• Gerardo Valero in Mexico
"No good movie is long enough and no bad movie is short enough". As much truth as this phrase carries it is also a fact that editing choices greatly influence a film's outcome. One of the best examples to illustrate this point is Guisseppe Tornatore's "Cinema Paradiso" which was released in 1990 as a 124 minute gem that won Best Foreign Film at the Academy Awards and the unconditional love of everyone I've ever discussed it with. Further, it made no sense to learn that a much longer version of the film had been released in Italy a couple of years before to mediocre reviews and box-office results. How could material this good ever be ignored? The answer came years later in a single viewing of one of those DVD editions that includes the complete 173 minute version. As strange as this sounds, I believe that the butchering of Director Tornatore's original 1988 vision saved his film from utter mediocrity, and took it to an all together higher level.
"Cinema Paradiso" is the story of an Italian WW2-orphaned named Toto, at three stages of his life: childhood, adolescence and middle age (with a different actor playing him in each case). Toto's life is driven by the love of movies he acquires at the old local theater with cranky projectionist Alfredo (Philippe Noiret) becoming a surrogate father who teaches him about life and love while helping channel his interests into eventual success. "Paradiso" is also a great "first love" story and tackles other less personal but relevant themes, by portraying the parallels between the evolution of the cinemas of old and Southern Italy's social customs.
In the film's first chapter we see this coastal town during WW2 as it depends on the strict criteria of its actual moral leader (the town priest) on what makes acceptable viewing content (with everybody constantly complaining nonetheless). These were times very different from today as also proven by the loving but very un-PC parenting of Toto's mother. The Paradiso of chapter two becomes privately owned and these decisions are then made entirely from a business point of view with the movies screened jumping from timid to anything goes. In the final act we simply witness how these kinds of theaters became extinct in the face of the new entertainment forms available.
Movies are the universal language understood in every corner of the world and they bring together the unique population of the Cinema Paradiso, along with their search for a communal experience in which they can not only laugh/cry at the same time but even whistle mercilessly at the projectionist when a technical malfunction occurs. For this town of modest means this is basically their only source of entertainment and main reunion site so there are plenty of other goings-on while the lights are dimmed such as courtships, attendees napping or making-out, the breast-feeding of babies, the sharing of an occasional cigarettes and even mafia-type hits. One could simply say that life doesn't stop while movies are projected at the Paradiso. These concepts may sound preposterous to today's audiences but fact is the theaters of old had their own, peculiar communities and the movie effectively makes theirs seem real and hilarious.
Much of the appeal of "Cinema Paradiso" has to do with its cast of colorful characters which aren't particularly edgy and even seem naive when compared to those of current releases, but this is a big part of film's charm. My favorite is the super-expressive and impatient priest whose indignant faces at the sight of the screen kisses he "edits" and mannerisms while explaining the miracle of the loaves and fishes" to a faking Alfredo, are two of the film's best moments (the latter becoming a standard "multiplying" expression between me and my wife throughout the years).
Still, the film's central relationship is that between Toto and Alfredo and they spend the first chapter of the movie trying to wittingly outfox each other into having their way. Later on the youngster meets the early love of his life and he will come to realize that much like his early movie going days, this experience can never be replicated, no matter how many gorgeous girls his eventual fame will allow him to meet. During the last chapter of the film an older Toto will finally come back home but only to experience a sense of loss, that of a beautiful way of life, of a great love, of a friend and father, and yet, the final gift that Alfredo leaves him, which he was once too young to play with, will now manage to make things right for him, in the process giving us one of the best film endings I've ever seen.
The many faults of our film's earlier, longer version are a great tool to understand some of the things the shorter one got right to begin with. Even though it represents the "Cinema Paradiso" as originally conceived by Tornatore, the extra subplots and complications add nothing to the main theme of romance, friendship and love of the movies. It would seem the director got lost in the details and forgot the precise kind of movie he was making. Alfredo is now shown lying to Toto and being a factor in destroying his relationship with Elena, killing much of our sympathy for him. The clever complications involved in two theaters sharing two halves of the same print, now include a tasteless sex scene that makes little sense. Great characters and routines that worked to perfection in the theatrical version like the plaza nut and the movie censoring process are extended to the point where they are no longer funny. Even Ennio Morricone's sublime soundtrack can feel repetitive when played enough times.
As much as this lesser details hurt the movie, there are two significant alterations that turn it into something less than the sum of its parts. Take for instance the "first love" story, which coincides with the period "Paradiso" becomes a venue in which apparently everything goes. We see the theater prostitute giving Toto the works shortly before he meets Elena and, as a result, when he blames his clumsiness towards her on this being his "first time", this doesn't ring true and greatly diminishes the innocence of their relationship, which is pivotal to the story. Later on Toto goes back home for his friend's funeral and we watch as he runs into a young girl (her daughter) who looks uncannily like Elena (naturally, since she's played by the same actress) and by following her he encounters his old flame (as played by somebody else).
Unfortunately this older version of Elena is effectively competing with her younger version, with the ghost of a long lost love against whom she can't hold a candle and by portraying her committing adultery with Toto in a car, Tornatore does the film no favors. One could even argue that Elena is the equivalent of the shark in "Jaws": the less we see of her the more affecting she becomes and all these extra scenes do is take away the feeling of Toto's loss, diminishing the impact of the fantastic final scene.
Most "Director's cuts" are simply re-releases of a film with extra scenes that were cut from the theatrical release (for good reason) and put back for purely financial purposes, but there are exceptions, for instance, James Cameron is usually forced to trim his films in order to fit a certain number of theatrical showings per day and once you see his directorial cuts you never go back to the original. There are three considerations which I believe every filmmaker must take under account before embarking on the Director's Cut of a memorable movie: 1) The natures and attitudes of the characters audiences have come to know and love must not be altered significantly, 2) There must be no major changes in the dynamics of their relationships and 3) The movie must not be made longer than need to be. The longer cut of "Cinema Paradiso" fails on all three accounts and greatly reminds me of "Apocalypse Now Redux" in which the legendary Lt. Colonel Kilgore now seems witless while searching for his surfboard and Captain Willard (who could breath and think of nothing else than Colonel Kurtz) is now shown as a James Bond of sorts who has dalliances with beautiful girls at various steps of his journey. Both re-issues turn great classics into lesser movies and only serve in helping us value the powers of great editing. My recommendation for readers of this review is to stick entirely to the older versions of both and ignore that a new one even exists, otherwise you may find yourself forcing to apply the mental "erase button" that we usually reserve for the many sequels that have diminished their original entries.
"Cinema Paradiso" is a nostalgic look at a kind of movie going experience that is never coming back. Even though today's multiplexes are far more comfortable and clean, have fresher popcorn and countless teenage attendants to greet you and bid you farewell, they also have smaller screens, the constant distraction of cell phones/ texting devices and lack a certain atmosphere. Shortly after "Paradiso" became a sensation I learned there were plans to remake it as an ode to the American Drive-ins with Harry Dean Stanton starring in the main role. Despite the universality of the theme, I wasn't surprised that this project never came into fruition. Forget for a moment how the Italian language and idiosyncrasies fit this material so well but the short version of our film is one of those "lighting in a bottle" instances of the right setting, casting and music that's not easy to duplicate. "Cinema Paradiso" is the very best of the "movies about the movies".
Page design by Marie Haws
the cinema paradiso that won the academy award is one of the best movies i have ever seen.
In an early VHS edition of the film, there were a couple of frames in the credits featuring the older actress cut from the film. It was almost like a wonderful easter egg coda to this great movie.
And then the actual director's cut of the film totally ruined it for me. I still can't erase it out of my head. SUCH a disappointment after years of wanting to see that footage.
It was Bob & Harvey that had the film cut down for US release, no?
Jonathan
sobuttons.com
Editing: Only the ego resists it.
Of late, many have been referring to editors - at least in that journalistic sense - as curators. But I think of them more as translators. They take big ideas and the broad brushstrokes they're painted in, and they adapt them to a version that will resonate, sometimes even change the way you describe a thing.
A great piece, Gerardo. I also love how in this piece that addresses the importance of editing, its main example, Cinema Paradiso, ends in a scene that compiles some of the most important movie bits that were edited out. A lovely parallel.
I have seen several cases of extended edition(or unrated version or director’ cut or whatsoever). Though they are not completely ruined by additional scenes/shots, but I usually feel that they are less tight than before, especially in case of comedies. When I watched Michael Mann’s “Ali”(2001), it looked like a rough cut. The director’s cut I later saw was more looked like a rough cut. I wondered whether trimming, or butchering, could make this disappointing movie a little better at least, because it has good elements. There are the movies deserving to be told during 4 hours or 8 hours(A good example is Raoul Luiz’s “Mysteries of Lisbon”), but less is more, usually.
Sometimes director’s cut is shorter than theatrical version. At the end of the last year, I watched ambitious South Korean action noir film “Yellow Sea”(it is the second work from the director of “The Chaser”). Though it is darkly powerful, it was a little bit too long. For international version/director’s cut, the movie was trimmed form 157-min to 140-min and some parts were replaced with the additional scenes. I have not watched it yet, but they said it was enhanced while being more tight(maybe I can write about it someday as another case of good “butchering”). There are the movies deserving to be told during 4 hours or 8 hours(A good example is Raoul Luiz’s “Mysteries of Lisbon”), but less is more, usually.
The more I think about these two versions, the more I prefer the shorter version of “Cinema Paradiso”, one of the memorable movies in my childhood. Like many of them, I watched it for the first time with the dubbed version shown on TV, but the dubbing, which was not bad, did not hurt its power. In the shorter version, the sense of loss feels more poignant because almost everything associated with the town theater in Toto’s life is now gone or about to be disappeared into the past as something which never will be regained. The original version explains too many things; personally, I think it would have been better if Toto had hanged up the phone without a word, with the realization that the past is past. In that way, we would have gotten some information about Elena without directly seeing her. But I think some people defending the original version have some good points, anyway.
I saw the shorter version, and didn't like it. It was one of those rare films that I have heard touted as being so good, but that fell way, way short of what I expected. I think of this film as one of the most overrated I have seen. I think it is so maudlin, especially in the funeral procession sequence. Maybe another viewing will make me think otherwise. But right now, I just don't get what others see in this one. I saw "Amarcord" again about the same time -- which made "Cinema Paradiso" look so pale and insipid by comparison.
I just finished my first film and after viewing what I thought was my final cut a few times, out came the scissors again. The final result is a much better and tighter film, so I'm not surprised that “Cinema Paradiso” was made better by some cuts :)
Cheers.
J\
Good point to bring up "Apocalypse Now Redux." Those extra scenes include implausible and corrupting material that doesn't add, but subtracts the thematic integrity of the film. Francis Ford Coppola's A+ war film becomes a B-. I'm glad that I have only seen the 2 hour "Cinema Paradiso." I'll keep it that way.
If it helps the film, it's editing. If it hurts the film, it's an abridgment. I use the same definition for books. Les Miserables could have been trimmed a bit, but cutting out 700 pages makes the book worse (which is why all abridged books are abominations). Editing tries to keep everything that is right and jettison everything that is wrong, while paying attention to pacing. Abridgments are only interested in making the work shorter, like when the original Metropolis was shortened so that theaters could should it more often.
Since I have seen neither version of Cinema Paradiso, I now know to watch the edited version. Thanks, Gerardo.
Hey Gerardo, great to read your thoughts on Cinema Paradiso and its earlier, longer version, which I, fortunately, have never seen. Although I must say I never saw the version that won the Oscar at a theater, bu rather in a VHS. And I can say that the short scene with the old Elena that appears after the credits completely ruined the experience for me. I was just wiping the tears from my eyes because of the sad/happy ending, while reading the credits and listening to the music, when suddenly I see the old Toto meeting the old Elena, and then the film ends. NOOOO! I will always hate what that moment did for me. Thanks anyway, for describing the longer version, which I was still curious to see, until now. I have been warned!
Yes, yes, yes...the 1989 version is a masterpiece I've loved since I first watched it!!! Philippe Noiret is one of my favorites and his role in this movie, the interaction with Salvatore Cascio is what makes the story magical...I was horrendously disappointed (horrified, even) when I watched the uncut version. Why? Why? Why? The pathos of first love lost, the heartbreak that informs Toto's adult life...all that was lost in the director's cut...Alfredo was reduced to a petty old man who stole Toto's youthful hope for love out of, what?, selfishness? I try not to think of the director's cut...
I agree...the clip where the adult Toto runs into Elena is a tease..."could it really happen? Could he someday see her?" And we were left with this thought...seeing how Tornatore meant for it to happen in the movie was a let-down.
"I also love how in this piece that addresses the importance of editing, its main example, Cinema Paradiso, ends in a scene that compiles some of the most important movie bits that were edited out. A lovely parallel."
wonderful olivia - i had never thought of this and you are exactly right.
I don't like the recently released 'director's cut' of Sergio Leone's The Good The Bad and The Ugly, either. the additional 18 minutes really alters the pacing and, in my opinion, kinda sinks the movie.
BTW - I never much liked Cinema Paradiso in either version.
I have to side with David Thomson on this one: "Cinema Paradiso is mercilessly made, as a pump for tears". Watching it reminded me of eating one of those sugary cereals you loved as a kid but now leaves you feeling gross and worried about your health.
When I think that this is what other people perceive as a quintessential 'foreign film', I die a little. The likes of Pan's Labyrinth, Fireman's Ball, Grave of the Fireflies, Rashomon, Wrath of God are what people should be remembering.
I completely agree with all the points in this article. The director's cuts of Cinema Paradiso and Apocalypse Now are like bad dreams I've had - watching one of my favorite movies and seeing that it is now altered beyond recognition.
@amy: You’re not the only person I’ve met who things the same way.
@Jonathan Baylis: There was no way of trimming those credits without re-doing them completely.
I do believe Miramax was behind the butchering. The film almost owes as much of its success to whoever re-edited it, than to Tornatore.
@Olivia Collette: A truly wonderful analogy Olivia.
@Seongyong Cho: I can’t begin imagine how these people sound in Korean, Seongyong.
I wished I’d never learned Elena marries Toto’s Math Challenged friend. That was a very bitter disappointment.
@Ted: I’ve met quite a few people who would disagree.
@Jason King: Don’t forget the very first line in this review which, as everybody here knows, belongs to Roger.
@Sean Chavel | Amen.
@Greg Salvatore: Avoid the longer cut at all costs Greg.
@Joel Meza: I owned the old VHS version too Joel but I never fully realized who was that woman in the credits, that we never got to see in the movie.
@MD Garcia: The chemistry between Toto and Alfredo is the one indispensable element in “Cinema Paradiso”
@Paul: Very valid comment, not everybody has to like the same movies.
@Graydon Zinder: I never called “Cinema Paradiso” the “quintessential foreign film”. I do think it is a beautiful film with one of the most amazing endings I’ve ever seen though.
@David Vicari: The original versions are very effective in helping us put these “Director’s cuts” behind.
I agree with the writer. The shorter version of the film was more effective on an emotional level than the much longer director's cut. I purchased of the much longer version. Watched it and while the additional scenes help me understand some History in the young life of Toto and his reunion with his lost love when he returns to his childhood village, but in the meantime, the film was losing the emotional center that made the film a success. The film as it stood, in its shorter version, had more emotional impact and yet it didn't need the additional information about Toto to carry the story. I agree that the scene of Toto, losing his "cherry" to the local prostitute in the movie theater, was really unnecessary and when he finally meets Elaina, the innocence is NOT there in the mind of the Viewer. When years later when he meets with the adult Elaina and we hear her explanation of the missed connection and her life since, I begin the feel that the reunion was really unnessary and I think i would have been happy without him seeing her and then for me the final scene of him in the screening room viewing the censored film clips would ring true, but with all the additonal information the emotional imapct of the ending is lost. In this case, less is MORE.
My God this was a gorgeous movie! Thank you for reminding me of it! And my 70 year old mother absolutely loves the soundtrack!
"If it helps the film, it's editing. If it hurts the film, it's an abridgment."
This pretty much hits the nail on the head. One example I would give of an improved extended version is the Lord of the Rings films; they incorporate a good amount of material that fills in gaps in the story, but were cut mainly for reasons of time. Of course, those are quite different in that even the longer versions are edited down from the books, compared to something like Cinema Paradiso that is written from the start as a film narrative.
Outstanding analysis. The third hour is clearly weaker than the first two and the fling in the car makes us think less of both characters. And Alfredo lying to both Salvatore and Elena didn't help either. The funeral, the family reunion, and the demolition of the theater was enough for the present-day material.
However, the shorter version goes too far in editing some great scenes that were left alone in the longer version. Two scenes come to mind without much effort. The first is the classic "kiss in the rain", which is needlessly (and infuriatingly!) interrupted with flashblacks to the older Toto. The second is the heartfelt conversation with his mother ("Let go, Toto") that wasn't that long to begin with. The abbreviated conversation doesn't make nearly as much sense.
So I would have preferred the short version with maybe 5 minutes of material added back. Still a great film...
One more movie I would like to add to the "horrible director cut" pile is Leon/The Proffesional. I adore the theatrical cut but absolutely loathe the extended directors cut which I feel taints the relationship between Leon and Matilda.
Great article!
It's funny that, for how often Harvey ("Harvey Scissorhands") Weinstein's Miramax cut down foreign films in ways that did interfere with their artistry, with "Cinema Paradiso" they actually helped the film achieve something like perfection. I suppose it's like the old saying that a broken clock is right twice a day. The new Blu-ray only has the two-hour cut on it, which seems like the right decision to me. The other cut is only worth considering for pieces like this one.
@Mitch: Couldn't agree more.
@Winifred G: Regarding the film's soundtrack: Ennio Morricone belongs in the Mount Rushmore of Film Composers. He came to Mexico a couple of years ago and this film's theme was his concert's encore. Just wonderful.
@Karl: "Lord of the Rings"are prime examples of "No good movie is long enough.."
@Zach: The shorter version may not be perfect but it took a hell of a vision on somebody's part to find the lost gem, among the mess which is the longer one.
@Daniel: Many thanks.
Sorry to see that you decided to pick a wrong angle: Giuseppe Tornatore is one of the most irregular directors of the past decades (remember Michael Cimino?, Richard Rush?). "Cinema Paradiso" is a perfectly functional film because it plays with its audiences as a: (1) Film lovers' film, or (2) Lovers of tragic romance films, and it's pretty good at it because it left what the audience-as-a-marker wanted, regardless of what the director intended to do, so what we have is a picturesque recollection of warm memories filled with one-dimensional characters that create a quasi-cartoon ambience for the soap opera that follows. The argument, hence, becomes irrelevant: this film works because (1) It displays a parallel between a person's life and the history of movies, and (2) Phillipe Noiret's masterful creation of the only real character of the movie, an Alfredo which cares for Toto as he grows up, and also an Alfredo that lies and cheats. It's somewhat upsetting to realize that such a nice outcome left out the real story Tornatore failed to create and that was only suggested by the emptiness in the great Jacques Perrin's performance as old Toto. Was his life really better because he consecrated it to movie making? Well...he can always console himself watching Alfredo's collection of film cuts. If you really want to know what butchering is, just consider what film "The Magnificent Ambersons" might have been if RKO had respected Orson Welles' direction.
And regarding "movies about movies", don't confuse a tear-jerker with the real thing: this lovely piece is no match for "Sunset Boulevard", "Day for Night" or "The Player"... or even "That's Entertainment!"
The worst for me is a when a revised cut fixes some problems with the original while simultaneously creating new ones. Now I can't be happy with EITHER version of the film, knowing exactly where each is inferior to the other. This happened to me with Alien and especially with Dark City. The Director's Cut of the latter I think much improves the pacing and overall presentation, but introduces a couple new moments I don't like and second-guesses some of the music editing to ill effect.
The flip side of that is Aliens, which is unique in that, for reasons I can't explain, both the original and extended cuts work perfectly for me. It would seem to defy editing physics, but I find both versions feel complete AND tautly paced.
Surprised no one's mentioned Star Wars, but I guess we don't need to open THAT can of worms...
Couldn't agree more. Years of being overseas prevented me from seeing Redux and only ever imagined it to enhance the original masterpiece. To top it off, I'd told my wife (who had never even seen the original) that we were about to see one of the finest films ever produced.
Elements such as the scene with the remaining French colonials were painful, poorly acted and edited and didn't serve whatever purpose they were intended to.
On a side note, I think the only movie I've seen re-edited that actually either improved it or made it interesting was Blade Runner, though I never really minded the voice-over narrative of the original.
I agree with your analysis except for a single point: the part of the extended version where we see Alfredo lie to Toto, breaking up the romance between Toto and Elena in the process.
In my interpretation Alfredo KNEW that Toto was destined for greatness, and knew that he would never achieve this greatness as long as the romance existed, therefore Alfredo thought he was justified breaking up Toto and Elena.
This brings added poignancy to the famous ending - it signaled to me that Alfredo had at least some regrets for breaking up Toto and Elena, and leaving Toto the reel of the previously taboo film kisses was Alfredo's way of giving back at least some of the romance that he had stolen.
I've loved "Cinema Paradiso" since it was released. When the "director's cut" was released I was excited. More of a good thing can only be a better thing, right? Wrong. I was disappointed. The theatrical release revolved around the movie theater. This other version lost the focus and went straying in other directions. The emotional power was dilluted. So, in addition to Tornatore, I also have the editor, Mario Morra, to thank for this masterpiece.
I looooooooooooooooooove the "Cinema Paradiso" I saw year before. I have been curious about the Director's Cut, but have never seen it. After reading this review and the comments . . . I don't want to see it.
This is one of my favourite films and I have resisted viewing the director's cut because I had heard about the "reunion" near the end. One of the things that made the theatrical cut so special to me as a love story is the fact that he never saw Elena again. The poignancy of that reaality has always hit a nerve for me. On the other hand, my all-time favourite movie is Bergman's "Fanny and Alexander". I had seen the 3-hour theatrical version countless times before the original Swedish television version (at 5 hours in length) was released by Criterion. I was unsure, not wanting to tarnish my love for this film. After seeing the full television version of Bergman's "Scenes from a Marriage" however, I relented because I was so enthralled with that film as well. I have never looked back. The complete version of "Fanny and Alexander" is an even more rich experience; one I did not think possible. I have now seen it several times and will continue to revisit it. After reading your excellent article on "Cinema Paradiso", I will not do the same with its director's cut.
Even though "Cinema Paradiso" achieves a level of greatness I do agree that it is a slightly over rated film when compared to the greatest foreign films we have gotten in the time since. Either version of "Cinema Paradiso" reaches the level of greatness of movies like "Shall we Dance?" but falls very short of films like "Life is Beautiful". I should mention that I have only seen the extended "New Version" when it was first released in theatres and have to say there is no way the shorter version could possibly be better. The previews for "Cinema Pardiso: The New Version" tell us to "find out what happened to the love of a lifetime" and that couldn't be more true. "Cinema Pardiso: The New Version" gives us the set up and payoff all in one and a brilliant ending. The only thing the shorter version did was give it a dumbbed down brilliance and of course a shorter running time to get those who wouldn't normally see foreign films in and out of the theatre so they can tell people they saw it. Roger Ebert even implied that there might not be much interest or need for the short version anymore. He said the short version shouldn't nessesarily go away but be included with the new version. I am guessing he means for purposes of remembering where it came from. Nick
I could not agree more! The director's cut is just awful.