Yeah, that's my thinking as well. Regardless of what you think of the movie on its own merit, it's reputation and legacy is always going to be tied into it, and it would have been nice to see the supplements reflect that, regardless of how Cimino feels about it...

My only argument against this is that it's not the first Kurosawa film that someone should watch. Hell, it shouldn't be the first samurai film, either. I lent it to a friend a few years back because he had never seen a samurai film before, and he specifically wanted to see SS. He said he couldn't get through the whole thing, either. It IS too much for a first-timer.

But see, it's not just a "Samurai" movie. Sure, it's long (and in B&W, and subtitled and 1.33), but it's power can not be denied! While it's not my favorite movie ever, I can't think of any movie that's better made. It's probably the best film ever made. Technical aspects, scripting, character development, editing, photography. You want it? You got it, and in spades.

But more importantly, and why I think that it's much more than just a great Samurai movie, Kurosawa managed to do something that no one else has really been able to do; make a film that appeals to literally every human being who sees it, regardless of class or social caste. We all sit around talking about the great power of cinema, the revolution of image, blah blah blah, but ultimately it all hits a brick wall when you realize that the average asshole on the street doesn't give a shit about your subtly inserted critique of modern society.

Kurosawa managed to transcend that wall of class and education most perfectly in Seven Samurai. That's why I'm befuddled that someone can't get through it - especially film fans.

While I had always liked and admired Seven Samurai, it wasn't until seeing the Criterion Blu that I absolutely fell in love with it. Not sure if it was the culmination of all my previous viewings, or the amazing technical presentation, (or both,) but I think if someone is going to watch it for the first time, that's definitely the way to go.

I wasn't saying I couldn't sit through the whole thing (which I did) or that it's a bad film, far from. The points I highlighted are merely the reasons why I had a hard time connecting to it, and why I'm a bit more cautious about diving deeper into Kurosawa's catalogue.

It's not just a Samurai movie, just TDK isn't just a superhero movie. For a first timer in general. Not counting film lovers, for the average person who MAY just get an itch for it...it's a long movie to introduce to someone. Hidden Fortress is probably the easiest AK film to show someone. Decent length, humor, action, drama...all in a very neat and lean package. I'd also say Yojimbo. SS has all this but the length..and it's amazing for it but for someone who has never even dipped into that world...it's a lengthy one of sorts.

This. If they only did one film for both Lynch and Mann, I'd be ok with these choices (although I'd really like to see a CC edition of Mulholland Dr.).

I would just die. Literally. Just. Die.

I agree. For me, this film and most of his other films were the easiest to get into as far as foreign films go. In fact, one of the big criticisms of Kurosawa is that he's too Western. I could understand younger people today having a harder time with 3 hour subtitled b&w films but for a film fan, it shouldn't be a problem.

I agree with your perspective on the greatness of the film, but I don't think that if someone doesn't like a film that you appreciate, then you should push him or her aside as some philistine who can't understand the finer things. I think that if LPMA came out here and said, "how can you like this long, boring film, it's in B&W and subtitled. OMG!!!!!!1!" then I might agree with giving the person a hard time. If you love Kurosawa as much as you say you do, wouldn't you want to help others understand that experience?

I love Bergman, Fellini, and Godard about as much as a person can, but I'm acutely aware of why a person might not like Pierrot Le Fou, 8 1/2, and The Seventh Seal, three of my favorites, I usually start people off in a more subtle introduction to those auteurs.

LPMA was asking if he should dive deeper into Kurosawa. I think the answer is a resounding, "yes" because there are all of those films that others have mentioned. For the record, I don't even like Yojimbo and Sanjuro all that much, but love Rashomon, Seven Samurai, and Ikiru. Someone might come in here and lay waste to those three and talk about the greatness of the first two; people have different taste. Again, I agree with you on Seven Samurai's greatness, but getting others to see that greatness is not going to result from giving them a hard time if they don't like it the first time.

My favorite film is Fanny and Alexander and I've never recommended it to a single person that hasn't already seen a few of Bergman's films, or has a really extensive film background. I think people will have a preconceived notion about a 5.5 hour film.

You never know what makes for a lack of connection. Sometimes it's mood, sometimes it might not reach you directly. I would take the advice of others here. As I said above, I actually don't love (but I do like) Yojimbo and Sanjuro. Maybe read up on some of those films that I, and others, have listed and see which one might work out well. Like I said, I've shown Rashomon to a number of people who were certainly moved by it.

The first time I saw Citizen Kane, I thought it was crap, but my English teacher made us watch it in high school and I was 17. The older I get, the more I love the film. The film didn't change, but I did. Maybe in a couple of years, you'll give Seven Samurai another shot and find a greater connection. And, maybe not.

Yeah what's funny in a way is that Kurosawa is my favorite director, yet I've only seen 12 of his films out of 30. (I own 28 of them, but, hey this is DVDTalk where the backlog goes on forever. ). But those films are enough to leave a big impression, as well as his autobiography and the various books/documentaries about his movies.

But even so I will definitely be looking forward to seeing the rest of them at some point in the future.

I like to say about Kurosawa that you could take 10 of his movies and make a solid argument that they're the 10 best movies ever made, if it weren't for 10 of his other movies.

Well, Luis Bunuel is my favorite film maker, but I certainly wouldn't recommend his stuff, willy nilly, to just anyone the way I would Kurosawa, who I feel has a much broader appeal.

The extras drop it from a "must have" to a "might buy during the next B&N sale if I can use a coupon".

I can't believe Criterion is going to do a Heaven's Gate release that lacks any kind of documentary about its production and the death of UA and doesn't include the different versions. What's the point if you're going to neglect the most interesting things about the movie? Might as well be Twilight Time or Olive.

Well, that's a bit hyperbolic. Twilight Time and Olive rarely offer any kind of special features. This release includes multiple interviews that, for all we know, may be fairly lengthy and detailed.

I just wrote my first ever letter to Jon Mulvaney expressing my disappointment over the extras.

I still can't get my head around this huge missed opportunity.... I guess they really wanted that director approved label on the front of the case

I'm fine with the extras on Heaven's Gate. The negative stuff has been well documented and Criterion is just trying to present the film in a way that Cimino approves.

Yeah but to new viewers of this film? We'd like to know as much as possible. I've never seen the film, have heard the name..that's it. Now reading all the shit on it? Yeah...I want all the details.

Yes, but shouldn't Criterion strive to present the movie in the correct historical context? Perhaps the liner notes/essay will delve into it.

I think it's better to let the film stand on it's own. Cimino denies the stories so you can't say what is truly correct. In some ways, the film is unfairly maligned. It didn't end New Hollywood nor did it bankrupt UA.

Are you Cimino's publicist?

It's comments like these which makes it even more of a reason that Criterion should have provided those extras...people are just making things up now.

Ok. I think I misunderstood your post. I have no personal feelings toward Cimino. I think Final Cut would have been a good extra but I also understand why Cimino wouldn't like it. Personally, I think the documentary sort of defends the film and Cimino's vision.

Denies what stories? That critics and moviegoers alike shunned his film? I don't care how Criterion or Ciminio try to shine it up, HEAVEN'S GATE is a BAD movie, no ifs, ands, or buts.

Good thing you're here to tell everyone else what their own opinion is on something subjective.

I think the "stories" being referred to are about Cimino's wastefulness on the set. People paid double and triple overtime for weeks just in case they were needed. Fifty or more takes on numerous shots. Building and blowing up a cabin just to see what it would look like, and not even bothering to film it. Hiring a lead actress who couldn't get the accent right and all the studio execs were opposed to. Shooting in locations that took hours to get to. Building a street set, then tearing it down because Cimino wanted it to be eight feet wider.

Most of these stories seem to be true. Maybe a couple are false or exaggerations. They all paint Cimino as an out of control egomaniac. But it's probably no worse than Coppola was on Apocalypse Now.