Revolution: The Director’s Cut (1985 / 2009)
Review by George Elcombe
"A revolution. A new turn"
Note: I have reviewed the DVD from the dual format
edition.
Well, this is a rarity. A film I've never herd
of! It stars Al Pacino and Donald Sutherland and on first impressions
seems to be one of those 80’s historical epics which should have won a bunch of
awards. It turns out it was rushed as was a global flop which was slammed by
critics upon release.
This film is a BFI (British Film Institution) edition
and I am a fan of what they do. Enclosed are the DVD and Blu Ray of the film and
a booklet with extensive essays, but also has a spoiler warning on the first
page. Guess I’d better watch it first!
Plot: Tom Cobb (Al Pacino) and his son Ned sail into
New York to
sell furs during the start of the American Revolution against British rule. Ned
is press ganged into joining the war and Tom is forced to sign up in order to
protect his only son.
What follows is the journey of father and son
throughout the war and seen from Tom’s point of view. They encounter Daisy McConnahay (Nastassja Kinski), a rich aristocrat
who abandons her family to help the war effort, and Tom falls in love with her
for her sacrifice. At one point Ned is captured by the British and Donald
Sutherland is good portraying the stern Sergeant Major Peasy. They travel, meet
some Indians and survive the war together.
Now this film wasn’t an easy to watch and didn’t
grab me at all. Simply, its overlong, has bad acting, shoddy camera work and an
annoying soundtrack. It uses many long takes (which in my general opinion adds
realism) but unfortunately in the case with this film it makes some scenes
drag. It also uses many shaky hand held shots (ala Paul Greengrass) but this
makes the film look very amateurish with the camera bumping around the actors.
Don’t get me wrong though as there are many fantastic shots of the American
landscape. These ironically, were actually filmed in England .
However the first thing I noticed about this film is
the terrible ADR (voice dubbing) sound mix. Some actor’s lip syncs are terrible
and just distracts from what they are saying and the movie in general. The
picture quality is grainy and I hope the Blu Ray transfer is up to scratch.
However the dirty sets, costumes and actors add a
sense of realism and I’m glad this film isn’t blindly patriotic showing the
struggle Americans went through to achieve independence. It shows the dark,
muddy side with little hope for survival or glory.
There are many things I like about war films and I’m
pleased to say that this film has them. Revolution was made to show the war
from the point of view of the poor, from the gutter if you will. The soldiers
fighting weren’t told what they were doing and neither is the audience.
The first fire fight is presented as a battle of
statistics, with formation and calculated shooting being the winning factor. It
shows the futility of war and how the government will always screw over the
little man who fight and die for them. They always send the poor and the poor
suffer for the rich.
Daisy is an interesting character as she has a
choice between living in a rich family and aiding her countries blind fight for
freedom and ‘liberty’; a word used for men to enter their graves. She is shown
as the Good Samaritan and fortunately isn’t one dimensional. On contrast the British
are shown as the generic bad guys and stereotypically personified by Richard
O’Brian’s Lord Hampton, who has got to have the most annoying accent I have
ever heard in a film!
Al Pacino is great as his was in this era, but he
needs a bit more to work with. His narration (newly added for this directors
cut) adds depth and history to a country which is changing into a nation.
Like most DVD menus, this is a montage of shots
showcasing some great cinematography, but for some reason the sound mutes after
the first cycle.
The DVD has the standard trailer which unlike the
film, made me interested in watching it. However it is full of spoilers and features
a synthesiser heavy 80s soundtrack.
However this DVD has some excellent content looking
back at the film. ‘Re-cutting Revolution’ shows side by side comparisons of the
original theatrical version and the shorter directors cut with interesting and
insightful commentary from director Hugh Hudson. He himself admits that some
scenes and shots drag on so they trimmed a lot to make it tighter, snappier and
as Hudson says
'modern'. This extra reveals amongst other things that this film was
indeed rushed for Oscar season as such suffered. He wanted to re-edit this film
to his original vision, and I am glad he had the chance. For this 2009 cut Hudson did indeed get his
‘new turn’.
Other extras are ‘Hugh
Hudson on Revolution’ and ‘Revisiting Revolution: a conversation with Al Pacino
and Hugh Hudson’. Here we discover some fascinating insights towards the
production, funding and reception by audiences and critics alike. Sylvester
Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger were sought after
for the role of Tom which I believe would have been fatal, although made more
money at the box office. During the 80’s there was a huge influx of Reginist
film where one muscle-bound solider disposed of the faceless enemy all for the
glory of America
Like the revolution itself, this production seemed to be a battle with America , whom for example wouldn’t let them film
there, then complained when it was filmed in the UK
Although this
film is British, Warner Brothers only funded the film if it included a happy
ending where Daisy meets up with Tom and we presume they live happily ever
after. Like the similar ‘happy ending’ attached to the theatrical version of
Blade Runner (1982), this ending was omitted from the directors cut as Hudson
Ultimately this film is a father and son journey across
America
and its history. Tom’s struggle is long, but he relates to the land and its
people and wants to fight for not only the future of himself and his son, but
also for the future of the nation. The ending hints that he has endured and
will now do great things, possibly become a congressman, but I was left with
the sense that this was just another mans story in a world where he will never
be remembered.
Just like Tom, this film drags you through the mud
leaving you careless of every other character and wanting to move onto
something better. Ultimately I found that in a film with this much scope, not a
lot happened and this seems to be another bad thing that history has swept
under the rug.
5 out of 10
If you like this try:
Greystoke: The
Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes (1984)
The Mission
(1986)
No comments:
Post a Comment