MovieChat Forums > Hell or High Water (2016) Discussion > i just read the script online... wow! b...

i just read the script online... wow! better than the movie!

posted 8 years ago by reylaforet
10 replies | jump to latest

I just read the script at

<https://www.scribd.com/document/323754871/Hell-or-High-Water-Aka-Comancheria-Taylor-Sheridan
>

There are scenes and lines of dialogue that were cut out of the film (probably to keep it shorter and more focused on tighter plot advancement).

But for me, these moments give the narrative more resonance and depth to the characters. For instance, there's a scene after Marcus Hamilton retires where he's sitting in his empty house (after his wife died), and the script describes the deteriorating furniture and you can just feel his sense of useless loneliness.

There are other tiny little moments in the script, between the cops, and also between the brothers, which add a sadness and sense of existential futility, which the movie moved through more quickly, and with less emotional inflection.

Also, a few plot points were clarified in more detail. But, overall, the script (while a little longer than the finished film), provided a much more vivid sense of elegiac emptiness, stasis, loneliness, stagnation -- and the feeling that the characters, and their environment had no future (except maybe some oil in the ground).

The narrative in the script gives the audience a chance to see how really trapped are the characters. More description about Hamilton's backstory: his wife died, and he's more scared and lonely about the future, alone.

The mythic-American-Indian subtext seemed more eerie, and the whole Texas environment seemed to be slowly decaying from stagnation and hopelessness.

If you liked the film, I think the script really makes it more haunting and sad.

I realize finished films sometimes need to keep things moving, and chop out little moments, but in this case, I think the entire script should be put back into a director's cut on DVD, etc.

The script itself SHOULD definitely be nominated for Best Original Screenplay -- although maybe they only nominate based on the parts of the script which actually got released in the movie.

There are some pricless descriptions of the characters' thoughts in the script, which got a little glossed-over in the film.

Anyway, if you liked the movie, the script fills in small subtleties which add a dimension of sadness and richness to the sense that nearly all the characters have no future, in a slowly but relentlessly decaying region of American culture.

[–] One-Eyed_Jack 8 years ago

There are scenes and lines of dialogue that were cut out of the film (probably to keep it shorter and more focused on tighter plot advancement).

Based on what you say was cut, it sounds like those cuts were made to, like you said, focus on the plot and make it the quick, concise, crowd-pleasing, summer blockbuster they turned it into by getting rid of the more complex themes like alienation and existentialism that would have potentially allowed Hell or High Water to transcend being the mere genre piece it is. That's not to say it's not a very good and infinitely rewatchable genre piece, but it sounds to me like if the director had followed the script and slowed down the pace and perhaps approached the project more as a contemplative art crime film then High Water could have really been something special.

[–] reylaforet 8 years ago

it sounds like those cuts were made to, like you said, focus on the plot and make it the quick, concise, crowd-pleasing, summer blockbuster they turned it into by getting rid of the more complex themes like alienation and existentialism that would have potentially allowed Hell or High Water to transcend being the mere genre piece it is.

I agree...

I think the studio, distributor, and/or producers just panicked and decided to chop it down and speed it up -- to market it to the testosterone redneck cops-and-robbers thriller/heist crowd, who live on shooting, car chases, and outlaws.

The script was written like a greek tragedy, i.e., a slow relentless meditation on the failure of negligent and greedy capitalism. All the individuals are hurting for money -- with no future prospects, while the capitalistic institutions like banks and oil companies are designing ways to maximize their profits (Marx 101).

Philosophically, the Native American/Mexican Texas Ranger represented the ideal of eternal recurrence: the Indians were victims of Imperialistic genocide by White Europeans, and generations later, the White Trash were victimized by the capitalistic banks and oil companies negligently greedy for profit over people.

But before the Native Americans, the fossil fuels under the ground, which nourish today's capitalistic culture, were created by wiped-out animals like dinosaurs, buffalo, dead horses, cows, deer, etc...

So, the cycle of mankind's rapacious stupitidy is trumped by the eternal destructive cycles of blind mother nature -- ad infinitum...

Anyway, I read that the script was considered for some years as one of Hollywood's best unproduced screenplays -- and the crotchety retiring Texas Ranger with the Toto-sidekick, seems like a Clint Eastwood vehicle once upon a time.

So, maybe after this film was finally shot, they previewed it and the audience was fidgety, or complained in the preview comments that it was too slow, or too long -- and the studio distributor decided to sell it as a redneck cops-and-robbers shoot-em-up thriller -- dumping the small slow moments of mythic character meditations. Big mistake!

This original script was a gem of an epic anti-hero Western, in the mold of BUTCH CASSIDY, BONNIE AND CLYDE, LAST PICTURE SHOW, DIRTY HARRY, COMANCHEROS (with John Wayne), and other iconic Hollywood Westerns -- but they chopped it down, for pacing and excitement -- into a faster-paced, compelling, but limited, redneck cops-and-robbers-thriller-heist vehicle.

The release started with a small platform of venues, and theaters were added after uniformly praiseworthy reviews -- but they would have had those same positive reviews if the producers had left in tact, the meditative mythic and character moments moments from the letter-perfect script.

Again, the script is much more elegiac, and dimensional -- but Hollywood loves to vivesect their young, for flash and fanfare -- fearing financial ruin.

It's still an interesting film, but this time Hollywood didn't need to be destroyed by the Comanches, banks, or oil companies -- it waters things down for pacing and violence, and ends up eviscerating the deeper value of its own great scripts.

[–] dhcouch 8 years ago

I just read the script, and there is little there that was not in the finished film. In any case, all the themes mentioned by the poster ARE very clearly in the film. So maybe they made the right decision not to belabor those points which would have made the movie into a philosophical essay. The points were already quite obvious and were even spoken out loud by characters. Maybe more than needed, in fact. Most narratives are better if you leave a lot unsaid and unseen, as Hemingway famously pointed out. What we have is an actually exciting and fast paced [later edit: but with many slow, leisurely, talky moments!], well acted, movie that has depth with perhaps a bit of unneeded padding left out -- what could be better?

[–] One-Eyed_Jack 8 years ago

That would be great if any of what you said was true... which it's not...

[–] dhcouch 8 years ago

One-Eyed jack: What did I say that was not true? What else of importance was left out of the movie? Almost the entire script is on the screen.

The most substantive section that was cut from the script (i.e., not in the finished film) was the extension of the fire scene -- the rangers see wild animals affected by the fire, and sight a cougar. (one can easily speculate as to why that was not included)

Also cut as I recall, a scene where the old ranger has a brief social interaction with another even older man and is horrified to see in the other man the very future that he dreads -- retired, playing cards, etc. I think Bridges conveys his dread of retirement (and grief) sufficiently by embodying it throughout his entire performance, and that cut is an example of a fine cut.

There were a few lines cut from the young brother's interaction with his ex, and from the scene where the old ranger sleeps outside. Not much.

[–] One-Eyed_Jack 8 years ago

What did I say that was not true?

This:

In any case, all the themes mentioned by the poster ARE very clearly in the film.

This:

So maybe they made the right decision not to belabor those points which would have made the movie into a philosophical essay.

And this:

The points were already quite obvious and were even spoken out loud by characters.

Don't engage in discussions above your pay grade...

[–] dhcouch 8 years ago

One-Eyed Jack: why must you write "Don't engage in discussions above your pay grade"?? We do not need to descend to insults, and let's have a little perspective -- we are only talking about comparing a movie and a script.

The OP made a thoughtful post, and listed the themes below -- which are indeed all in the movie:

the old ranger's feeling of "useless loneliness".
[various characters'] sense of existential futility
"elegiac emptiness, stasis, loneliness, stagnation"
"the feeling that the characters, and their environment had no future (except maybe some oil in the ground)."
"how really trapped are the characters"
"[the ranger's] wife died"
"he's more scared and lonely about the future, alone."
"the whole Texas environment seemed to be slowly decaying from stagnation and hopelessness"

The OP also wrote these comparisons, which are a matter of reasonable opinion --

"If you liked the film, I think the script really makes it more haunting and sad."

"mythic-American-Indian subtext seemed more eerie" in the script.

The "eeriest" missing piece seems (to me) to be in the fire scene, which is extended in the script, including the sighting of a cougar in the flames. That may have some relevance to the OP's observation.

The OP also wrote the following which I think is true:

if you liked the movie, the script fills in small subtleties which add a dimension of sadness and richness to the sense that nearly all the characters have no future, in a slowly but relentlessly decaying region of American culture.

and it certainly was enjoyable to read the script. But to me, that is partly because reading the script brings back to mind the vivid and skilled way in which the movie brought the script to life.

[–] reylaforet 8 years ago

below, is an exchange from earlier in this thread. i think it adds a wider context to the discussion....

one_eyed_jack wrote:

it sounds like those cuts were made to, like you said, focus on the plot and make it the quick, concise, crowd-pleasing, summer blockbuster they turned it into by getting rid of the more complex themes like alienation and existentialism that would have potentially allowed Hell or High Water to transcend being the mere genre piece it is.

reylaforet (OP) wrote:

I agree...

I think the studio, distributor, and/or producers just panicked and decided to chop it down and speed it up -- to market it to the testosterone redneck cops-and-robbers thriller/heist crowd, who live on shooting, car chases, and outlaws.

The script was written like a Greek tragedy, i.e., a slow relentless meditation on the failure of negligent and greedy capitalism. All the individuals are hurting for money -- with no future prospects, while the capitalistic institutions like banks and oil companies are designing ways to maximize their profits (Marx 101).

Philosophically, the Native American/Mexican Texas Ranger represented the ideal of eternal recurrence: the Indians were victims of Imperialistic genocide by White Europeans, and generations later, the White Trash were victimized by the capitalistic banks and oil companies negligently greedy for profit over people.

But before the Native Americans, the fossil fuels under the ground, which nourish today's capitalistic culture, were created by wiped-out animals like dinosaurs, buffalo, dead horses, cows, deer, etc...

So, the cycle of mankind's rapacious stupidity is trumped by the eternal destructive cycles of blind mother nature -- ad infinitum...

Anyway, I read that the script was considered for some years as one of Hollywood's best unproduced screenplays -- and the crotchety retiring Texas Ranger with the Tonto-sidekick, seems like a Clint Eastwood vehicle once upon a time.

So, maybe after this film was finally shot, they previewed it and the audience was fidgety, or complained in the preview comments that it was too slow, or too long -- and the studio distributor decided to sell it as a redneck cops-and-robbers shoot-em-up thriller -- dumping the small slow moments of mythic character meditations. Big mistake!

This original script was a gem of an epic anti-hero Western, in the mold of BUTCH CASSIDY, BONNIE AND CLYDE, LAST PICTURE SHOW, DIRTY HARRY, COMANCHEROS (with John Wayne), and other iconic Hollywood Westerns -- but they chopped it down, for pacing and excitement -- into a faster-paced, compelling, but limited, redneck cops-and-robbers-thriller-heist vehicle.

The release started with a small platform of venues, and theaters were added after uniformly praiseworthy reviews -- but they would have had those same positive reviews if the producers had left in tact, the meditative mythic and character moments moments from the letter-perfect script.

Again, the script is much more elegiac, and dimensional -- but Hollywood loves to vivesect their young, for flash and fanfare -- fearing financial ruin.

It's still an interesting film, but this time Hollywood didn't need to be destroyed by the Comanches, banks, or oil companies -- it waters things down for pacing and violence, and ends up eviscerating the deeper value of its own great scripts.

[–] dhcouch 8 years ago

Yes, right, true. I am sorry I didn't ALSO respond to your second thoughtful post, but I ran out of time, and that second post seemed more of your own interpretation of the meaning of the script as you saw it, rather than specifics about what you thought was missing from movie.

Everybody who is interested should definitely go ahead and read the script, which is great, and see the movie, which is great and is IMO about exactly all the same things as the script and is in the same spirit -- see if you think they are as different as the OP writes. I don't think so, maybe you will. I don't think all the great reviews have considered it to be a "mere genre piece" (as another poster wrote) either. As a reviewer in the Guardian wrote (https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/sep/23/hell-and-high-water-dont-breathe-old-fashioned-film-making):

it’s driven less by traditional action theatrics than by people sitting, surveying their space, drinking in their perverted, disappointing patch of Americana. The film is self-consciously mythic, and that’s why it’s poignant

My only substantial other disagreement with the OP is that it seems weird to be blaming Hollywood or the "studio", as interviews I read with the director make it sound like he got to do just exactly what he wanted, but yes he had three test screenings. He didn't pay attention to the audience "scores" -- but he did try to feel how the test audiences responded to the pacing (just as the OP suspected).

Director Mackenzie said (http://www.philonfilm.net/2016/09/hell-or-high-water-might-seem-at-first.html):

I did testing for the first time ever. Jake had done testing on a couple of pictures. I was a little bit disturbed by it, but I got into it. We tested it three times and each time you feel the audience, you know, the audiences write down these score sheets but that wasn't relevant to me and I didn't really read them, to be honest. Just watching the film with an audience and feeling that's where it's lagging or that's where they're disengaged was very informative, and after each test we shaped the film a bit more. Showing the film for the first time in Cannes is a terrifying thing to do, because if they hate a film it's very public and they're very vociferous about it, so knowing you've put it before a test audience before its world premiere is quite a good thing.

And as for the basic theme of the movie -- as the half Comanche ranger Alberto Rodriguez says in the script AND in the film:

A hundred and fifty years ago, all this was MY ancestors’ land. Everything you can see. Everything you saw yesterday. This was all Comancheria. Till the grandparents of all these folks took it. Now it’s being taken from them. Except it ain’t no army doing it. (Rodriguez points at the bank) It’s that son of a bitch, right there.

Anyway, thanks for bringing the script to our attention and availability, and for starting an exploration of the relationships between them.

[–] reylaforet 8 years ago

[quote]I don't think all the great reviews have considered it to be a "mere genre piece" (as another poster wrote) either./quote]

This is exactly my point: the SCRIPT TRANSCENDED the Western/Heist/Thriller genres. Reading the director's interview that you quoted: the film <<as I suspected>> was shortened, after three test screenings revealed that audiences were fidgety.

While watching the film, I felt it was edited too tightly, and moved too fast to allow any slower script-moments to work their magic. The script was plenty tight, but, as I mentioned, I think the filmmakers (director, producers, distributors, etc.) panicked, and kept trying to keep the pacing faster, so Cannes (as Mackenzie says), wouldn't fall asleep at the premiere screening.

I still maintain that the script was nearly letter-perfect, except for some plot issues which I brought up in other threads, e.g.: if they had over a half-million dollars a-year in oil money due them -- why rob banks, and not get a fast (however usurious) short-term loan, before their debt deadline....

And also: the bank was still missing forty-thousand from the robberies, so why wouldn't they prosecute, when the dead perpetrator's brother gave a two-hundred dollar tip to a waitress, between two robberies in one day; and the casino surveillence video would show that they never won $40,000 gambling; and DMV records would show that they never sold a car, as Toby told the casino buy-in cashier.

Anyway, plot smudges aside, the script delivered an existentialist, meditative elegy on the dead-end American capitalistic dream, and the dead Native American dream (where dead animals now produce fossil-fuels for the capitalistic oil companies).

So, who cares if the film slows down in places! Many classic films are long and slow, and this one is the opposite (to its detriment).

Watching the finished film, I continually wanted to know more about the characters' histories dealing with a world which was grinding them down, slowly. Yes, it was inferred, but the script had small interludes which gave the narrative more seamless depth and pathos.

While watching the film, I kept feeling that it was trying to rush, instead of relax. Even if it got "slow and meditative": so what! The script was mythic and meditative and longer than the finished film -- but never SLOW.

Some examples:

In the script, Tanner flirts with the casino hotel clerk when they're booking a room -- and she ends up in bed with him (while Toby ends up staring at the wall, sulking, annoyed, and helplessly emasculated).

But the film-scene starts immediately with butt-cheeks bobbing up and down on Tanner -- with no explanation of who she was -- and pulling the camera back to see Toby under the covers, staring at the wall. Cute, concise, but incomplete.

Also, in the script, the interludes between the Texas Rangers Marcus and Rodriguez was slightly more leisurely and hence more balanced, since, in the script, Marcus' fear of retirement was constantly in the foreground of his annoying put-downs of Rodriguez.

In the film, Rodriguez seemed more one-noted -- constantly accepting Marcus' taunting and teasing. One of the final scenes in the script (which was cut) showed the retired Marcus becoming nearly emotionally-nauseated talking to an elderly Texan retired man. Then, the script describes Marcus settling into his easy-chair, alone in the dark, where his furniture is thirty years-old. I found it a haunting denoument which justified the whole narrative. But the movie tossed-aside those poignant scenes which brought closure to Marcus' struggle for a purpose after law-enforcement.

Also, in the script, after Marcus retires, the Texas Ranger in the office tells Marcus that he's welcome to keep researching the case on his own, since it smells fishy. But in the film, Marcus is sent out to pasture as hopelessly fixated and out-of-touch (when he was exactly correct about Toby being the mastermind, and getting away with it).

Throughout the script, Marcus' fear of lonely uselessness was palpable and resonant, but, (according to the director) the preview audiences were getting bored -- so they "shaped" the film by the three preview screening-responses.

Again, I rated the film: A-/B+. The script: A.

Slowness notwithstanding, critics would be calling it an epic meditative Western, instead of a great redneck vs. cowboy-hats cops-and-robbers genre thriller with existential overtones.

The script was only marginally longer, but never boring. Maybe they'll release the full film (before they had cut it down after the three previews) on DVD, so film historians can judge for themselves whether the "cuts-for-pacing" sacrificed the script's sense of the slow haunting decay.