Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

NEVADA SMITH HAS BEEN CUT


Stephan55
 Share

Recommended Posts

ANYONE ELSE NOTICE THE SUBTLE EDITS IN NEVADA SMITH?

 

Watched NEVADA SMITH (1966) again today.

I consider it a great, if atypical, western.
But I noticed at least two scenes that had been verbally altered on the TCM screening.
In much the way that in the train dining car scene of NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959), in which

Eva Marie Saint says to Cary Grant, "I never make love on an empty stomach."
We see the lips move, but we never hear the originally scripted word "make."

Too risque, I guess, for theatrical audiences of that, and any future day.

Instead we hear a voice-over

Eva Marie: "I never discuss love on an empty stomach."

Cary: "But you've already eaten."
Eva Marie: "But you haven't."

I think that scene would have played even better if the censors left the original word in that line alone.

 

I first saw NEVADA SMITH, at my local theater in 1966, before I saw THE CARPETBAGGERS (1964), although the latter was released two years before the former, at my local theatre it wasn't shown until later, for some reason?
Then I discovered that the former was a later made "prequel" to the latter, based on a character by the same name in the popular Harold Robbins 1962 novel "The CarpetBaggers."

In that book (and the movie) an aging westerner (in the movie played by Alan Ladd, in one of his last screen appearances) befriends a character not unlike a young Howard Hughs.

I had inadvertantly watched these movies in their chronological order, and was intrigued as how in the prequel, the entire film (NEVADA SMITH) was developed to flesh out the adventurous back-ground of that same named character from THE CARPETBAGGERS, and the briefly aluded to relationship that the half-breed Kiowa, Max Sand (alias Nevada Smith), had with Jonas Cord (the father of Jonas Cord, Jr., the lead character in THE CARPETBAGGERS, portrayed by George Peppard.

 

However, in NEVADA SMITH, there were a couple of critical scenes in which some shocking

dialogue was altered in the televised version I saw today.
Lines that reveal just how ugly the Tom Fitch character (played wonderfully evil by Karl Malden) was and is. And just how strikingly reserved the adult Nevada Smith character has learned to become.

In his early more openly emotional days, as a teenage youth (believably played by Steve McQueen), the young Max Sand sets out on a trail of vengeance to track down a trio of killers (Malden, Martin Landau, & Arthur Kennedy) who viciously mutilated and murderered his father and mother.

 

Early in the film we see Jesse Coe, one of the three killers (sadistically portrayed by Landau), as he begins to skin-alive the Indian mother of Max, while his father is forced to watch.

Later, Fitch is leading a band of outlaws and reads a wanted poster with a reward for the capture of Max Sand, who had recently escaped a Louisiana swamp prison.

Fitch realizes that Max is the same halfbreed who killed both of his former partners, Jesse Coe & Curley Bill Bowdre (brilliantly portrayed by Kennedy).

Fitch is obviously agitated as he tosses his tobacco pouch on the table.

When he notices one of his gang staring at the pouch he blurts out that this fancy piece

of leather and bead was "...made from the "dress" of an injun squaw."

However, as I recall the original line was "made from the "breast" of an injun squaw."

That line was so horrific when I saw that film as a teenager that everybody in the theater audience made an audible exclamation when it was uttered.

 

Still Later, when a visibly unchanged Max Sand attempts to join Fitch's gang, under the Nevada Smith alias, Fitch doesn't recognize him from the years that have past, but is suspicious of all newcomers and attempts to trap Max into revealing himself.

Fitch asks if Smith has ever heard of Max Sand, and confesses that he killed the half-breeds mother and father.

When a cool Smith reaches into his saddle bag to roll himself a smoke... Fitch then tosses him the infamous tobacco pouch and says "Here, why don't you use some good tobacco. What do ya think of that pouch, huh?"
Smith replies, "Never seen anything like it. Where'd you get it?"
Fitch responds, "Gift. Sort of a gift...."

Then there is a slight incongruency where it appears that we might have missed something... and we (the audience) have.

Smth says, as if trying to change the subject, and he is...
"Well now look Fitch, lets get down to it. You said you could use a man like me. For what?"

While Fitch briefly explains about his plan to rob a gold shipment, a composed Smith lights up a handrolled cigarette filled with Fitch's tobacco.
Smith walks up the stairs to his room and a smiling Fitch stuffs the tobacco pouch back into his shirt pocket, at this point fairly confident that this unperturbed Nevada Smith could not possibly be the hot-headed half-Indian, Max Sand.

 

In the above scene, what I remembered hearing and what was edited out, was Fitch's more elaborate explanation as to the origin of the mysterious tobacco pouch, which, if left intact , even more greatly impacts the scene, and makes the audience marvel at how Max Sand can remain so cool when confronted by Fitch's revelation.

 

In the final scene, the showdown between Fitch and Smith, Max has Fitch wounded and cries out "Beg. Beg like my mother and father begged!"
An unrepentent Fitch says, "Your mother!" and grabs for the tobacco pouch, tossing it at Max, "Here, maybe you want this! Huh!"

But Max refuses to kill Fitch, crippling him instead.
While Fitch yells at Max to "Finish me!"
Max says, "You're just not worth killin."

 

There is much more poignancy to Max Sands character development throughout this epic film. And once one suspends the reality that a blond haired, blue-eyed, 35 year old Steve McQueen is totally miscast as a half-breed Kiowa boy, his character matures before our eyes, not visually, but through McQueens behavior and mannerisms, from a naive teenager into a cold-hearted adult killer, practically as ruthless as the men he his hunting.

 

There is a brillant support cast.

Already mentioned, Karl Malden, Arthur Kennedy, and Martin Landau.
Also such familiar names as Brian Keith, Suzanne Pleshette, Janet Margolin, Raf Vallone, Pat Hingle, Howard Da Silva, Paul Fix, Gene Evans, Josephine Hutchinson, Bert Freed, Lyle Bettger, Ted de Corsia, an uncredited Strother ("Hey look at me..., I'm in the tub") Martin, and others....
This Paramount film was produced and directed by the great Henry Hathaway

Wide screen cinematography by Lucien Ballard
Great story and script by John Michael Hayes
With a wonderful score (that has me whistling it each time I see this film) by Alfred Newman

 

I wish that TCM could get their hands on an unedited copy of the intact theatrical release, or a restored version of NEVADA SMITH and present it as a back-to-back premier along with THE CARPETBAGGERS, which I also cannot recall TCM ever showing before.

 

Hopefully this will be possible.

 

The existing edited version of NEVADA SMITH is still an outstanding production, but restoration of this diaolgue omission, though slight, to me is critical in presenting the film with the full oomph that the writer and director had intended.

 

Like the edited (and apparently only available) version of JOHNNY GOT HIS GUN (1971) (which TCM aired one time, in July of 2009), Only those of us who saw and remember the originals will know what we are missing.

As great as those films still are, they could be even more so if they were restored to their original estate.

 

How bout it TCM? Uncut AND Commercial Free?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MovieMadness said:

 

"Looks like they edited the film because they were Yellah." 

 

 

Ha! :D

 

So many great lines in this film.

 

I can see why they may have made those edits especially for a commercial television broadcast, but I'm surprized if there isn't an unedited DVD or Bluray release, and if that is the case, why isn't that the one TCM broadcasts?

The edits are so powerful, and yet so slight in time that it likely wouldn't affect the total run time, likely much less than a minute of dialogue, but I still remember the impact.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is quite possible that whomever the distributor or studio that leased this film to TCM gave TCM the edited version of the film instead of the uncut version. I am NOT making excuses for TCM, but this is quite possibly the reason this version of the film was shown. As it so happens, people at TCM have in the past acknowledged that this occurs every now and again.

 

Not much they can do about it except that they can send the film back once the lease period is up and ask for the unedited film for the next lease period. Unfortunately for TCM, they really are at the mercy of the distributors who send them the films. There just is not enough staff at TCM to check these films out before they are broadcast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TCM shows what they received unedited and commercial free. Considering what TCM shows, no way they would have edited "breast" out in favor of "dress."  

Also, did the OP hear "breast" when character many, many years ago actually said "dress?"  The film may have actually been edited by the studios at some point during its first release or a later one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NEVADA SMITH HAS BEEN CUT

 

No, it hasn't.

 

Not in my experience, anyway.

 

My friends and I had read 'The Carpetbaggers' in the early 60's, so we were well aware of what was presented in the novel. The word used in the novel was "t it".

 

In 1966, I was a 16 year old usher in my hometown's best movie theater and 'Nevada Smith' played there. My friends and I eagerly watched the movie at that time and when the word "dress" was used to explain where the tobacco pouch came from, we smirked knowingly. We knew that the producers of the movie had changed it from the novel's "t it" because, after all, censorship in movie content was what was done then.

 

I watched the movie several times over the course of the week it played at the Capitol - in 1966, when it was a new movie. At no time did I hear the word "breast". It was always "dress".

 

IF it had ever been "breast", it was quickly changed after the very first screenings. It's highly doubtful that there are any editions of the movie still in existence where "breast" is used - IF there ever were.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the "tobacco pouch" business from the original source - the Harold Robbins potboiler "The Carpetbaggers". The movie version wasn't much, but then either was the novel. I never saw "Nevada Smith", but McQueen seemed a better fit than Ladd. From your description, "NS" sounds superior to the "The Carpetbaggers" film, but that would not be much of a stretch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentlemen,

 

I know that memory can be a tricky thing, but I am not confabulating.

 

The Lamar theatre in Manhattan Beach, California showed this film for a number of weeks, and because it was the only theatre in that town, I visited several repeat times during the showing of Nevada Smith in 1966.

 

I cannot say if other communities across the country were seeing the exact same film as I.

At this age, I am aware that during that time and before, sometimes films were slightly altered (edited) with somewhat different versions to suit certain regions that had various censorship restriction. This is also true of international releases as well.

 

So I cannot refute anyone who says that they saw the same or a different movie version at that time in their local theatre, or whether what they remember is a match to the recent televised TCM version.

 

And I would never mean to suggest that TCM would deliberately edit any film that they show.

However, I think we all can agree that sometimes what TCM  does show is not the best, or most complete version available.

Though I do believe that is their intent, some previously edited versions do sometimes slip through, for whatever reason.  

 

The Lamarr theatre was seldom full to capacity, and in those days there were fewer restrictions than today. Patrons weren't evicted from the theatre after a single viewing.

 

Tickets cost 60 cents for persons over 12 years of age and 30 cents for under twelve.

Tickets were torn in half at the entry to the lobby by an usher and we retained half the stub.

During my youth, the color of the stubs rarely changed.

 

I was such a frequent movie goer and had so many stubs that I started gluing two halves together to make a single apparent ticket. Since I held one half while the usher tore the ticket in half, I always retained half of a ticket to reuse again. That allowed me to have alittle more money to spend on concessions between films.

I didn't consider what I was doing as "stealing" at that time, I just thought that I was being clever. I rationalized that the theatre almost always got all of the money in my pocket when I went out, I just applied it alittle differently than what they had in mind.

Now, of course, I am ashamed of my behavior from back then... :rolleyes:

 

In the 1950s-1960's the Lamarr almost always showed double features, and they repeated both films at least once each evening, Sometimes the main feature played three times, before the theatre closed down for the night, early the next morning.

 

There were times when I either had nothing else better to do, or was greatly interested in a particular film, or was with some pals who wanted to see a film again, or with a girlfriend who could stay out late, that I would spend an entire evening rewatching the same movies, again, and again.

 

There were even a few times when I was "dating" two different girls, one would be picked up by her father after a single early showing, and I would meet another after that during the same night for a later showing.

Of course, I am now ashamed of that behavior from back then, as well... B)

 

The first evening that I saw Nevada Smith I stayed to see it twice... Just so I could see and hear those scenes again, and see if a mostly different audiences gave the same gutteral response,... which they did.

 

The version TCM showed yesterday was different.

In the first scene I described, the word "dress" wasn't the same word that shocked us, when used in that context , in 1966.

 

In the second scene, between Fitch and Smith, there is an obvious deletion edit. Pretty smoothly done, but still altered from the theatrical version I remember seeing.

 

In the last scene, I "thought" I remembered Fitch tossing the tobacco pouch at Max and saying, "Your mother! Here's your mother!"

But I wouldn't swear to that. It may just be a line that we thought at the time would have been more appropriately said by Fitch.

 

When I went to the movies with my friends in those early days, before many of us had cars, or were even old enough to drive, we would walk everywhere, and we relived those movies with each other, or at least revisited the most memorable scenes, over and over again.

 

Sadly, one guy that I used to chum around with at that time, that might have been able to confirm what we saw, is now dead, and I've lost track of the others.

However, it could be claimed that all of our memories were faulty.

 

Since making this post I have attempted to see if there was a script from Nevada Smith available on-line, but so far I've not been able to turn one up.

 

For what it's worth, I did turn up this small snippit from WikiPedia:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Smith

 

Fitch keeps a tobacco pouch containing a bit of deerskin decorated with Indian beads from Sand's mother's shirt – the tobacco pouch was made from the breast of Max's mother and Max knew this –

 

So apparantly at least one other person shares my same "faulty" memory....

 

I saw NEVADA SMITH before I saw THE CARPETBAGGERS, and I can't recall if there was any particular dialogue in that movie that may have influenced or convoluted my memory about those NEVADA SMITH scenes, having seen NEVADA SMITH many times at that theatre, long before I ever saw CARPETBAGGERS.

 

However, I did like George Peppard... having seen him in THE BLUE MAX (1966), I was happy to see him again, and Alan Ladd, from SHANE , as well as many of the other actors that I "grew up with" and enjoyed seeing in films.

.

Honestly, at that age I wasn't particularly interested in THE CARPETBAGGERS, except for the Nevada Smith character connection. And I'll admit that my memories of that movie are far less precise than those I have of NEVADA SMITH, of course, I just had most of NEVADA reinforced having just viewed it again.... And I didn't read the Harold Robbins book until years after I saw both movies, and my memories of that long read are not particularly noteworthy.

Though it may be worthy of a repeat read from a more mature, and worldly perspective, to see how it holds up.

 

I would still like to see both CARPETBAGGERS and SMITH, back-to-back, on TCM though. As today I can better appreciate both movies than I could as a youth.

 

Regarding the  supposition of this thread, I suppose we could talley votes as to was there or wasn't there different versions of this film, with one being as I have described... but that would prove nothing.

 

I wish we could defer to a more authoritative source on the subject.

 

Lacking that, I will passively seek out DVD rentals to see if  I can discover one that matches my version. Of course, lacking such a discovery, still is not definitive, depending on how soon after release such an edit ocurred, and whether there are any digital tranferences of such an early, perhaps less popular, release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MovieMadness said:

 

"Looks like they edited the film because they were Yellah." 

 

 

Ha! :D

 

So many great lines in this film.

 

I can see why they may have made those edits especially for a commercial television broadcast, but I'm surprized if there isn't an unedited DVD or Bluray release, and if that is the case, why isn't that the one TCM broadcasts?

The edits are so powerful, and yet so slight in time that it likely wouldn't affect the total run time, likely much less than a minute of dialogue, but I still remember the impact.  

 

As others have already pointed out TCM broadcast the version they are given.   Period.     We all wish that TCM's staff would take more care when they lease films to try to obtain the most 'pure' (original),  version they can obtain.    So TCM's staff can improve in this area.

 

Note that DVD or Bluray versions may not be available for lease.  This is because the owners of these 'better' versions wish to sell them instead of allowing stations like TCM to broadcast them (where people can then record them which reduces the market value of the product).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have already pointed out TCM broadcast the version they are given.   Period.     We all wish that TCM's staff would take more care when they lease films to try to obtain the most 'pure' (original),  version they can obtain.    So TCM's staff can improve in this area.

 

Note that DVD or Bluray versions may not be available for lease.  This is because the owners of these 'better' versions wish to sell them instead of allowing stations like TCM to broadcast them (where people can then record them which reduces the market value of the product).

It may be that sometimes TCM (or other networks) choose a later, revised version because the quality of the prints are much better than the available original.

Probably not worth discussing, but wonder how many movies were revised by the time they went into general distribution from what the earliest showings might have been.  Also, if a studio revised a movie for general distribution, would they exert a lot of effort in maintaining the quality of the original prints?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be that sometimes TCM (or other networks) choose a later, revised version because the quality of the prints are much better than the available original.

Probably not worth discussing, but wonder how many movies were revised by the time they went into general distribution from what the earliest showings might have been.  Also, if a studio revised a movie for general distribution, would they exert a lot of effort in maintaining the quality of the original prints?

 

I do not believe TCM has any choice as to what type of prints they get when they create an order for a batch of films from a distributor. They get whichever version of the film they get and if they happen to receive a film that has been edited, I do not think there is much they can do about it except to show it without any mention of the fact that it has been cut or simply not show it and indicate that they can not show it for whatever reason they deem to matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Gentlemen,

For all of your thoughtful comments and possible explanations.

 

When we are impacted by a movie, and we see it again, I think most of us are drawn back to those particular scenes, or moments of dialogue that made those first impressions.

 

I believe that is why when they are absent it stands out to us.

 

As has been suggested, these edits may have occurred very early, perhaps after a limited first release in the summer of 1966.

Assuming what I remember seeing, and hearing in this movie is valid, then what I saw may not have been the broader general distribution release.

 

I would not have been aware of this editing practice at that time, but now know that it was not an uncommon occurrance.

 

For one example, I recall growing up and watching my all-time favorite KING KONG (1933) numerous different times on television. Sometimes one stations broadcast would seriously differ from another.

But, one summer, the Lamarr theatre advertized on a Saturday afternoon matinee marquee "Watch The Original Restored KING KONG."

I paid my money and for the first time saw King Kong on the big-screen, along with an excited theatre audience. The film had several seconds of the goriest scenes restored. Though I did recall having seen them at different times before. None-the-less, for a film over 30 years old, at the time, it still produced ooohhhs & Ahhhhs from the audience, both young and old alike. And in the darkness of that theatre, felt like I was somehow transported back to 1933, and really seeing this wonderful film as it was intended to be seen.

 

I since became aware that KONG had been edited, and reedited numerous times, first by the original producers, and then later numerous more times by television broadcasters to fit whatever commercial time slot was scheduled.

 

Fortunetly most of those lost film fragments have been restored, but only a few ever saw, and fewer still alive to remember, the horrors of the lost "Spider Pit" footage, or realize that the reason those men remained to be shaken off that giant log is because not only did Kong block their advance, but an enraged Styracosaurus blocked their retreat...

 

Post release film editing is as old as film. And likewise, sadly, is "lost" film.

 

Perhaps I may yet luck-out and rediscover the "missing" NEVADA SMITH footage as an "alternate scene" add-in, or "deleted scene" excerpt in the Special Features section of a quality DVD or Bluray release.

If that never happens, then the memories of those scenes will die out with me, and those others that can remember that they once saw them.

 

No big loss really, in the grand or even minor scheme of things,...  just another slight loss in the history of film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine what the 26 minutes of footage extracted from Tod Browning's 'Freaks' (1932) would be worth? The 90 minute version ran for a week in San Diego, then the 64 minute cut ran everywhere else (where it wasn't banned outright).

 

Anyone stumbling across a canister containing those 26 minutes would be a very fortunate person, I'd think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darkblue wrote:

 

"Can you imagine what the 26 minutes of footage extracted from Tod Browning's 'Freaks' (1932) would be worth?....."

 

"a very fortunate person," indeed.   ;)

 

I have several films on my "to see" wishlist, including:

 

 The pre-code 90 min original version (if it still exists), of Alice in Wonderland (1933) NOT the severely edited 76-77 min Universal/Paramount release).

 

also,  the original early widescreen 157 min version of The Big Trail (1930)

 

 Just to name two versions of films I've never seen, as well as the forementioned complete FREAKS (1932).

 

There are also many, many more films that I once saw long ago, that seem to be rarely, if ever broadcast anymore, and have never been digitized for purchase, for example:

 

The 1949 version of The Blue Lagoon featuring Jean Simmons & Donald Houston,

 

Among too many notables to mention. 

 

 

I could compose a huge list.

 

But if a station like TCM can't, or won't, show them, then they'll likely never be seen again, by anyone, except those fortunate few who may have  precious VHS recording stashed.

Assuming that they made it to VHS....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not believe TCM has any choice as to what type of prints they get when they create an order for a batch of films from a distributor. They get whichever version of the film they get and if they happen to receive a film that has been edited, I do not think there is much they can do about it except to show it without any mention of the fact that it has been cut or simply not show it and indicate that they can not show it for whatever reason they deem to matter.

 

Rey, you are right. There are a few repeat offenders that pop up on TCM from time to time even though TCM has been warned by us that they are receiving an edited or cut print. So, I can only assume that they can only get these films from one distributor. That being said however, it does seem to me that TCM does, especially in a very tight schedule where there is no wiggle room, end films prematurely to save time. In these cases, I do find cast lists being cut off from the ends of some older films that I know for a fact do exist. I am not saying that TCM physically butchers the prints, but simply turns off the projector or what ever they use to transmit these films to us right after the words "THE END" flash across the screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched another Steve McQueen film last night, also from 1966, during the Richard Attenborough tribute.

 

THE SAND PEBBLES.

 

Also saw this at the theater when first released.

The theatrical release had an intermission/enteract with theme music and was 182 min, whereas the film shown by TCM last night was a 179 min version, without the intermission.

 

There was also a later release called a "Road Show" version that was 196 min long, with 14 minutes of scenes that had been edited out from the theatrical release most people saw.

 

I honestly can't remember if the version I saw in 1966 was a "Road Show" version or not (probably not). I only recall seeing this film once in 1966, and I do not recall missing scenes from last nights presentation. I do remember it was a long movie back then, and it did have an intermission, for which I was grateful.

 

I liked the film a lot back then, and I liked seeing it again on TCM last night. I didn't like the way it ended, but it was still a very good film by Robert Wise.

 

Just thought it merited beng included in this thread because unlike the "questionable" few altered and missing seconds of dialogue from NEVADA SMITH, the version aired byTCM of THE SAND PEBBLES was at least 3 minutes shorter than the theatrical version, and a full 17 minutes shorter than the most complete version that IS still available.

Whether TCM could acquire for broadcast either of those other two versions or not, only TCM knows. And although TCM has shown other films with their theatrical intermission/enteract and full score intact (i.e. GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) & BEN HUR (1959)), there are other films ( i.e. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)), which they have not.

 

Some may not care about seeing or listening to an enteracte, whereas others consider it part of a complete film experience which includes opening and closing overtures, along with a full list of film credits.

I happen to be one of those "oddballs" that fall in  the latter category.

 

Regardless, just thought I'd use this as an irrefutable example of different  edits of the same film which are still (for this moment in time) in extent.  

 

Not sure if this was a premier or not (RO didn't say it was), but I don't recall ever having seen it on TCM before, so if it wasn't a premier, then it may be one of those films TCM only shows once a decade or so?

In either occurrence, it was a rare event and I'm grateful that TCM presented it.

Brought back some old memories for me.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Others have posted online they remember the word breast being used so it must have been released that way. They went Yellah and changed it for TV is my guess and that is the print circulating.

 

Nope. It played at our theater in 1966. Did not use the word "breast" - used the word "dress". I paid very close attention. It was "dress" all 4 times I saw it that week.

 

The movie would not appear on TV for another 2 years yet. So, if a change happened, it was not for tv that it happened - if a change happened, it was for its theater run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. It played at our theater in 1966. Did not use the word "breast" - used the word "dress". I paid very close attention. It was "dress" all 4 times I saw it that week.

 

The movie would not appear on TV for another 2 years yet. So, if a change happened, it was not for tv that it happened - if a change happened, it was for its theater run.

 

I read one person say you had to be an adult to see the movie where he watched it. I also read it premiered on TV in 1972 and had scenes changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read one person say you had to be an adult to see the movie where he watched it. I also read it premiered on TV in 1972 and had scenes changed.

 

Whatever you read, you read.

 

I saw it in its theatrical run in 1966. What I saw then is exactly what was shown by TCM. No changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rey, you are right. There are a few repeat offenders that pop up on TCM from time to time even though TCM has been warned by us that they are receiving an edited or cut print. So, I can only assume that they can only get these films from one distributor. That being said however, it does seem to me that TCM does, especially in a very tight schedule where there is no wiggle room, end films prematurely to save time. In these cases, I do find cast lists being cut off from the ends of some older films that I know for a fact do exist. I am not saying that TCM physically butchers the prints, but simply turns off the projector or what ever they use to transmit these films to us right after the words "THE END" flash across the screen.

 

I do not believe TCM does this.

 

I think what happens is the print itself has had it's credits listing already cut off. What is TCM gaining by doing this if what you seem to be saying is correct? They have a few extra minutes then to advertise DVD sales or advertise upcoming movies or show additional institutionals?

 

I think what is happening is that on the rare occasion that the end credits are not shown, that TCM has nothing to do with this. They show entire films, including the end credits. But what is TCM going to do when a distributor sends them a chopped up version of a film that was meant to be shown on a commercial tv station and that version has had it's ending credits eliminated? TCM has no power over what they get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever you read, you read.

 

I saw it in its theatrical run in 1966. What I saw then is exactly what was shown by TCM. No changes.

 

Here is another possibility, the Hays code ended around 1966 and this is when the "Suggested for Mature Audiences" (SMA) label came out. Nevada Smith was also played overseas besides the US, so what you saw could be the Amish Hays Code version which TCM also shows, and what others that heard the word breast in was the "Suggested for Mature Audiences" (SMA) version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another possibility, the Hays code ended around 1966 and this is when the "Suggested for Mature Audiences" (SMA) label came out. Nevada Smith was also played overseas besides the US, so what you saw could be the Amish Hays Code version which TCM also shows, and what others that heard the word breast in was the "Suggested for Mature Audiences" (SMA) version.

 

Yeah, that must be it. Very believable.

 

Too bad there are no surviving prints with the word "breast" in them - guess they all got sucked up by a tornado in Wisconsin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...