Rather oddly, IMDb is counting this picture as two films, it's original 1950 British version GONE TO EARTH and the edited print that was released in America as THE WILD HEART in 1952. Has anyone seen BOTH versions? I have THE WILD HEART from it's US broadcast on AMC in the 1990's. Even with the UK original running almost a half hour longer, I feel it still should be listed as one film.
shareYes, that's quite correct. The version that was initially released in the States as The Wild Heartwas edited enough to be considered a different film.
I've seen both versions. Confusingly, when Gone to Earth was shown on British TV some years ago it was shown with the title The Wild Heart - but it was really Gone to Earth.
The differences are legion. Although he had been involved throughout the filming, executive producer David O. Selznick disliked the finished film and took The Archers, Powell and Pressburger's production company, to court to get it changed. He lost the court case, but discovered that he had the right to have the film changed for its American release.
Consequently, Selznick had the film re-edited and some extra scenes shot in Hollywood under director Rouben Mamoulian to make the version known as The Wild Heart (1952). Selznick's changes were mostly additions to the film: a prologue; scenes explaining things, often literally, by putting labels or inscriptions on them; and more close-ups of Jennifer Jones. The most infamous of the alterations are the scenes at the end when Jones is supposedly carrying a tame fox — in the additional scenes, she is carrying what is obviously a stuffed toy fox.
Selznick also deleted a few scenes that he felt weren't dramatic enough, some of which were major plot points, so the story doesn't make as much sense as it does in the original film. One of the most significant of these cuts is when Hazel goes to perform the ritual in her mother's book at the Devil's Chair. The ritual is supposed to tell her if she should go with Reddin or Ed'ard. She hears what she thinks is the fairy music (actually just her father practising on his harp, blown on the wind) and so she goes with Reddin. With this cut out there is no reason for her to go off with Reddin - apart from lust.
In his autobiographies, Powell claimed that Selznick only left about 35 minutes of the original film, but, in fact, about two-thirds remains intact. Overall, Selznick cut the film's length by 28 minutes, from the original 110 minutes to 82 minutes.
You can tell which version is which. If it shows the Selznick mansion in the opening credits, then it's really The Wild Heart, whatever title it's given.
Steve
Thanks for the info. I'm going find my tape of THE WILD HEART and watch it this week as I haven't seen it in maybe twenty years. I actually liked the movie but did not think it was great or anything.
If two-thirds of a 110 minutes remain that's about 74 minutes, a cut of 36 minutes plus 8 minutes of new footage. One thing that struck me as bizarre is THE WILD HEART ends with man's voice proclaiming "Gone to Earth!", which made no sense since the original title was not known by viewers.
I rather liked the bit with the pet fox (I don't remember the scenes with the fox obviously being fake but then I last saw the movie two decades ago) which kind of captured the childlike quality of Jennifer's character.
I'm really tempted to get one of those import dvds off ebay of GONE TO EARTH for a chance to see the original film.
The British DVD of Gone to Earth is a very good one. A restoration was done by a nice man at Disney, but then the suits at Disney decided that they didn't want to release it. Luckily it was picked up and released in the UK by Pearson. The DVD includes some "behind the scenes" footage taken with a hand-held 8 or 16mm camera as they worked on the film. Although there is no sound to that footage (they have put a music track on it) so it helps if you can recognise the crew as well as the cast. But it shows what they went through to make it, lugging wind machines up those steep Shropshire hills.
It's not exactly the best film Powell & Pressburger ever made. It shows its origins as a book too much, and it is overly melodramatic. But it's good enough and even an average film by The Archers is still a lot better than most films by most other film-makers
It fits in well with their other "landscape" films like A Canterbury Tale and I Know Where I'm Going! where the landscape on location is a significant part of the story.
Steve