documents

The Big Red One Makes a Stop in Chicago
By Gabe Klinger

And so, to borrow from the title of Sergio Leone's epic Western once again, let's begin with

The Good:

Richard Schickel and company's reconstruction of The Big Red One is to be commended. It has already been written on in the pages of Cahiers du Cinéma, Cinema Scope, and Film Comment. It has many new scenes, and not one of them falters. It has many longer scenes that preserve the integrity of Fuller's vision. It's a dynamic work, one that brought this critic to tears.

The Bad:

Well, let's say not exactly bad, but the voiceover, which was a controversial issue to begin with, sometimes over-explains things, and rather than punctuating certain moments, ruins them ("he walked around for an hour before he realized the kid was dead"...) But Schickel addressed this in his Q&A discussion, and gave a somewhat satisfactory response. He said that because of the episodic nature of the story that certain scenes required a bit of background. Fuller, who was opposed to it, also thought there shouldn't be title cards explaining what country the soldiers were in.

The Ugly:

It has been said that Sam Fuller's images were always of the most basic, functional kind. The critics who have said this are obviously disregarding many of his loveliest films, including The Steel Helmet (lensed by Ernest Miller), which Martin Scorsese has cited as an influence on the visual plan for Raging Bull. Or more conspicuously, his work in Cinema Scope for Daryl Zanuck, from House of Bamboo to Forty Guns. Sam Fuller was by no means a primitive visualist.

Which brings me to my point. Those who allege that the cinematography in The Big Red One is no big deal are sadly wrong. Adam Greenberg's baroque desert landscapes, rich blacks in the night scenes, and monumental shots of Lee Marvin — one of the greatest actors to have ever lived — deserve to be treated with the utmost care. Namely, they should adhere to the look of the original 35mm image. Instead, they have been travestied by the digital dupe produced by Warner Brothers to tour the film at limited engagements.

The film — which will undoubtedly look great on DVD — does not look great on the big screen. It's speckled with digital graininess, making Marvin and others' faces look rubbery and mannequin-like, and taking away the intensity of the nighttime shots. Also, the desert shots look as if they have been carbon-copied. The 35mm prints made have not been printed from the original materials, but instead from a digital intermediate used to edit the new materials on an Avid. The reasons for this choice is due to the limited funds allotted to the project.

Therefore, we don't yet have The Big Red One as it was meant to be seen. This issue brings up a whole series of restoration-related questions and theories, which I had originally intended to explore in this article. What I have seen in The Big Red One has already happened and will continue to happen to many films inching their way onto DVD. It's a subject for further study.

Gabe Klinger
© FIPRESCI 2004

top