Hi pobojc,
You can setup your account to email you whenever somebody replies to your posts. Will save you having to check for answers.
Anyway, I got a bit geeky and maybe put a bit more effort into my comparison than needed. In fact as I'm typing this message now, a work colleague has peered over my shoulder and asked me what on earth I'm doing.
I imported the 72 minute cut in Sony Vegas's timeline and then imported the 61 minute cut so that they were overlaid. You can actually set the transparency of one cut to 50%, so that you can play both versions simultaneously on top of each other.
The first thing I noticed was that the 72 minute cut has been cropped. I believe this may have occurred when it was transferred to VHS.
My plan was to try to make a cut every time the 72 minute cut differed, so that I could line the two versions up and see gaps where footage was missing. I was not expecting the kind of differences I found...
The opening shot has a different narrator. The lines are very similar, but it's clearly not the same person reading them.
Then, starting with the first scene, I noticed that alternate angles have been used. The cuts are in different places. The voices sound slightly different, as if from different takes. The scene gets the same message across, but not all the lines are the same. My plan to simply isolate the additional footage from the 72 minute cut was not going to work.
I cut the entire 61 minute version into (somewhat random) little chunks and then spread the chunks across the timeline to sync them with the 72min. (So I lined up the end with the end and the middle with the middle etc). Then I could see if there were any huge gaps or if the pace was consistent.
To my surprise, the two cuts never differed from each other for longer than a few seconds. I was expecting to see at least one extra scene, but there was nothing.
I concluded that both versions are the same and contain all the same scenes, they have simply been cut together differently (Like the workprint version of The Dark Crystal, which adds 25 minutes, yet somehow remains the same). Although I didn't sit through the whole 72min cut, I believe the 61min to be tighter and is probably the better version to watch.
As for the film itself, I didn't really get it. I'm sure Kubrick had some good ideas and themes that he intended to explore with the film, but the script and actors weren't strong enough to make it work and the action scenes were some of the most awkward I've seen.
Next I will be watching Killer's Kiss, then I'll finally have seen all his features.
Let me know what you think of the Fear and Desire.
Best,
fishpoo
reply
share