizes she's actually flat!

Suddenly, they hear someone at the door. Noodles pulls his gun out, the door opens, and in walk... Max and Carol, to pick them up to go to Florida!

--------


I am pleased that the scenes where Noodles first meets Eve were restored, but I wish that eventually, they restore all the scenes with Eve (along with the other 20-25 minutes that still haven't been restored). Scorcese mentioned in an interview that there are still these 20-25 minutes that have not yet been restored, and implied that they may eventually be, if they are able to find it or something like that (this interview with Scorcese was transcribed earlier in this thread by Mat Viola).

video provided by Gucci and the Film Foundation narated by Martin Scorsese

http://www.gucci.com/us/worldofgucci/articles/once-upon-a-time-in-america-gucci-restoration (http://www.gucci.com/us/worldofgucci/articles/once-upon-a-time-in-america-gucci-restoration)

Thanks for the link Derbent 5000.  Hopefully all who are interested will be able to see the extended version in theaters or on disc soon.

The additional scenes between Noodles and Eve are fun scenes.  They show a different side to Noodles.  Some viewers may come away from the movie, thinking that Noodles is a loser and feeling sorry for him.  Including these scenes may partly address this and restore the balance between melancholy and the fun times these gangsters undoubtedly had.

The video clips look low quality and it'll be interesting to see just how well the additional scenes have been incorporated into the movie when the extended version airs in theaters or on disc.  There are several on-line reviews from people who saw the new version at Cannes and they seem positive.  One reviewer commented that the additional scenes had slightly more grain but then went on to say that people who have seen the movie several times will notice the new scenes simply because the old version is firmly entrenched in their memory.  It may take a while to get used to the new version.

At the Cineteca di Bologna web site, there are 3 images which are described as captures from frames from the restored scenes. These should represent more accurately the look of the finished movie.

Frame capture from scene 107 Noodles and the chauffeur:

(http://www.cinetecadibologna.it/files/stampa/maggio_2012/Seq_107_De_Niro_Milchan_02.jpg)

Bailey wants to be killed by Noodles at the end.  He knows he has to die so he would rather have Noodles do it.  First, he has guilt over how he treated Noodles and secondly, he figures Noodles would want to do it as revenge.  We find out that Noodles doesn't want to kill Bailey, (and Noodles never calls him Max, and says that he had a friend once, as if "Max", his friend died many years ago. )

added scenes

(http://lostpic.net/images/d7ac5b5b443ebeeb2eae932d2fc31ffe.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/16d662762236b5cd16c1397a8240ebe0.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/f5b37b39592fc8027fc265fdf6bda6a9.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/5bffc36b82b59436bacb672335e4bf01.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/88a93c6fb6af0eee29087356519dc734.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/3fa9c1460c4017edb680955873555419.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/a174e871d045643f820ad4839705fe19.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/ec7e0a2f823c4b8926182ad4966cfbed.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1ab7dad1efa1139931b4b10b0ac3b4dd.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/e442b680e91c131f9895ab11c5193822.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/746fbd9b980720f8dfa05921c0df4b8b.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/b269a08e3ed9f5da66311e0862f6b517.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/e1306af5bdf3964e257879eb5769bc9a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/1b68eef0026c739895acf1784c82873a.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/edb47a938861fbf207b81936190c6a64.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/4c21e78e3cf43e1f5aff05878dde2e76.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/8747b0c666702f690a7564fc2088bb04.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/39217118484cbd452f2209a5638eab8d.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/85c8fe771b456cf82005be954014bf23.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/728fc225b96b46d5d9de205396001749.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/bf3155cfa4880ed3cf389a9324e5b297.jpg)

(http://lostpic.net/images/73be6f743b781000b2d355e233c5ff67.jpg)

According to the issue 359 Cahiers Du Cinema

Sergi Leone in interview there is another 50 minutes of scenes, Sergio Leone meant that 220 min PAL European runntime 3 hrs 40 plus 50 mins will be 270 mins or 220 mins plus 45 will be 265 mins that makes sense

Oooops...needs more work:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/aug/03/sergio-leone-once-upon-time-america?newsfeed=true

while I am of course waiting anxiously to be able to see the restored film, I am glad to hear that they are trying to get it right. I guess that they rushed it to make it in time for Cannes, and now figure they want to get it as best as can be for the theatrical and dvd release. Based on the videos we've seen so far, the quality of the restored scenes is markedly worse than that of the rest of the film; I hope that this new work will rectify that, as much as possible.

Also, as we've discussed there are an additional 20-25 minutes that Leone wanted in the film that were not included in the Cannes release and which Scorcese speculated may eventually be restored (I am not sure exactly why they didn't do it for the Cannes release, whether they couldn't find negatives in decent shape or whatever?) Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but I am hoping that this re-restoration will include more footage.

I am glad that this restoration is in good hands, being done by people like the Leone children and Scorcese, who really care about this movie. So, as difficult as the wait is, my opinion is, take the time to get it right, and when it ultimately is released, hopefully we'll be able to say, after nearly 3 decades, that we FINALLY have the REAL version of the film  :)

Thanks for the link MatViola.

In a way this is good news. It seems to confirm that further restoration will be completed in the autumn and the new version will be back on the film festival circuit during the winter of this year or spring of 2013.  Sounds good to me.  O0

TV5monde also did an interview with James Woods recently (in broken French):

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xsarld_james-woods-cannes-2012-mes-souvenirs-incroyables-avec-de-niro-et-leone_news (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xsarld_james-woods-cannes-2012-mes-souvenirs-incroyables-avec-de-niro-et-leone_news)
 
(Leone wanted teardrops during the watch scene)

 

Any delays for further restoration are good delays


Good on Woods for doing his best in French.

Wow I live in Melbourne and didn't even know that it was going to be screened here, and now it's been pulled! I don't know whether to be disappointed that I could have missed this amazing opportunity or not now that's it's not showing anyway! :-\

If and when the complete, COMPLETE version of AMERICA ever makes it onto blu-ray, it'd be ideal if Sir Christopher Frayling were to contribute a commentary.

OMG! Keep it from D&D!! If he finds out he might try to hurt himself!!!

For those who can understand French and Italian:


http://www.homecinema-fr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1382&t=30025815 (http://www.homecinema-fr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1382&t=30025815)


and


http://www.amazon.it/CEra-Una-Volta-America-Extended/dp/B009HX6PH8/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1349869679&sr=1-1 (http://www.amazon.it/CEra-Una-Volta-America-Extended/dp/B009HX6PH8/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1349869679&sr=1-1)


and


http://dvd.forumcommunity.net/?t=52568847 (http://dvd.forumcommunity.net/?t=52568847)


 
Hopefully the release date of 4 December 2012 won't be delayed again.  I've pre-ordered mine.  One of the posts at DVDforumcommunity says the running time of this version is 260 minutes and some of their members have emailed Andrea Leone films and received responses.

 

WTF, HURRY UP USA!!!

Wow so a BD release is coming after all.

I had thought things had been put on hold until further remastering was completed on the scenes already added (and possibly some others scenes were added)

Screenings of the new extended version were due to start at The Space Cinema in Italy on 18 October 2012 and a new Blu-ray released in November 2012.

Andrea Leone films have confirmed that these will be delayed and the new Blu-ray is now going to be released in Italy on 4 December 2012.

There is a 46 second trailer of this new version at Youtube and an option to view it in 1920 x 1080. I've not done any screen captures yet but the quality looks better than the existing Blu-ray.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qn3mOKMCOzw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Qn3mOKMCOzw)


The PAL version of the unextended movie runs for 219 minutes.  


Assuming the new Italian version is in the PAL format, Amazon's running time of 244 minutes looks correct (219+25=244).


  

Well, the Blu-ray won't be in PAL.

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure Blu-Rays are still region coded...

And the new shot in the video of McGovern looks excellently restored. BONER BONER BONER

Blus are region coded (which has nothing to do with Pal), but they have a 24p/Sec frame-rate.

As stanton says region coded has nothing to do with PAL.  Most Warner Blu-rays are region free but since this is a release intended for the Italian market, regional coding may be an issue.

According to Blu-ray.com (http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=95245) there are some Blu-rays with 50Hz (PAL) content but in the future these may be a rarity.

AVForums.com (http://www.avforums.com/forums/blu-rays-dvds-download-services/739067-blu-ray-pal-v-ntsc.html) have discussed the differences between UK and US versions of Pan's Labyrinth and Face/Off.

If the Blu-ray matches the duration of the theatrical release, the running time will be about 260 minutes.

_ _ _


Noodles85 from the DVDEssential.it forum wrote to Andre Leone Films in September 2012 and received a response, roughly translated as follows:


Dear Daniel,

Thank you very much for your email which I have forwarded to the director's children.

One of the reasons that led us to buy back the rights to the film that Leone only wanted to direct and not co-produce as usual, was the mail from fans when the redubbed version of the film came out.

We carried out a complete audio and video restoration, re-inserting into the film the scenes which Leone had to cut to reduce the overall length of the film at the request of the producers. The quality of these scenes is not 'excellent' because unfortunately only the positives held by Leone's family survive but we thought it only fair to give fans the chance to see the film as originally made by Leone.

This version of the film (in English) was presented last May at the Cannes Film Festival.

It is due to come out in theaters on October 18th and is a version of 4 hours and 20 minutes and, in the Italian version, dubbing the original.

I also confirm that Warner will be distributing the DVD/Blu-ray versions for us in November. This will contain only the original audio versions.

I hope you will succeed in seeing the film on the big screen which for me was a great thrill.

Best Regards,

Gustavo van Peteghem
SERGIO LEONE PRODUCTIONS
ANDREA LEONE FILMS

gvp@andrealeonefilms.it
 
 

Very Cool.  8)

Here are two email contacts for the company; if anyone wants to email them in Italian and let us know what they have to say, specifiocally regarding an America dvd/blu ray release


rl@andrealeonefilms.it   

mfb@andrealeonefilms.it

If it's region-free and with the original English audio, then it shouldn't make any difference except of course higher shipping costs (and perhaps the licensing/subtitling of extra features). However, a theatrical release in the US would be a different matter altogether  ^-^

DVDStore.it quote Region B and PAL encoding.  This may of course be incorrect but some caution may be prudent until definite details are released.

http://www.dvd-store.it/DVD/Blu-Ray/ID-42655/C-era-una-volta-in-America-Extended-Cut.aspx (http://www.dvd-store.it/DVD/Blu-Ray/ID-42655/C-era-una-volta-in-America-Extended-Cut.aspx)

Some delays may not be a bad thing. There is a lot of discussion on the Italian forums about fitting a movie of over 4 hours and extras onto a single BD.  Looks a bit rushed with minimal extras but on the positive side a very low price of just over 13 euros. I think Leone's children have done some interviews which may be shown with the movie in theaters and obviously with more time the extras could be greatly improved.  According to Martin Scorcese a further 20 to 25 minutes may be restored and this would bring the version nearer to the one that Leone originally made.  

The 30th  Anniversary occurs in 2014 so who knows?  Hopefully a version on 2 BDs with a commentary from Frayling, interviews with the Leone family, members of the cast and crew, Martin Scorcese and others, special features on making the movie and the restoration, the many locations around the world used for filming, the book on which the movie was based and biographical details and the true story of Harry "Noodles" Grey.

I will be the first in the queue for that version.

 

This is on the board at MoMA for today:

I'd looked earlier at the calendar and seen the title listed, but since they were reporting a running time of 229 I assumed they were screening the standard version. Now it appears it's the new extended cut, but the info comes too late to be of any use for me.

Sorry, Drink.

If I'd seen your post a couple of hours ago I probably would have gone  :'(

If I'd seen my post a couple of hours ago, I would have too. Those bastards at MoMA have really cheesed me off.

It does say 229 minutes. Why do you think they are showing the longer version? I mean, I know it says that it was restored and all, but does it really make sense that the USA premiere of a version of a movie that millions of people are anticipating is at MoMA??? That's strange.

It really is a bummer that MoMA only plays a movie for one or two days. A week or so would be better, so that everyone who wants to can go when their schedule allows  >:(

Millions of people? Drink, now I KNOW you are on drugs.

I'm guessing the 229 is what some idiot at MoMA put down after looking up the film on some kind of list. The fact that the show is playing as part of MoMA's program of a film restorations, and that the source of the film is credited to Andrea Leone, AND that DeNiro was supposed to personally introduce it leads me to believe that what they were showing was NOT the 229 minute version.

either way, it doesn't strike you as strange that the USA premiere of this new version would be at MoMA?

(And yes, I think the restoration is highly anticipated, though I never took a survey)

The new Blu-ray will sell 3,000 units, tops (in the U.S.).

It was the "European theatrical cut," or the film as it appeared on the two-DVD set.  DeNiro spoke briefly--of course--and did say that he worked a year on the picture, and that Sergio seemed to never want to stop making the movie, the implication being so great was his enthusiasm for it.  I will say this: I saw OUATIA at MOMA about five years ago, and this didn't seem to be in better shape than I remember that print being, although it's quite possible the quality of the DVD has obscured my sense of its quality on the big screen.  Maybe it was just the projector's illumination, but it seemed fairly dark at times.  MOMA's presentation of Scorsese's restoration of OUATITW a few years back was a noticeable upgrade over my previous theatre-going experiences of that film.  Almost forgot: Burt Young was in attendance, and stood up to good applause prior to DeNiro's appearance.

Also, I don't know if anyone put these up: three restored scenes which I presume will make up half of the reported extra 25 minutes.

www.youtube.com/results?search_query=leone+restored+scene&oq=leone+restored+scene&gs_l=youtube.3...658.9575.0.9981.22.21.1.0.0.0.739.2615.16j2j2j6-1.21.0...0.0...1ac.1.ErZ8gnWypTw

Phew - good to know.


Sounds like a Twilight Time release (they always limit theirs to 3000)

That's why I suggested the number. 3,000 seems like the safe estimate for "classic films" (those more than 20 years old). Twilight Time (and I'm guessing others) don't take chances (they have to pay for the license up front). If OUATIA had never been released on Blu-ray before I'd guess higher, but I don't think there are that many people who are going to buy the blu-ray twice.

Let's say they actually sell twice as many units as I guess, or triple. That's still under 10,000. As far as potential viewers are concerned (home video plus special screenings plus festivals but not TV), maybe at most they could reach 40-50,000. Even granting 100,000, we are still nowhere near the "millions" mentioned.

OK. Glad I didn't go then. I still wish those MoMA guys would write less confusing copy, though.

I was addressing the interest in seeing the restored version, not the number of people that will purchase the disc.

One is the index of the other.

 O0 O0 O0

Wow an HD channel dedicated to nothing but Sergio Leone - sounds awesome.

All directors should be so lucky!

RE: the dvd/blu ray, any word on whether it will only be Region 2, or if it'll be region-free?


RE: the movie being "available on PC's, tablets, and smartphones," any further info about that? I guess that would mean that we in America can get it too?

Also, has an official running time been listed for the version in theaters and/or the dvd/blu ray? Cuz Scorses mentioned something about possibly even more footage being restored (in addition to what was restored and shown at Cannes) and I am wondering if that is really going to happen?


Thanks for the info  O0

The running time of the new version in theaters is quoted as 260 minutes.

Ignoring PAL & NTSC, the unextended version runs for 229 minutes. Between 25 and 26 minutes have been added bringing the total to about 255 minutes.

Leone's children have recorded intro and outro interviews which will be shown before and after the movie. It's possible that these are the other 5 minutes.

New Blu-rays and DVDs are being issued in December and some retailers are simply copying the information between the 2 formats.  As other board members have pointed out, the Blu-ray may not be in PAL format.  It is logical however that the DVD will use PAL and be region locked.

The running time of the new version will probably be approximately 244 minutes (PAL 219+25) or 255 minutes (229+26).

To legally use PCs, tablets and smartphones to access Cubovison will no doubt require a subscription but there may be ways round this.

Anyone yet figured out the significance of the tractor and bucket behind the garbage truck?

 

I believe here's the deal:

in a trestored scene, while Noodles is visiting the graves of his friends in the mausoleum, he speaks with the cemetery's director, played by Louise Fletcher, who explains to him that a "Mr. Aaronson" is the one that paid for this mausoleum, and sent a tape with the song (Cockeye's Tune) to play there. Then Noodles sees a limousine following him at the cemetery, and he writes down the limo's license plate.

Soon thereafter, in another deleted scene, Noodles is outside Bailey's estate, where he sees the same limo blow up -- the same car that's on the news report he watches on the tv at Fat Moe's (I guess the reason he was at the estate in the first place is either because by this time he's figured out that Secretary Bailey has something to do with this mystery of why he was brought back). And Noodles sees the garbage truck outside the mansion too -- the same garbage truck that he sees outside the mansion at the end of the movie, in which Bailey seemingly kills himself.

--

As we've discussed here, with these added scenes, the matter of Noodles' return takes on much more of a literal meaning, as a real mystery; in the 229MV, there was much less of this literal mystery.

---

Leone said that the garbage truck is a reference to Jimmy Hoffa, who disappeared mysteriously (and whose death has still never been solved), Frayling quoted Leone saying that a garbage truck was seen outside his house for 3 days before his disappearance. However, it is obvious that the James Conway O'Donnell (played by Treat Williams) is also inspired by Hoffa: after all, Bailey is a corrupt politician with union ties who is connected with a scandal over the misuse of union pension funds; but ODonnell is the actual corrupt head of the national union of truckers! So while I have seen Leone quotes discussing the Hoffa inspiration with Bailey but I've never seen any quotes where Leone explicitly mentions the Hoffa inspiration with O'Donnell, there is no doubt whatsoever that both their characters are actually partially inspired by Hoffa

Just my way of seeing things but the significance of the tractor and the bucket is to do with match cuts.

First a bit of conjecture.  Sergio Leone's method of filming upset several prominent people in America and he left the country voluntarily before he was forced to leave.   He may not have completed all the scenes he had planned to shoot there.

The gang go swimming in a car, some of the gang come to the surface but there is no sign of Noodles.  Originally this was to be followed by Noodles coming to the surface in a Turkish Baths in 1968, then to Turkish baths scenes in 1933, to Max driving through the streets of New York in 1933, arriving at the Baths and saving the life of Noodles who is about to be killed by gunmen.  Max is wounded and Noodles carries him to a car outside, passing by a garbage truck.  To be followed by the garbage truck and exploding car scene in 1968.

None of the Turkish Baths scenes were filmed and, in the unextended version of the movie, we cut from a car disappearing into water to a burnt out car being sprayed with foam.

I thought I'd seen a video clip of a crane or something nearby when the gang re-surface and I wondered if Leone had used this and the tractor for a match cut.


  
SPOILER:  Some may prefer not to know what is in the extended version or to see all the additional scenes in full. If so, please do not read further or click on the following link.  Four days ago La Stampa.it uploaded an item about the additional scenes and a video of over 20 minutes showing the additional scenes in full.  After the gang go swimming in a car and come to the surface, there is a nearby dredger with a large bucket containing waste and we cut to Noodles and a tractor with a bucket containing waste behind a garbage truck in 1968. Full scenes of the exploding car, the matching number plates and Noodles meeting Eve etc.


La Scampa.it video:   http://tinyurl.com/9xywmlx (http://tinyurl.com/9xywmlx)


 

I don't think you have to worry about spoiler alerts, if you read the pages on this thread since Cannes, we've discussed pretty extensively all the added scenes, I think everyone here knows what they are already  ;)

Of course, it would have been great if we could have seen the new version without knowing what was in it, but of course, knowing that i wasn't going to be able to view it for a while after it was shown at Cannes, there was no way I was going to have the self-control to avoid finding out what the added scenes were.

Long before the announcement of the restoration, there has been a script floating around of the movie which includes the added scenes, as well as a separate document with just those added scenes. Both docs are available here http://msb247.awardspace.com/ (click "Links & Downloads)

James Woods looks quite scared in the video at La Stampa.it.  The dredger is very close to the gang and he seems fearful that the bucket of mud and dirt will be deposited on him. Possibly he thinks that the dredger has picked up the body of Noodles in its bucket. 

The dialog in the additional scenes sounds better than that in the original script.  In the book and the original shooting script, Eve is given a $1,000 note but in the movie this is changed to $500.

It seems that the new extended version still has some gaps.

In 1968, Noodles receives a letter advising him that his friends have been reinterred at Riverdale.  He visits the mausoleum, gets a key to a railway station locker and collects from the locker a suitcase containing dollars and a note "advance payment for your next job".

So far so good.

Chronologically we then move to Noodles and a garbage truck outside the mansion of somebody important in Long Island. We are never told how Noodles came to be there.  The gates of the mansion open and a car which was tailing Noodles at the mausoleum drives out and explodes.

We then cut to the scene of the exploding car on TV, the mention of Secretary Bailey and an interview with Jimmy O'Donnell, whom Noodles knows from the 1930s.

In the not yet restored footage we would have eventually seen Noodles visiting Carol at the Bailey Foundation Rest Home and Noodles explaining that somebody from the home had called him and said that Carol wanted to see him.  Carol denied this.  Back to the movie Noodles sees a photo of the innaugural festivies of the home in 1953 and in the center, Deborah, who he learns is the home's patron saint.

We then move to Deborah playing Cleopatra on stage, Noodles visiting in her dressing room, the party at the Long Island Mansion and the mysterious garbage truck and procession of classic cars scene.

Even in the original version with an additional 50 minutes or in the shooting script, Noodles' arrival outside Bailey's mansion for the first time is not explained.

  

well at some point, he has received an invitatio to Bailey's party -- we never find out if that's in the original letter he received that caused him to come to New York (but he never mentions it to Fat Moe), or if some messenger delivers it to him while he's staying at Fat Moe's.

Either way, once we find out later he's received an invitation to a party there, it makes sense that he's be outside a few days before -- if you got an invite to a mysterious party on some fancy mansion, maybe you'd first wanna find out wt is going on. He knows that Bailey has something to do with his return, a fact made much clearer in this restored version. In the 229MV, we really never see any justification for why Noodles should be so intently watching this news story about the Bailey scandal. I guess you could say it's because he used to be involved in the early labor movement, so it still makes sense that Fat Moe would ask him "you know those guys?" But this point is brought out more clearly in the 229MV, that Noodles has a reason to be watching that news program, and to know that this Bailey scandal has something to do with the key to his return

I'm not convinced.

The shooting script reads:

SCENE 100 LONG ISLAND MANSION (1968) Exterior. Day.

i.e. no mention of Bailey

In the later scenes Bailey's name is mentioned.  E.g.:

SCENE 153 THE GARDEN OF SENATOR BAILEY'S HOUSE (1968) Exterior. Evening
 
SCENES 154 & 156 & 158 SENATOR BAILEY'S STUDY (1968) Interior. Evening.

The movie flits between 3 different time periods but, apart from the smile at the end, all the scenes within a time period are presented in the movie in chronological order.  The first time we learn of the invitation to the party is during the conversation between Noodles and Deborah backstage after her performance as Cleopatra.

Chronologically the scene of Noodles standing outside the gates of the Long Island mansion for the first time occurs shortly after he visits the mausoleum and collects the suitcase of dollars.  As Noodles mentions in his conversation with Carol, a lot of funny things have been happening to him recently and he is obviously keen to find out who sent the letter which prompted him to return to New York, who has financed the reinterment of his former friends to a fancy mausoleum, who is tailing him and who has left a suitcase of money for him.

He obviously writes down the car license plate number for a reason.  The next logical step for Noodles after collecting the suitcase of money would be to stash it somewhere safe and return to Fat Moes to investgate further and try to come up with answers for the things which have been happening to him recently.  Possibly he finds out the registered address of the owner of the vehicle from the car license plate number.

  

Check out the Italian website Once Upon A Time In America Extended Version some intresting stuff in there, including

Video
Fotos
Biography
Articles
Cast
Crew
Research
Restoration

http://ceraunavoltainamerica.it/ (http://ceraunavoltainamerica.it/)

(http://www.repubblica.it/images/2012/10/17/161340763-8d078dcb-5ba2-45d8-92b2-eb9e8ec70d12.jpg)

And this animated menu of the future italian Bluray includes some added scenes of cleopatra

http://vimeo.com/49382733 (http://vimeo.com/49382733)

(http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/340/707/340707232_640.jpg)

Bluray and DVD Dec 4 in Italy

http://www.animangaplus.it/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1375&catid=34&Itemid=54 (http://www.animangaplus.it/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1375&catid=34&Itemid=54)

(http://www.dvd-store.it/data1/images/america.jpg)

http://www.dvd-store.it/DVD/Blu-Ray/ID-42655/C-era-una-volta-in-America-Edizione-Integrale.aspx (http://www.dvd-store.it/DVD/Blu-Ray/ID-42655/C-era-una-volta-in-America-Edizione-Integrale.aspx)

http://www.dvdland.it/nicom1/p_576566/blu_ray/c_era_una_volta_in_america_extended_cut_blu_ray.html (http://www.dvdland.it/nicom1/p_576566/blu_ray/c_era_una_volta_in_america_extended_cut_blu_ray.html)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-r-sC_WGtvV4/UIcTy6U_QiI/AAAAAAAAFcA/p37FZ-jN_b8/s1600/ceraunavoltainamerica2012.jpg)

What's up with the awful use of music in some of those scenes? Drowns out Max's cries for Noodles after driving off the dock, and it completely ruins the mood when Noodles meets Eve and asks to call her Deborah. It makes it feel like a playful scene when really it's hopeless and sorrowful.

Also, I'm still completely not cool with meeting Eve interjecting between the rape and the train station scene. Judging from the clips, I think it's going to really ruin the flow of my favorite sequence. I'm excited for this new restoration to come out, but for the most part I think I'll be remaining partial to the 226 min. cut I'm used to.