At 10 pm EST on June 11, Turner Classic Movies will show the original pre-release print of The Big Sleep. AFAIK, this has never been shown on television before. I’ve certainly never heard of a showing.
This is a must see of gigantic proportions.
10 pm EDT on June 11. I thought I corrected that. :smack:
“including a complete list of murder victims and their killers”
Now that would be damned interesting to see, given all the foofahrah about Owen’s unidentified killer.
–Cliffy
Thanks, Exapno, for the heads-up.
Someone familiar with both verions of The Big Sleep said that the preview version (which was distributed in 16mm to the U.S. Armed Forces) is more linear . . . and less interesting. And it doesn’t have the famously suggestive dialogue between Bogart and Bacall about riding a horse.
Holy crap, that’s TRUE must-see TV. I’ll be sure to record that!
Whew!
I thought something bad had happened to the Tree Crushing Monster from ABC’s LOST.
BTW, there is a documentary featurette on the DVD of The Big Sleep that compares the two versions.
I should have put more [snip]s or …'s in my quotes from the original article. Many of the things discussed here are already mentioned there.
I just watched The Big Sleep a few weeks ago. I was surprised to realize that it really is three short films, loosely strung together. And it’s only the first film that everyone remembers. That film has the humor, the sharp characterizations, the crackling dialog, and the utter originality of the portrayal of Marlowe. The second film is drabber and more conventional. The third is a remarkably dumb gangster film, almost unconnected to the other two, in which people rush into beatings and killings for no intelligible reason. The dialog is idiotic, the pacing is strange, humor is totally lacking, and Marlowe is little more than a thug among thugs.
Maybe there’s less interaction between Bogie and Bacall, but a more linear movie would almost have to be better in many ways.
Thanks TCM!
The DVD copy I have is double-sided, the original on one side, the re-cut release version on the other. While I’m not a huge fan of this film (since I bought the DVD, I think I’ve only watched each version once) I prefer the release version. The scenes between Bogey and Bacall are better, and the films tone, while a little inconsistent, is more to my liking.
Exapno, have you ever read the book? It’s just as disjointed, largely because Chandler took four (?) of his short stories, synched up the names, added a couple chapters, and called it a novel. I think it’s his least engaging novel and, through most of it, it doesn’t really present Marlowe as anything but a Continental Op clone in better shape. This is to be contrasted with essentially all of Chandler’s later work, where Marlowe is the epitome of the man who goes down those mean streets who is not himself mean.
–Cliffy
Yes, I have all of Chandler’s books and short story collections. I’ve read all of the stories, including the ones before he named Marlowe Marlowe. My copy is the Avon paperback from 1943 (so not a first, alas) with the cover showing a skull in a blonde wig.
But the movie isn’t the book. They did brilliant stuff with the first section, adding a layer of sass and brio. It’s sharp in a way that the rest of the movie isn’t. I just hadn’t remembered how swiftly and deeply the tone changes.
They considered the original version unreleasable, so I have to assume that the new scenes with Bacall make a huge difference to the likability. And some of them are in the first section so they set a new tone. Still, Carmen plays a much bigger role in the book and the scenes with her should be worth seeing because she’s a character well past anything that could be filmed in those production code days.
I’ll try not to get my expectations too high, since everyone who’s seen the original is giving me warnings. But I’m looking forward to it nonetheless.
I have that DVD, and I’d concurr that the re-release version is better than the original cut.
It has been shown before. I have a VHS tape of it I made when TCM showed it a few years ago.
Still confusing as hell - I always get lost.
You’d think Doghouse Reilly would have made an appearance in this thread by now.