brandinfennessy-77531 HEAVENS GATE (1980) directed by: Michael Cimino starring: Kris Kristofferson, John Hurt, Christopher Walken, Jeff Bridges cinematography by: Vilmos Zsigmond9 *s out of 10 I don't understand why this film still gets hated-on so much by audiences, even while the critics and intellectuals finally come around to embracing it as a great, important film; in my own opinion, it is just shy of a masterpiece, and, in a lot of ways, very much like Cimino's masterpiece from just a couple of years before - 'The Deer Hunter' .. that particular Vietnam-war film starring De Niro is as much of a slow-burn as HEAVEN'S GATE is, or is, at least, a l m o s t as much of a slow-burn .. I mean, Cimino definitely had his own unique style and aesthetics going on for himself, which obviously involved deliberately slow-pacing (very slow at times, albeit), immense subtlety, overwhelming intricate visual-detail (like old paintings), purposefully awkward interactions between characters, very deep characterizations, etc .. and, as with 'The Deer Hunter', patience is just required to understand and appreciate HEAVEN'S GATE - both films almost require a form of meditation for them to fully work and pay off .. HEAVEN'S GATE may be long, yes, but certain aspects are fully and obviously intended by Cimino, such as the stiffness of everything, as well as the beautifully deliberate pacing that almost creates an illusion of a narrative in real-time - he wants the viewer to have to absorb what is going on in this way, and there is often, quite awesomely, this superbly realistic and humanizing affect on the viewer because of this - this was, at least, my experience with every viewing .. .. .. what I'm saying is, in a way, I really do find it a mystery that people love 'The Deer Hunter' so much, but still can't handle HEAVEN'S GATE because of, primarily, its length and its pacing; I mean, lol, The Deer Hunter' is definitely the better of the two films, but it certainly requires patience - almost as much as this picture does .. and like I said, the patience pays off here .. the more you give to this film, the more it will give to you; it is almost like a relationship with somebody in a metaphorical way.. HEAVEN'S GATE is elegant, enormously epic, stately, rustic, ultra-realistic, thoroughly well-acted and gorgeously well-shot brilliance .. Cimino knew what he was doing, and I'm sure that, even in the '80s and '90s when this was s*** on even by the critics and film-intelligentsia. he knew deep-down that he had made a magnificent epic for the ages to appreciate .. now, I do believe this picture is just shy of a masterpiece, because it IS eccentric, and DOES require patience, and maybe does try to take on too much of a load, so to speak; basically, the way I see it, this film just has these human-like-flaws that it wears on its sleeve because of how earnest it is in so many ways, including its themes as well as its extreme ambitions on technical levels.

Peter Kettle Heaven's Gate… William Shakespeare, in Sonnet 29, expresses much about human nature in fourteen lines. Heaven's Gate, the Michael Cimino movie, takes what seems like fourteen hours to express nothing with any clarity. Ostensibly based upon 'real events' in 1890 - the conflict in Jackson County, Wyoming, between poverty-stricken immigrants and wealthy cattle farmers - it lasts a very long 219 minutes in the Director's cut. We watched the entire bewildering chaotic brilliant epic, and I could not take my attention away from it, even though I wanted to slash whole chunks of it out. It is difficult, too long, challenging, and exasperating; and that made me think it is like many great works of fiction. Set pieces of real wonder were interspersed with longueurs which made me want to hit Cimino in the face for allowing such self indulgence. But then along comes another unforgettable image, another astounding realisation of visionary genius, and you will forgive Cimino anything. Almost.I will have to sit through this film again. Which is how I felt after reading Ulysses, Moby Dick, and Wolf Solent the first time. Greatness and banality can so often become mired together. Heaven's Gate is a great curate's egg of a movie that, because of the good parts, I will revisit because I must. It is undoubtedly a bloody but glorious mess, and a seriously loving edit would get it running faster over a shorter distance. The opening college sequence, for instance, is obviously in need of a very large but affectionate trim. Far too much dancing and huddling, many more caps in the air than necessary, hurtling along ancient streets shown far too much, and so many unfunny giggling japes; if it is not an hour too much it seems like it. The movie launches itself at the audience exultantly, but then reveals a cinematic disregard without engagement or character involvement. Good actors are wasted. We get tantalising shots that need fleshing out. Vast sequences are filled with hordes of people, every one of them too anonymous to grab our sympathy or attention. It is a pageant of multitudes without illumination, a coarse quantity rather than a telling focus. It is constantly beguiling and frustrating. And it is undoubtedly a masterpiece.

Samiam3 Arguably one of the most self-indulgent movies ever made. Heaven's Gate is the ultimate paradox of epic and empty. Few movies are as beautiful as this one, or as boring.Michael Cimino's account of the Johnston country war is like a museum of epic paintings, beautifully shot but void of intelligent dialogue and sympathetic characters.Kris Kristopherson goes through the movie as if he is suffering from a hangover, dreary and dull. Christopher Walken and Isabelle Huppert fair somewhat better but the problem is that Cimino is incapable of finding his characters motivation, so everyone seems lost. There is a major absence of backstory in this movie, and instead we have numerous 'cast of hundreds' scenes that are stretched out beyond any reason other than Cimino is in love with the images.Cimino is more interested in telling the story through the picture than through the writing, and he in so ham fisted in his approach that Heaven's Gate feels like a 1920's propaganda film by Griffith or Eisenstein. He doesn't seem to appreciate that movies have changed since then and so have moviegoers. For the audience it takes three seconds to comprehend a message that Cimino takes four minutes to convey. The sound mix is also bombastic, mainly because long segments of dialogue are inaudible behind the cacophony of horses and carriages. The only memorable about Heavens Gate is the photography, everything else is a waste.

lycanus777 Prolixity in film review should be outlawed. Out of courtesy I read 3 paragraphs from a certain review that went on and on. I couldn't stand it. I haven't watch "Heaven's Gate" so can't offer you anything helpful that would persuade you either way.It's about preference. It's what you like, not what others like in a film. The movie, it is said, initially received bad reviews and was the "decline and fall" of Cimino. That tells me it's probably worth watching. Always remember there's a certain amount of political, Hollywood wrangling that goes on in the process of making film. You rub someone the wrong way like Cimino mostly did, then no matter how good the film is chances are it'll get a bad rap. So do this: pick a rainy Saturday afternoon, along with your favorite munchies, get comfortable and watch "Heavens Gate". You'll probably enjoy it.