MovieChat Forums > Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid (1973) Discussion > New 2005 Cut Not So Special

New 2005 Cut Not So Special

posted 18 years ago by modernknife
39 replies | jump to latest

Warner Bros./MGM have done the right thing by releasing 2 versions of Sam Peckinpah's "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid". Because after a single viewing of the "new" 2005 Special Edition, I'm certain that I will not be revisiting that version of the film ever again, regardless of the picture and sound upgrades.

When I first saw PG&BTK on cable television in 1990, it was the 1988 Turner Preview Version. It was shown uncut and letterboxed -- and for a Peckinpah fan it was a revelation.

Simply put, it's all about the opening credits and framing device. Two things (among others) removed and reworked in the new 2005 Special Edition, which quite frankly, isn't so special.

Peckinpah's assistant Katy Haber is interviewed as saying Sam was trying for a more poetic/lyrical feel to the pace of the film. Several scenes in the finished film reflect this, but none as well as the slow reveal of the opening credits. When I think of pure Peckinpah, I think about the freeze-frame title cards from the 1988 Turner Preview Version (which should be said, was Sam's first "Director's Cut" of the film he turned into MGM -- he never really had the chance to fine tune it to his original specifications -- and whoever whispered into his ear to change the opening credits was no friend to Peckinpah.) His first cut of the scene was brilliant and adds a deep layer to the narrative. Plus it's just so radical to see Billy shooting Pat from another time period. The editing is mesmerizing.

I'm sorry, but no "credit sequence set to montage stills" can ever have the beauty of the freeze-frame of Pat Garrett shot on the ground as the title of the film appears on screen. The following title cards are all masterfully chosen to act as pauses as various members of Billy's gang are introduced. The film needs these pauses and breaks. It's a clear signal to the audience that this film will be different and is in no hurry.

Watching the recut scene in the 2005 version I was shocked and appalled. Jamming through the lines, characters and information at a lightening pace did nothing to help the film. Plus, trying to combine the opening cross-cutting of Pat Garrett's death and Billy shooting chickens is mishandled by not setting it up and letting it play out as originally intended. We don't even get the proper "date card" informing us to the "flashback time period" until after the Billy shooting sequence has ended. Plus, it's not cut as well as seen in the Preview Version.

It doesn't even feel like Peckinpah.

To be fair, on the commentary for the 2005 version, the "experts" were quoted as saying that this version was "...an attempt to combine the Preview and Theatrical versions..." Notice and remember the word "attempt". Cause they are right. And it sure is a pretty poor one.

And come on, when Pat says to Billy "And in three days, I'm making ya" and then we hear the strums of Dylan's guitar as a freeze-frame still puts up the credit "Directed by Sam Peckinpah" -- it's one of those great Peckinpah credit moments that still gives me chills. One to rival his title card for "The Wild Bunch" when it appeared after the line "If they move, kill 'em".

The still frames and title cards are as much a part of Peckinpah's editing artistry as any of the slow motion in his work.

Plus, lines of dialogue are cut. Billy's joke to Pat is butchered when Billy's final line is removed from the picture. This "dick" joke was always one of the more clever ways to say to a friend "mine is bigger than yours". But it is lost in the 2005 version. And later in the film, when Billy shoots Bell, in the Preview Cut, he shoots Bell a SECOND time, then says his line "Keep the Change". In the new 2005 cut, he shoots Bell ONCE, then says the line. Without the pause and action of the second shot, the line now comes off as a cheesy one-liner. In the Preview Cut, the line makes sense. Billy is giving Bell the rest of the change from the gun.

Is cutting the second shot of Bell part of a new "PC Peckinpah" I am unaware of?

Now sure, the new 2005 cut has a new bonus scene with Pat and his wife that adds some nice character shadings. Plus it's now layered more with the Bob Dylan soundtrack -- which does work well, but on a first viewing, now seems a bit overused. The words to "Knocking On Heaven's Door" are now heard over Slim Pickins' death scene (only an instrumental version plays on the Preview Version) and it works pretty well, but it also risks being very "on the nose", where the original version wasn't so obvious. I'm sure fans of the song will be happy to see what it was originally written for.

I guess you could argue for a "4th" cut of the film that better integrates the material from the Preview Cut and the 2005 "remix" version. But until then, stick with the 1988 Preview Cut. It's the film I fell for.

[–] mikeslant 18 years ago

I agree overall, while the new cut was interesting to see once, I still like the Turner one better. Theres some things I liked in the new one, especially to hear the vocal version of "Knockin'" when Slim Pickens dies, but I still like the Turner one better. At least they released both Cuts on one DVD set, instead doing something like releasing two different cuts on two different DVD's, ala what most Studio's do nowadays.

[–] plungerjoke 18 years ago

i agree with a lot of what you said,
disagree with some too,
the intro to the film is one of my favorite things ever, and believe it or not i first saw the theatrical version,
somehow my local video store had a 20 year old VHS tape, strange,

anyways, because of my love for this sequence, even in that version, i watched both,
and until the end, i preferred the turner preview version to the new cut,
the grey freeze frames with red letters, just something about it,
made it feel like they were moments frozen in time, which was great,
however when this sequence reaches its close i think it really runs out of steam by continuing on after billy's response "he's my friend."

also, i think that the montage suggesting that pat garrett was shot by billy the kid years earlier i felt was just as effective,
sure he was shooting chickens but the way montage is "supposed" to work is ,
see item A,
see item B,
item A did something to put item B into the state it was in,
the old shot of boy crying, shot of man, OOO what a mean man thing.
if im not mistaken, in the film, we see billy shoot, and then garrett shot
i think it works just as well,

also there has been lots said about this but i think it needs to be said again,
the sequence iwth garrett's wife really is crucial,
without it the later scene with the prostitutes kind of seems like nothing but blatant hedonism on the part of garrett,

i also dont really get how the second shot makes it any less of a "cheesy one liner,"
either way its the same thing... whcih i would argue is not really a cheesey one liner but a bit of grim cleverness,

i do feel though that neither version is perfect, but viewing them together can take us closer to something that is what peckinpah could have made,
i love it.

[–] camelotontheavon 8 years ago

Just a clarification: Billy does not deliver the line "Keep the Change" after killing Bell (He reluctantly shoots Bell in the back with the gun that was planted in the outhouse) I believe he uses Ollinger's own shotgun (filled with dimes) to kill him. Then he deliver's the line.

[–] smacaulay-4 18 years ago

Totally agree that the Turner credits are so much better than the 2005 version.

If you look at the great trademark Peckinpah credit sequences — Wild Bunch, The Getaway, Pat Garrett - (and Junior Bonner to a lesser extent) they all combine stylized freeze-frame title cards punctuated with music and continuing sound effects. The freezeframes are often jagged, catching weird offguard moments, but held together by the music as they introduce many threads - past, present, the hero and his doubts, the key characters and their tension against the forces of society and order, the animal metaphors (headless chickens, scorpions and ants, deer inside the prison) - and bring them to a head with the final title title. "If they move, kill 'em." "In five days, I'm making you." McQueen crumbling his matchstick bridge in jail.

I can't define the magic, but these sequences work like overtures setting up a mood that covers the rest of the film. In The Wild Bunch and Pat Garrett especially, there is a sense of the past becoming lost as the present freezes into this historical photos.

The still photo montage of the 2005 version, while approved by Peckinpah from his theatrical cut, is just too smooth, to me. It has the elegiac lyricism, etc, etc, but none of the distinctive jangled nerve sharpness to Peckinpah's best editing.

If only one can get a Turner cut with the wife scene added.

[–] djfntstque 18 years ago

I posted a blog about the crucial differences between the two. It's at http://steef.ndrw.net/cellurants/

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] PunkBuster88 18 years ago

The following is all just opinion + it doesn't mean much but:

I agree that the Opening Credits on the Trunner version were 1000 times better than the 2005 version. No question.

Also Agreed, that the second shot that Billy delivers to Ollinger (not Bell) when he's on the ground was absolutely necessary to avoid the one liner thing...

Additionally, I am not a fan of the "Knockin on heaven's door" vocal version, BUT... BUT... BUT... Other than that though I think that the 2005 version was better of the two. There was a lot of stuff in the Turner version that I felt didn't need to be in the film.

Overall if I had to choose though I'd pick the Turner version because it felt more Peckinpah-like.

Anyhoo, it's just opinion, but thanks for listening.

[–] ctoprefect 18 years ago

I've only had time to watch about an hour of the picture, but these are my impressions so far.

The Turner cut opening credits is better, much better. The editing is smooth and the impression of characters shooting forward and backwards through time works. Plus, stopping the action for the credits work for me. Maybe someone thought is was too much like The Wild Bunch, but it does work, especially Peckinpah's card. In the 2005 cut, with no pause, the music fades in, but in the Turner cut, it stomps in and makes an impression that this is an important moment.

I miss most of the lines that do not appear in the 2005, such as Bell's parting line to the gang ("I'm planning on living" - which proves false when Billy kills him two weeks later) or Black Harris's last words ("Paris, France" - he refuses to tell Garrett where Billy really is).

Did anybody notice a badly-synced moment when Olinger tells Billy about the dimes in his shotgun? It is completely out of sync! Which is weird because the same moment in the Turner cut is in sync.

There is a bad dissolve to join two scenes of Garrett in the barber's chair when there used to be a shot of Billy on his horse separating them.

Definately miss Olinger's line about taking Billy through a tour of Hell on a spiderweb.

Quite liked the scene with Mrs. Garrett. He doesn't touch her and we know why later when it takes a bevy of whores for him to get it up.

The "experts" on the commentary track make a big squeal about the placement of the raft scene. For me, it works in either spot.

Although I haven't gotten this far yet, I heard they cut the scene where Poe finds out where Billy is hiding from Dub Taylor. I'm going to miss that scene. I think it's important to have Elisha Cook's speech about how tired he is of being shot, sunburned and snakebit and waiting to be killed. This is the reason why Garrett sold out: he didn't want to turn into something like that guy. Also I think it works better for Poe to find out where Billy is and tell Garrett, not for Garrett to find out from Ruthie Lee and have Poe tell him info that he already knows.

I peaked at the ending and they do not return to the scene of Garrett's death. That's another loss.

"The vocal version of "Knockin" is nice, but the "humming" version worked fine too.

Those are my observances thus far.

[–] supersecretalias 18 years ago

I agree as I to was very dissapointed by the 2005 "Special Edition." All the 'fine-tuning' robs the film of it's resonating lyrical power. I could easily go off on a rant about people returning to films and "improving" them years after the fact especially if it's not even the orginal filmmaker but I'll refrain as I believe at least in this case the effort was motivated out of respect and love of the material.

I'm very glad the "Preview Version," the version of the movie I originally fell in love with, is included as it is the verions I'll rewatch countless times and show to friends that have never seen this movie. I only wish the Preview Version had undergone the image and sound polishing as well. (I don't remember the laser disc version being this sub-par in image or sound.)

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Dr_J 18 years ago

I now have seen all 3 versions - original, expanded 1988, and SE 2005, and I think the 1988 one is the closest to what Peckinpah had in mind. I say that because it has more the "feel" of a Peckinpah movie than either of the other two. The other two felt rushed in comparison.

Although there's many examples, the one that I noticed right off the bat was an exchange between Garrett and one of the members of Billy's gang at the beginning of the film (I'm almost sure it's Holly, Richard Bright's charater)

Garrett: I understand those Mexican senoritas are still pretty as ever down there.
Holly: Yeah?
Garrett: [pause] yyyup.
Holly: [smiling] yeah...

In the '05 version, it ends with Holly's first response. It's just a difference of 2 words - just 2 words and 2 facial expressions - and yet it opens up a whole new view on the characters.

In the '05 version, the characters appear to be sizing each other up, cagey, spoiling for a fight. The '88 version has this, but you can also sense that they had a past together, that within that veiled threat lie memories of good times long ago, still longed for.

I know it's a small thing, and that languid exchange between a principal and a minor character should be nothing, and yet it is pure Peckinpah - unhurried, textured, open to a million interpretations, and no explanation needed nor forthcoming from the director.

The '05 version does have a better picture and sound quality, and does have 2 scenes that also add to the film - the scene with Garrett's wife, and the scene with Ruthie Lee in the bordello. My druthers would have been to have expanded the '88 expanded version with these scenes and given it a nice restoration.

Who knows, maybe for the 35th Anniversary in 2008?

[–] alfredo_garcia 18 years ago

Well, I am bothered by some of the dialogue deletions, I don't like the title sequence and Billy's second shot into Ollinger should have been kept, but...

I do think the Dub Taylor/Elisha Cook jr scene should be removed. It's unnecessary and doesn't feature either title charcter.

I prefer Slim Picken's death scene with Dylan's vocal.

The afore-mentioned Mrs. Garrett and Ruthie Lee Scenes are certainly welcome.

The raft scene is better placed in the 2005 version. It's a great scene but has no place in the third act, especially after Garrett has just intensified the plot by killing Holly.

I agree with Paul Seydor that Garrett's "What you want etc..." line is awful and should be deleted.

As for Peckinpah's cameo, he probably would have cut it, but I like the longer version because well...it's Sam!

So I'd say that I don't mind the new cut, but it's hardly definitive. It feels rushed but that may be because I've grown so used to the 88 version.

[–] smith93 18 years ago

I've gotta say that I prefer the new cut. The DVD special features debunke the idea that that '88 cut is the version Sam wanted us to see. Yeah, there's some stuff there that I think shouldn't have been cut and was, but there's alot of flab too. The movie slows down way too much toward the end, it lacks Peckinpah's editing scheem as he wanted it, and some of the scenes only in the '05 cut are a huge loss. The scene with Garrett and his wife is very important to the movie, and without that and the scene where he slaps around the hooker, that whole sequence at the bar/brothel before they go to Sumner is just filler. And the latter part of the '88 film, aside from being draggy, is too heavy handed.
And regarding the credit sequence, yeah, I loved the '88 credit sequence as much as everybody else, but the images during the credits in the theatrical/'05 version are beautiful, and not the half-assed throwaway that some have made them out to be. Also, I like the way it seperates the scene of Pat and Billy in the bar and the seige of the cabin with something substantial. The just streight from one to the other seemed inappropriately jarring.

They shouldn't have cut the "Keep the change," scene though.