Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid (1973)

[stanton]

You wicked german.

He he, probably, but it seems Moorman (too bad) avoids the trap ...

[stanton]

Regarding the theatrical version of Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid, nowadays one can get the impression that this film did not get any recognition before a longer cut appeared in 1988, but that is not true. Peckinpah?s film found a lot of admirers from the beginning on. Having returned to Hardy?s Western encyclopedia, I also reread his entry about Pat Garrett, which was written before the longer cut was released, and it starts with ?A masterpiece, despite being mangled? and ends with ?This film is essential viewing?. I easily agree, and in between there is this quote: "Peckinpah offers what one critic has called ?a paralysed epic? ". Paralysed epic, that wonderfully describes the fatalistic view of the film, in which (unlike the exploding The Wild Bunch) everything implodes.

[Novecento]

Criterion, Eureka, Arrow... anyone... where's my four disc special edition (TCM, Seydor, Theatrical, TV)? I've only seen the first two.

[dave jenkins]

Alex Cox:

Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid is the most political of all American Westerns, and for all its difficulties I think Rudy [Wurlitzer]?s collaboration with Peckinpah (and Dylan, and all the actors and crew!) led to the creation of a masterpiece.

All of this was compounded by the studio?s mutilation of the film on its release; the creation years later of a much longer version, based on Roger Spottiswoode?s cutting copy; and later still a shorter but intelligible version based on the long cut. Criterion are releasing the film on Blu-ray this year, and will presumably pick a favourite

. 

https://pleasekillme.com/alex-cox/

Thanks to Crime Film Hub for spotting this!

[uncknown]

They should have left the theatrical version alone.
It is the " director's cut".

[stanton]

They should have left the theatrical version alone.
It is the " director's cut".

No, definitely not.
There is no DC of PG&BtK, but I think the 2005 cut comes the closest to such a thing. Apart from the yet unreleased Stanton cut of course ...

[Novecento]

They should have left the theatrical version alone.
It is the " director's cut".

 I think you mean the TCM cut, don?t you? For me, that is the director?s cut. It?s the last one he touched.

So are these Criterion rumors true then?

[uncknown]

Afaik the version released in theaters was prepared by Sam.
So, yes it's the DC.

[noodles_leone]

Afaik the version released in theaters was prepared by Sam.
So, yes it's the DC.

That argument isn't valid. He released it but his vision had been compromised in the editing room by the studio. So this is the very definition of "not a director's cut". There is no DC for Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid. We only have lots of different versions that:

(1) get more or less close to/far from what Sam wanted
(2) are more or less good (IMO they're all flawed masterpieces anyway - that movie can be hurt, but it's just too good and too powerful to lose its masterpiece status by tampering with 10% of the edit)

Let's discuss those two points instead of wasting energy on a phrase that is, in our case, absolutely meaningless.

[dave jenkins]

By the time that Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid was in the editing room, Peckinpah's relationship with the studio and his own producers had reached the breaking point. Peckinpah's first cut was 165 minutes.[9] Aubrey, enraged by the cost and production overruns, demanded an unrealistic release date for the film.[9] Peckinpah and his editors, given only three weeks,[9] were forced into a desperate situation in order to finish editing on time. Furthermore, Aubrey still objected to several sequences in the film which he wanted removed, forcing Peckinpah to engage in protracted negotiations over the film's content. Adding to the problems, Bob Dylan had never done a feature film score and Peckinpah's usual composer, Jerry Fielding, was unhappy with being relegated to a minor role in the scoring process.

Peckinpah did complete a preview version of the film at 124 minutes, which was shown to critics on at least one occasion. Martin Scorsese had just made Mean Streets (1973) and was at the screening, and he praised the film as Peckinpah's greatest since The Wild Bunch. This version, however, would not see the light of day for over ten years. Peckinpah was eventually forced out of the production, and Aubrey had the film severely cut from 124 to 106 minutes, resulting in the film being released as a truncated version largely disowned by cast and crew members.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Garrett_and_Billy_the_Kid

This information comes mostly from Peter Bart's book. There is no director's cut.

[mike siegel]

True, there isn't a director's cut. (and certainly not the 103 minute version, which made Peckinpah sue the studio!)

The preview version is the closest. But it wasn't fine tuned and also included some alternate takes
that probably would have been altered by him.
The 2005 cut unfortunately has some deliberate editing choices which are hard to accept (including some sloppy misttakes)

[dave jenkins]

Mike, know anything about the rumored Criterion release?

[uncknown]

I've already commented on the quality of the film  in previous posts.
The various versions are pretty similar.
I don't think it's a " butchered masterpiece"

[uncknown]

 Fwiw I don't think the different versions of GBU are definitive " director's cuts" either.
MY version would be the BEST one!
😅

[dave jenkins]

Fwiw I don't think the different versions of GBU are definitive " director's cuts" either.
MY version would be the BEST one!
😅

Them's fighting words! I'm certain stanton will meet you on the field of honor. Not sure about choice of weapons, you'll have to ask him.