• By thevoid99
    December 04, 2012
    04:07 PM

    1. Vilmos Zsigmond's cinematography 2. David Mansfield's score. 3. The art direction It's not a bad film but not the great film it wanted to be.
  • By Sidney
    December 04, 2012
    06:32 PM

    1) An all-star cast of great actors, especially Kris Kristofferson, Christopher Walken, and Isabelle Huppert. 2) The darker, deeply probing side of the American West. 3) One of the more memorable, and interesting 'failures' in Cinema history.
  • By PNeski
    December 06, 2012
    03:41 PM

    Well that no-one should go by the taste of the Critics,Be it that Times guy who though Gostbusters 2 was better than 1
  • By Dana W.
    December 25, 2012
    11:23 PM

    I have to agree with Aaron's analysis. i loved this movie even in its most butchered form. For a long while I thought i was the only one that loved it. The internet finally cured me of that mistake. I have always had a fascination for the past and old things, old ways and I suppose heaven's gate fits right into that. As Aaron said, it's nearly as much about place texture as story or character. Even the intentionally grainy photography looks like a moving Autochrome, though this process came along in 1903. But there is another trait that will never allow it to be enjoyed by many a modern moviegoer. That is it has a very odd, slow rhythm that can only be entered by surrendering your expectations of even 1950's pacing. Life in the 19th century was slower than life is now on the whole, and i feel Cimino really wanted to make a film that truly felt like the 1890's. Just think, still photographs were a novelty for working people, that's why the immigrants are getting a large group photo to split the cost. No films or electronics of any kind, instead People read anything they could get their hands on, If they could read. They had time to think, when they were't working six days a week, twelve to sixteen hours a day. Read Moby Dick today and often the modern mind screams "come on, will you, pick up the pace already", but that pace was how people experienced life back then. Most of the serious criticisms of Heavens Gate stem from this i believe. I May just be strange in that I wish some passages of Heaven's Gate were longer than they are, especially the Casper sequence. It takes time to become immersed in another world and If you cannot enjoy this process you will never like Heaven's Gate.
  • By Gilles Antoine Duchaine
    February 05, 2013
    10:12 AM

    Yesterday, I presented Heaven's Gate at my school cineclub. There was almost 30 persons in the audience. I expected a controversal debate after the screening. But the main question was: "How can you hate or dislike this film? Just how?" I mean, you dont havé to love it to death, but calling it a bad movie? Nobody understood it last night. More than half of the audience, mainly film scholars, cailles it a perfect picture, a unquestionnable masterpiece.
  • By Alex Black
    March 16, 2013
    09:56 AM

    Daniel i have to agree There will be blood,Days of Heaven and Lawrence of Arabia are better with imagery and story telling and Heaven's Gate i kind of watched built up like everyone else and although no terrible it isn't great in story like those three movies which will go on for decades and decades as true movie classics!
  • By Ev7
    March 26, 2013
    07:08 PM

    1. Stunning cinematography 2. The American Dream 3. The anti-western.
  • By DCSnyder
    April 08, 2013
    12:05 PM

    Love the new transfer and restoration, but I miss the Intermission. The new cut loses one of my favorite shots in the film: John Hurt disappearing in the smoke. The Intermission also gives a natural break in time so that when Cully is woken up by the assassin on his way to Johnson County, it feels like a new day and not like he stopped to take a nap.
  • By Ben Armington
    April 08, 2013
    03:38 PM

    Just received and watched my copy of this the other day, and it looks excellent (and I own the not blu ray version) and the film itself gets richer with each viewing. With it's well-intentioned but strangely ineffectual hero and it's overall aura of downbeatedness, I really feel that it follows Wild Bunch and McCabe and Ms Miller and points the way to Unforgiven in the lineage of truly awesome westerns. That said, the extras on the disc feel like a missed opportunity; all the interviews are strictly complementary and even repeat information, and the essay, by Giulia D’Agnolo Vallan, is nice, but short on critical insight and plays as defending the film more than exploring it. It would have been cool to have Robin Wood's lucid analysis of the film, along with Steven (Final Cut) Bach's gossipy and ridiculously enjoyable account of the making, or even some of the bloodthirsty reviews from when the film was released for context.