1224 Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid

[Mr Sausage]

Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia could be described as pitiless, but Pat Garret and Billy the Kid is elegiac. It's like Once Upon a Time in the West that way.

[DeprongMori]

So unless imdb is lying, Rudy Wurlitzer, who is still alive, will not be involved with this release in any way. And he's been extensively involved with two past Criterion releases! Is there some sort of problem he has with Peckinpah or his own work on the film, or am i just feeling the steely chill of austerity Criterion? Or should I just shut the fuck up and get over myself? Nevermind, complaining is a legitimate use of this forum! It has to be!

According to Alex Cox:

Rudy wrote a scathing introduction to the paperback edition of the screenplay. Copies are hard to come by now, and very expensive. His descriptions of Peckinpah ditching his script, and reverting to scenes from his early episodic TV westerns, like The Rifleman and Zane Grey Theater, are most amusing. But, over time, I think he’s come to appreciate the finished film.

My copy of the paperback with Wurlitzer’s foreword is some 2700 miles away, but my foggy recollection is that he distanced himself from the film because his screenplay was mostly jettisoned in the making.

[Randall Maysin Again]

I think I was just reacting to this Letterboxd review:

I love how Pat Garret plays the same function as Robert Ryan does in The Wild Bunch, executor and witness to the end of times, but by blowing it up to such large proportion Peckinpan makes the elegiac quality disappear, it is sad, tired and just horrible,

For me it was precious and a little affected. The brilliant John Coquillon's cinematography was both extremely beautiful and a contributor to this impression. I definitely prefer Straw Dogs, Ride the High Country, and Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia.

[Adam X]

It’s been a long while since I’ve seen this film so I can’t really comment, but I feel like you’re perhaps misreading Furtado’s review; and leaving off the last sentence fragment (“… but he will keep going.”) misrepresents it. He’s talking about the character of Pat Garrett rather than the film there, and Mr. Sausage’s comparison to Leone’s film seems rather apt.

[Randall Maysin Again]

No, you're right, my mistake.

[Number Forty-Eight]

The theatrical cut at last! I can't believe it's been missing on home video on all formats except Pan & Scan VHS.

[Orlac]

To clarify, it is that Richard W and he is in the industry.

One of the most pathetic individuals I've ever encountered online - a pretentious mysoginist.

[dwk]

One of the most pathetic individuals I've ever encountered online - a pretentious mysoginist.

Aye, and there is a lengthy thread dedicated to that, but he seems to have some contact with someone who worked on this, so it is a reliable source of information.

[Orlac]

God, they're really arguing about this over at the "other place."

[Lighthouse]

Is there any chance that this Criterion Blu will be region free?

[FrauBlucher]

Zero chance. But they could release a region b in the UK

[DeprongMori]

Zero chance. But they could release a region b in the UK

Would a UK release even be possible without cuts to the “chicken target practice” scene? Previous releases required cuts.

[FrauBlucher]

Hmm. Has Criterion ever edited a film for a UK release?

[Peacock]

Hmm. Has Criterion ever edited a film for a UK release?

Yes, Zatoichi and the Fugitives has a blurry oval applied over a shot of a snake dying.

[yoloswegmaster]

Mike Siegel's response to a user on the other forum who was claiming that Criterion had to be made aware of Mike since they weren't aware of him in the first place by someone else and that they weren't striving for "perfection" on this release:

"Perfection" in the movie business isn't easy to find. Too many people, deals, different goals, tastes, ego's etc. etc. involved (also stupidity). It tore me apart many a times - on the one hand, coming from the Super-8 (!), VHS generation, I embrace almost every Blu-ray of "old" films. On the other hand so many releases could be much better - with a little knowledge and extra-effort. I co-produced so many (35-40) international Peckinpah's the last 17 years regarding supplements, and there's not a single one that couldn't be better. IMPRINT's CROSS OF IRON comes closest (for my money anyway), ARROW's DUNDEE too. One should always aim at 100% and be happy with 95% - 97% . But I also met many labels out there that just don't care really. It's a business.

Whatever the outcome (PAT GARRETT, I didn't see restored versions yet),
I'm very happy about this release.The title (was) on top of our wish lists for so many years - now it finally happened. As with JUNIOR BONNER I tried myself for over 10 years (together with other labels), very frustrating. BONNER (KINO LORBER) happened due to a package deal, a small miracle (licensing from Disney is almost impossible). OSTERMAN is not that important, but I'm so happy I could do the IMPRINT box. It's far from being perfect, but budgets also have a big effect on the final outcome (and sales are going down, as we all know).

I'm truly happy I finally got the chance to make my film on PAT GARRETT (one of my better ones, I think). I was in contact with Criterion about this a long time ago, but so much time passed that we lost contact. Producers changed, secrecy etc. Also they do not work as other labels, rather like a little studio - they produce their own "in the house" supplements and usually do not license from freelancers like me. Hence I'm very very happy this important chapter of my PASSION & POETRY series will see the light of day (or rather darkened screening rooms).
As we know, the studios don't care anymore, so we must be greatful for the fantastic filmhistorical work done by so many indie labels, very often it's not that easy...

As for the film itself, I don't comment much. The different versions are piling up, that's the only thing I know for sure. I remember talking with Seydor about it 24 years ago, we had similar views. And I don't know what really happened in 2005, 'not sure who's to blame. But I'm sure that they didn't have an easy time with the studio. I thought the restoration was quite good but unnecessary flawed (some bad music fading/editing, wrong music cues, sloppy editing when Whitey Hughes character dies, omitting some good stuff like the line I always liked a lot "what you want and what you get are two different things!". I had quite a list here, but I can't find it. Don't have to, unfortunately I'm not involved. I just make documentary films far away from LA in Germany... many thanks to CRITERION for including this one. I'm sure (or rather hope) you're gonna like it.

[Black Hat]

5. The 2005 Special Edition, also known as the Seydor Cut. In the early 2000's, Peckinpah scholar Paul Seydor, who had seen Peckinpah's private cut of the film, attempted to assemble a version of the film that would resemble the "best of both worlds," using the higher-quality footage from the negative and the cut scenes included in the Turner Cut, as well as several scenes included in neither (I think the chicken-catching scene is one of these). Having known Peckinpah personally (Seydor even dated his daughter!), he wanted to create a version that would most accurately resemble Peckinpah's original vision. However, this 115-minute-long cut was rushed and underfunded. As a result, Seydor was able to rearrange the structure of the film to fit Peckinpah's version, but used a number of cuts that had been taken from the theatrical version and had never been meant for release; there were also issues with the audio. Seydor has for almost twenty years expressed a desire to retry this experiment with better funding, finally resulting in...

Is this the version on TCM's rotation?

[Hogfather]

5. The 2005 Special Edition, also known as the Seydor Cut. In the early 2000's, Peckinpah scholar Paul Seydor, who had seen Peckinpah's private cut of the film, attempted to assemble a version of the film that would resemble the "best of both worlds," using the higher-quality footage from the negative and the cut scenes included in the Turner Cut, as well as several scenes included in neither (I think the chicken-catching scene is one of these). Having known Peckinpah personally (Seydor even dated his daughter!), he wanted to create a version that would most accurately resemble Peckinpah's original vision. However, this 115-minute-long cut was rushed and underfunded. As a result, Seydor was able to rearrange the structure of the film to fit Peckinpah's version, but used a number of cuts that had been taken from the theatrical version and had never been meant for release; there were also issues with the audio. Seydor has for almost twenty years expressed a desire to retry this experiment with better funding, finally resulting in...

Is this the version on TCM's rotation?

Yes. Even though Seydor explicitly said he didn't want it to supplant the 1988 Turner cut, the 2005 Special Edition has become the primary version on all streaming services - including, ironically, TCM.