just saw the movie on TCM for the first time. (Prior to the screening, Robert Osbourne [the TCM host] said that while the version doesn't restore everything Peckinpah wanted, it is much closer to peckinpah's version than the theatrical release was).1. the movie is visually stunning and the casting and acting was good, but overall I was very unsatisfied. I'd rate it 6.4/10:2. There were frequent brief references in the dialogue to Pat and Billy's having rode together in the past, yet no further explanation of the backstory/motivation, and I did not feel I could "identify" with them. 3.Throughout the film, the blood looks so fake it is laughable.4. I always hated Peckinpah's shtick with the slo-mo violence.5. The film kind of drags on for stretches with nothing happening. According to Robert Osbourne's introduction, that was a problem the studio execs had with the film, which led to them cutting it for theatrical release. While I have never seen that theatrical version, who knows -- maybe the studio execs did have a point, for a change. Parts of the film did seem to drag on needlessly IMO.SPOILER SPOILER SPOILERFinally, I couldn't tell who those guys were that killed Pat in the opening scene -- can anyone help me out on that? Thanks
rambling robert zimmerman made his film debut in PGABTK. he jerks his head around a lot and does what he's told
...But the scene with Garrett's wife is good. She even knows what's going to happen with him. "You are dead inside."No mercy for missing lines! Turner version is much better.James... oh my God. He's not playing, he IS Garrett.Oh... I feel pity for his charakter. Just looking into his sad eyes and I know he didn't wanted it and he did it, but for what? For nothing. And he lost his peace forever. At the end being murdered by Poe and the other SOBs.
And it's shorter than the '88 version. How is a *special edition* ever SHORTER than the original?