Suture

[antnield]

A THRILLER WHERE NOTHING IS BLACK AND WHITE

Inspired by the paranoid visions of John Frankenheimer’s The Manchurian Candidate and Seconds, the desert noir of Detour and the black and white widescreen beauty of Hiroshi Teshigahara’s The Face of Another and Woman of the Dunes, Suture is one of great feature debuts – by writer-directors David Siegel and Scott McGehee – and a truly unique piece of cinema.

The wealthy and self-assured Vincent (Michael Harris) meets his blue collar half-brother Clay (Dennis Haysbert) at their father’s funeral and is struck by their similarity. He decides to murder Clay and take his identity, only Clay survives the assassination attempt with no memory and is mistaken for Vincent. The fact that Harris is white and Haysbert is black only complicates a film that probes into the nature of identity.

After viewing an early rough cut, Steven Soderbergh came on board as executive producer and enthusiastic patron. Suture went on to become a hit on the festival circuit, including Sundance where it deservedly won the award for Best Cinematography.

DIRECTOR-APPROVED SPECIAL EDITION CONTENTS

- Brand new 4K restoration from the original camera negative
- High Definition (1080p) and Standard Definition DVD Presentations
- Optional English subtitles for the deaf and hard-of-hearing
- Audio commentary with writer-directors David Siegel and Scott McGehee
- All-new interviews with Siegel, McGehee, executive producer Steven Soderbergh, actor Dennis Haysbert, cinematographer Greg Gardiner, editor Lauren Zuckerman and production designer Kelly McGehee
- Deleted scenes
- Birds Past, Siegel & McGehee’s first short film, about two young San Franciscans who journey to Bodega Bay along the path set by Tippi Hedren in Hitchcock’s classic, The Birds.
- US theatrical trailer
- European theatrical trailer
- Reversible sleeve featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by maarko phntm

June 20th [UK] / 21st [US]

[swo17]

I'm confused--the description says the two protagonists are different races but they look alike to me. Like, remarkably alike. I just can't get over how alike they look. I bet they get that a lot.

[FrauBlucher]

Good thing the film is in black and white.

[colinr0380]

Wonderful news, as this is a stunning looking film that could really benefit from a Blu-ray upgrade! It kind of anticipates Christopher Nolan's early noir films - I'm not sure it holds together quite as well as something like Following or Memento, but it creates a wonderful hazy, inexplicable and disorientating atmosphere that is an almost Ballardian world of plastic surgery, paranoia and psychiatry! Here's the trailer

I'd also be very supportive of a Blu-ray of Scott McGehee and David Siegel's follow up film - the Tilda Swinton starring The Deep End.

[jazzo]

Saw this at TIFF way back in the 90's and don't remember much about it except that I wished I liked it more than I did. I agree that it's a beautiful looking film, but if memory serves me correctly (and these days, that's a particularly unfaithful servant), I actually found that its rigidly formal aesthetic worked against me finding entry into the narrative.

Funny, but executive producer/shepherd Soderbergh's film THE GOOD GERMAN elicited a similar reaction from me; an interesting exercise, but without much else for me to hold on or warm up to.

Maybe worth a revisit, though. I've changed considerably since my twenties.

[swo17]

It's certainly one of the few modern noirs that understands the tone and rhythm of the old ones.

[domino harvey]

This movie is a noble failure. Here's my write up from the Noir thread:

A film with almost everything working in its favor, and yet two fundamental problems keep it from being truly great. Filmed in black and white 'Scope, this is a noir homage that by all markers appears to have been made by those who actually understand the genre on more than a surface level. I kept smiling and nodding my head as the film accurately plugged away and hit all its marks (especially when Sab Shimono's psychiatrist is on-screen). The basic story is deliciously pulpy: A rich man discovers his recently deceased father had another son out of wedlock and the newly discovered son, a common day-laborer, is a dead ringer for the rich man. The rich man then fakes his death by blowing up his brother. Only the brother survives, believes he has amnesia, and begins to "learn" to be the rich man, a guy who may or may not have killed his own father. It's a novel and juicy premise, and the movie has fun with it. But, like I said, there are two missteps in the conception of the film, one minor and one major.

Firstly, many of the affectations and stylistic choices are tied to the 50s and yet the film is set in then modern day, and this often creates a disconnect that doesn't need to be there (nothing in the film couldn't be done in another way to accommodate a period piece). The other problem is far more fatal: The rich man is a white man and the newly discovered brother is played by Dennis Haysbert, a black man with no shared physical characteristics. No one in the film ever notes that the two look different, and indeed everyone goes to great lengths to reinforce that the two are identical so that the audience gets the idea. But there is no reason for this, and I'm sure anyone reading this could conjure up countless ways how this decision may be read or interpreted, but the film has no ideas with regard to this provocation and anyone bringing meaning is doing the heavy lifting on their own. It's an empty and fruitless gimmick and what's especially frustrating is that the film doesn't need it. Suture is still worth seeing, especially for the scenes between Haysbert and Shimono (do a nice double feature with this and the Dark Past or the Snake Pit to see how perfectly the directors captured the spirit of this line of discourse in noir films), but it could have been more than a mere curiosity.

[zedz]

This movie is a noble failure. Here's my write up from the Noir thread:

A film with almost everything working in its favor, and yet two fundamental problems keep it from being truly great. Filmed in black and white 'Scope, this is a noir homage that by all markers appears to have been made by those who actually understand the genre on more than a surface level. I kept smiling and nodding my head as the film accurately plugged away and hit all its marks (especially when Sab Shimono's psychiatrist is on-screen). The basic story is deliciously pulpy: A rich man discovers his recently deceased father had another son out of wedlock and the newly discovered son, a common day-laborer, is a dead ringer for the rich man. The rich man then fakes his death by blowing up his brother. Only the brother survives, believes he has amnesia, and begins to "learn" to be the rich man, a guy who may or may not have killed his own father. It's a novel and juicy premise, and the movie has fun with it. But, like I said, there are two missteps in the conception of the film, one minor and one major.

Firstly, many of the affectations and stylistic choices are tied to the 50s and yet the film is set in then modern day, and this often creates a disconnect that doesn't need to be there (nothing in the film couldn't be done in another way to accommodate a period piece). The other problem is far more fatal: The rich man is a white man and the newly discovered brother is played by Dennis Haysbert, a black man with no shared physical characteristics. No one in the film ever notes that the two look different, and indeed everyone goes to great lengths to reinforce that the two are identical so that the audience gets the idea. But there is no reason for this, and I'm sure anyone reading this could conjure up countless ways how this decision may be read or interpreted, but the film has no ideas with regard to this provocation and anyone bringing meaning is doing the heavy lifting on their own. It's an empty and fruitless gimmick and what's especially frustrating is that the film doesn't need it. Suture is still worth seeing, especially for the scenes between Haysbert and Shimono (do a nice double feature with this and the Dark Past or the Snake Pit to see how perfectly the directors captured the spirit of this line of discourse in noir films), but it could have been more than a mere curiosity.

I think the explanation for your second quibble is that the film is informed by film theory (as the title implies), but to me it seemed to be informed in a half-baked way, and the central conceit just hangs there helplessly and fruitlessly. I'm also in the 'nice filmmaking, shame about the film' camp with this one.

Their follow-up, the Tilda Swinton remake of The Reckless Moment, is a much more ordinary, but more successful, modern noir.

[rockysds]

I'd also be very supportive of a Blu-ray of Scott McGehee and David Siegel's follow up film - the Tilda Swinton starring The Deep End.

Fox has already put this out themselves in the US and Scandinavia. Blu-ray.com review.

[R0lf]

I thought the take home message from THE DEEP END - a white mothers ultra conservative lifestyle is valued above anything else - was so deeply offensive that having it pointed out this movie is from the same director instantly made me lose interest.

[The Narrator Returns]

Anyone not impressed enough by the film itself to consider buying this should note that Arrow's extras description is actually underselling Steven Soderbergh's involvement in the supplements. I've read on two separate reviews of the release that Soderbergh is included in the directors' commentary, making this his first appearance on a commentary since The Informant! seven years ago. I don't know if this was recorded for an earlier special edition that never materialized or if Arrow actually got Soderbergh back in the booth after he said that he hated making commentaries (if the latter, this bodes well for the potential of a Round 2 commentary with Soderbergh and Lem Dobbs on Kafka, whenever that comes out), but either way, dare I say it, this alone is worth the price of a purchase.

[manicsounds]

DVDBeaver

[med]

Anyone not impressed enough by the film itself to consider buying this should note that Arrow's extras description is actually underselling Steven Soderbergh's involvement in the supplements. I've read on two separate reviews of the release that Soderbergh is included in the directors' commentary, making this his first appearance on a commentary since The Informant! seven years ago. I don't know if this was recorded for an earlier special edition that never materialized or if Arrow actually got Soderbergh back in the booth after he said that he hated making commentaries (if the latter, this bodes well for the potential of a Round 2 commentary with Soderbergh and Lem Dobbs on Kafka, whenever that comes out), but either way, dare I say it, this alone is worth the price of a purchase.

This is an excellent commentary track. Soderbergh is there to ask questions, but he spends as much time as the directors talking about the filmmaking process. Whether this track was specifically recorded for this release I do not know, but there are a handful of comments that indicate the track was recorded very recently.

[antnield]

This is an excellent commentary track. Soderbergh is there to ask questions, but he spends as much time as the directors talking about the filmmaking process. Whether this track was specifically recorded for this release I do not know, but there are a handful of comments that indicate the track was recorded very recently.

It was recorded specifically for this release.

[rapta]

This is an excellent commentary track. Soderbergh is there to ask questions, but he spends as much time as the directors talking about the filmmaking process. Whether this track was specifically recorded for this release I do not know, but there are a handful of comments that indicate the track was recorded very recently.

It was recorded specifically for this release.

Wow, really? I just got hold of this release and looking forward to seeing it. Anything influenced by both Frankenheimer and Teshigahara definitely deserves a watch (especially one that stars Dennis Haysbert)!

I wonder if you guys have considered any Soderbergh? Would especially love to see Traffic or Solaris, but would also like Kafka, Schizopolis, King of the Hill or The Underneath.

[dda1996a]

Are you asking how they are, recommending watching them or asking arrow to release them?

[rapta]

Are you asking how they are, recommending watching them or asking arrow to release them?

Just asking if Arrow had considered licensing any Soderbergh. I've seen all but one of them (Kafka), and seen over 20 of his films overall. You could call me a fan.

Only mentioned it because Soderbergh produced Suture, and also featured briefly in another Arrow Video release (Linklater's Waking Life).

Anyway, just grateful to see some 90's/00's US independent stuff show up on Blu-ray thanks to Arrow! Especially with transfers as good as these and plenty of extras.

[med]

Speaking of Kafka, Soderbergh mentioned his recutting it during the commentary and it sounds like he's nowhere near finished with it.

[The Narrator Returns]

He talked more about the recut of it in a Q&A he did to accompany a Haywire screening.

I’m calling it the ‘Midnight Edition. It’s very weird. I didn’t solve any of the problems, I’ve just mitigated them by making it so weird. You’re so distracted by the weirdness that you don’t notice what doesn’t make any sense.

Also, I concur with the hosannas for the commentary, it's just as entertaining and informative about the filmmaking process as the best of his commentaries, for his films or other people's. I'm glad he's realized how much the form needs him, and I hope whoever ends up releasing Carnal Knowledge has the sense to get him in the booth for it.