Sergio Leone Web Board
Films of Sergio Leone => A Fistful of Dollars => Topic started by: titoli on December 31, 2008, 07:15:34 PM
-
I mean, the one Leone completed at the moviola before doing cuts for the censure (or for his own second thoughts).
Eastwood is quoted as saying, in an old biography I reviewed in another thread, that the first time he saw FOD it was more than 2 h long. I wonder where he saw it. I don't think he could have seen it after shooting ended, as he must have returned to USA at once or almost. But he was sent a copy in USA (this he told during a press conference in Rome, when somebody gave him a copy of the 45 and he candidly admitted he didn't need that as he was sent the reels almost at once). The same, I assume, he showed Burt Reynolds as reported in Frayling's Leone's bio. I don't think he owns the uncut version (that I don't think it was ever shown publicly on Italy and anyway it's not the one I saw in 1965 and in later years in the cinemas and was shown on TV, the only difference being the missing sequence of Joe's recovery being cut from many dvd's release but I presume restored for newer releases). I am sure the material is still somewhere: I only wonder when and if the family will decide to bring it to light again.
-
i remember reading that too many moons ago. if eastwood was correct. it adds up to about half an hour of unseen footage. also in frayling's book he states TGTBTU was originally 4 hours long. so there must have been an hour of unused footage. i would love to know what all the footage was, but i do not think we will ever see any of it. the best we can hope for, is if some whizzkid uses CGI to reconstruct the socorro scene and releases it as an extra on some future deluxe edition dvd. because the reconstruction on the special edition is shit and just leaves me feelng annoyed and frustrated. happy new year by the way
-
I don't know if we'll ever see any unreleased footage of any L.'s film during our (expecially mine) lifetime. But I'd bet the material is still existing.
-
Eastwood is quoted as saying, in an old biography I reviewed in another thread, that the first time he saw FOD it was more than 2 h long. I wonder where he saw it.
Eastwood's first time viewing was with some friends back in the states (at first he was embarassed to show them the movie not knowing what to expect).
The timeline was sometime just before going back to Italy to shoot FAFDM.
Not sure if this info is legit but it has been cited many times.
-
Eastwood's first time viewing was with some friends back in the states (at first he was embarassed to show them the movie not knowing what to expect).
The timeline was sometime just before going back to Italy to shoot FAFDM.
Not sure if this info is legit but it has been cited many times.
I doubt it then that it could be a more than two-hour version.
-
I have the interview with Eastwood that I think the quotes are from, I'll find it, scan it and post it soon...
-
Eastwood's first time viewing was with some friends back in the states (at first he was embarassed to show them the movie not knowing what to expect).
The timeline was sometime just before going back to Italy to shoot FAFDM.
So . . . this was before it was dubbed into English? Because he would have had to watch the film in order to dub it, and once it was dubbed he would have seen it. But why would Eastwood show his Stateside friends the film in Italian or completely undubbed? Something doesn't add up here.
-
So . . . this was before it was dubbed into English?
That is how the story goes.
C'mon guys... Eastwood has told this story several times.
I won't believe this is the first time anybody here has heard this.
-
The only time I've heard of it was a passing reference in Spaghetti Westerns.
-
The only time I've heard of it was a passing reference in Spaghetti Westerns.
I assume you're talking about the Frayling book?
Well now I know the story has been told elsewhere because I've never read that book.
I've also seen an interview with Eastwood telling the story.
-
So . . . this was before it was dubbed into English? Because he would have had to watch the film in order to dub it, and once it was dubbed he would have seen it. But why would Eastwood show his Stateside friends the film in Italian or completely undubbed? Something doesn't add up here.
Uh? He would show it undubbed because it was his first feature as a protagonist. And the movie was the smash it was overseas. And it's not a movie which cannot be at all go unappreciated even if not understood completely. And it was a masterpiece anyway. We're talking about 45 years ago, no vhs or dvd available then.
And still I wonder where the f... Eastwood saw the longer version.
-
Could he have possibly seen a work print?
-
It was probably a rough cut. I remember Frayling quoted Eastwood as calling it "absolute madness", which implies bad things (Clint's not the type to use madness in a good way). No reason to assume that it was coherent or fit for release in any way, or even that there was any additional material beyond uncut/longer versions of scenes in the final cut. Remember the restored version of Topaz is just twenty-thirty minutes of additional footage added to already existing scenes.
-
Found that article I mentioned (towards the end he talks about what was cut), and yes, I 've seen/read that story many times that the first version Eastwood saw was the italian cut, but I believe it was a straight italian cinema print (not the workprint/early cut etc) because if you remember the story as it's been told many times in print etc, he only first knew of the film's success when Sofia Loren said that Eastwood was Italy's biggest star with the film "fistful of dollars" (this shocked Eastwood because he had made the film under the title "magnificent stranger".) It was at this point that he requested an italian print and was able to see the film with Burt Reynolds & other friends.
(http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/7922/eastwoodarticlear8.th.jpg) (http://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=eastwoodarticlear8.jpg)
another earlier article...
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/303/article2af4.th.jpg) (http://img522.imageshack.us/my.php?image=article2af4.jpg)
-
Let's put some of this debate to rest....
from the book Clint Eastwood: The Man with no name by Iain Johnstone:
(http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5214/cemanwnonmaeijyi0.th.jpg) (http://img84.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cemanwnonmaeijyi0.jpg)
From Richard Schickel's biography (quality is the best I could with such a tightly bound book)
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/7815/rich1ck0.th.jpg) (http://img397.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rich1ck0.jpg)
(http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/1123/rich2vr6.th.jpg) (http://img397.imageshack.us/my.php?image=rich2vr6.jpg)
-
This is all very well and good, but what is IN the missing scenes? I only have interest in such a long version if we know what's missing, otherwise it's just a piece of trivia.
-
We don't know that there ARE missing scenes at all for FOD. The only footage I've seen not in the current release is a few alternate takes/angles in the FOD trailer included on the italian BR disc. But in that trailer is nothing that indicated a deleted scene. Also, I've been collecting Leone stills/books etc for many years now and I've yet to come across a photo that leads me to believe there's something that was shot and then cut from the film. Considering the low budget, they probably shot only what they needed and pretty much used everything. The only thing I've ever come across text wise is this quote from the dvd savant website:
Quote from Leone anthology review from dvdsavant.com:
"Informed fans mention scenes present in some foreign versions but never seen in UA's export copy, including a scene of the Baxters sitting at the Rojo's dinner table. All of these films were customized for release in different countries. Some scenes were cut after initial engagements, or were perhaps set aside yet reinstated when local censors cut other scenes. When it's difficult to simply get a useable transfer element from a foreign producer, looking for variant versions is not always possible."
I've never seen any stills or other evidence to suggest this is a legit scene, and none of the italian prints ever had this. Also, I don't know who these "informed fans" are. I'm going to get in touch with the website and see if they can point us in the direction of these "informed fans"...
The sad reality of old-school filmmaking is that in most cases out-takes or unused footage was usually destroyed. Even recently, the original negative footage of Blade Runner was marked for the garbage pile, and only bad paperwork on the storage facilites part allowed it to be saved for the recent dvd. It IS possible that a workprint or very early cut could have survived, but considering the low budget, they would have probably screened it and made changes/cuts after that point on the very same print.
This is all very well and good, but what is IN the missing scenes? I only have interest in such a long version if we know what's missing, otherwise it's just a piece of trivia.
-
Anyway, it's clear that Eastwood never saw a 2-hr cut of the film, right? He saw the Italian release print, and nothing like the Ur-version titoli is hoping to find.
-
Exactly.
-
This is all very well and good, but what is IN the missing scenes? I only have interest in such a long version if we know what's missing, otherwise it's just a piece of trivia.
On the contrary, I'd be interested to watch missing scenes without knowing what to expect in advance.
I think Schickel's version of how things went is the most realistic and dependable. Eastwood never saw the two h. version. So why did he mention it to Kaminsky? Because, I presume, he was in a Leone-stinging mood and wanted to present him as a bungler who didn't know where it was at and was just waiting for Eastwood to appear on the scene to make ends meet. As we know, he's been proven a liar on the matter of the "advices" he gave to Leone, starting from the "serape" business. But I don't think he invented the 2h story from scratch. I think he shot sequences he didn't find in the version he saw and, after having spoken with Leone during their subsequent shooting experiences, he put things together and declared such to Kaminsky.
Is there any chance they might have survived. I believe they did, though I didn't enquire into the matter. If I'll have some spare time I'll try to sort out the question.
-
On the contrary, I'd be interested to watch missing scenes without knowing what to expect in advance.
That's not what I said at all.
-
That's not what I said at all.
But it's what I have understood.
-
Sorry Titoli, I'm confused by the end of your post and don't understand what you mean by "though I didn't enquire into the matter" Do/did you know somebody involved with the film or Leone family?
On the contrary, I'd be interested to watch missing scenes without knowing what to expect in advance.
I think Schickel's version of how things went is the most realistic and dependable. Eastwood never saw the two h. version. So why did he mention it to Kaminsky? Because, I presume, he was in a Leone-stinging mood and wanted to present him as a bungler who didn't know where it was at and was just waiting for Eastwood to appear on the scene to make ends meet. As we know, he's been proven a liar on the matter of the "advices" he gave to Leone, starting from the "serape" business. But I don't think he invented the 2h story from scratch. I think he shot sequences he didn't find in the version he saw and, after having spoken with Leone during their subsequent shooting experiences, he put things together and declared such to Kaminsky.
Is there any chance they might have survived. I believe they did, though I didn't enquire into the matter. If I'll have some spare time I'll try to sort out the question.
-
But it's what I have understood.
I was saying that since the scenes don't seem to exist any longer, the fact that they did at one point is not of interest.
-
Sorry Titoli, I'm confused by the end of your post and don't understand what you mean by "though I didn't enquire into the matter" Do/did you know somebody involved with the film or Leone family?
Nope. And I don't think that would be the best route to tread, at least at the start.
-
Nope. And I don't think that would be the best route to tread, at least at the start.
Ah, so maybe someone at MGM/sony or the italian distribution company then? It would be amazing if there were cans of film sitting in somebody's attic/basement :), we can all dream can't we?
-
Ah, so maybe someone at MGM/sony or the italian distribution company then?
Nope, either. I can't reach that far.
-
A man's gotta know his limitations. ;D
-
Hey guys, the author of the dvd savant website was very quick to reply and very generously forwarded my questions about this "lost dinner scene" quote to his friends at the mgm research department (the aformentioned "informed fans") and I received this friendly answer today (I had also forwarded them my threads about the cut scenes of FAFDM from this site which is why they're mentioned as well) :
Hi Glenn, Lee and Jordan,
Thanks for asking. I can't say that I can add much at this point. My best recollection is Clint Eastwood's statement in an interview many years ago. He said that he watched the Italian version of FISTFUL when it was completed - "It ran like two hours or more. Absolute mayhem! Later on, they cut it and it was better. Then they cut it too much." I think the first cut he was referring to was the 100-minute version that we all have on DVD now. I think the one that was cut too much was United Artists' theatrical U.S. version that went out at 96 minutes and was the only version I ever saw in theatres. That one had literally every 'bloody' scene trimmed out of it (i.e. Estaben Rojo's two close-ups where he is shot by Silvanito from the ground at the end of the film). About fifty percent of the Rojos killing the Baxters near the end was also removed.
I'd have to side with Clint on this one. I suspect the longer print would not be a revelation. Speaking of the missing dinner scene, Leone does a 'last supper' parody with the Rojos dinner also. That missing scene might just repeat the same idea. That's my two cents. I appreciate seeing the website (thank you) and I also think that FFDM might be the better film to pursue 'lost' scenes from (there have been too many varying versions of that film here). Thanks again,
Kansas
-
Yeah, DVD Savant's a cool guy. Thanks for the info. O0
-
Found a passage in the novelization that somewhat describes this supposed Baxter/Rojo dinner scene (the Fistful novel unlike the other two books stays pretty close to the script- probably because it's a different author than the other two) - I can certainly picture it being intercut with the graveyard scene (placing the bodies) the same way Joe exploring the Rojo compound is intercut with the graveyard gunfight later..
from the novel:
'The Rojos have asked us to come to dinner,' she said after examining the nervous faces of the men. 'And we must go. I don't like it any more than you. Not at all, even if they granted all the guarantees we demanded.'
Her husband seemed about to speak but she hurried on, not allowing him the opportunity to voice an opinion.
'So we'll go along with it.' Her voice abruptly became threatening. 'But don't touch a thing in that house. You must not eat. You must not drink. You must keep your eyes open and your wits about you. It is not yet time for me to die, and if it were, I would not choose to end my life in that evil house.'
With this, and without awaiting for a reaction to her words, she strolled decisively down from the porch and the men stood aside, allowing her passage to the buggy which Antonio had brought from the back of the house. The gang fell in behind the buggy as Antonio drove his mother down the street towards a dinner party that not one of them wished to attend.
But, to the bewilderment of them all, the occasion passed without incident, for Ramon was as good as his word. His gun, and those of his brothers and their men, really were hung on the walls of the big house. And as the evening wore on the initial atmosphere of tension was dissipated and the mood of relaxation evident in the Rojo gang was communicated to the Baxters so that when the time came for parting it was as if the two groups had been life-long friends. And those citizens of San Miguel who witnessed the return of the Baxters to their house looked on in amazement at the smiling faces and boisterous behaviour of the gang members. Almost all went to their beds that night feeling that peace had at last come to the town.