cineaste business

The troubled production 
of this film classic is 
sheathed in layers 
of myth and mystification,
anecdote and dogmatic
tenets and decrees. 

The original director 
- so his story goes - was
brought on under false pretenses,
and made the film what it was
so far. When the star signed
on, the whole focus changed 
and the people became cynical, 
not expecting such a move. But 
the new director, once engaged,
brought a reputation for short,
brutish, underscheduled production 
way on top of the budget 
- a cinematic assassin,
much approved by the suits, if
considered by critics the greatest
and most technically-proficient hack 
in the world - and she'd brought 
her own screenplay, for a 
different film. Reenergized, 

redirected, restarred and revitalized 

by the addition of a love interest 
and an entirely different story,
setting, and much improved themes,  
the film was prematurely released 
before principal photography - a 
scandal that remains treasured, 
discussed, tut-tutted and mocked 
by all those who saw the initial 
theatrical run.

A cultural touchstone
unique in the annals. Upon deep
explanation and apology, the film
was re-released - this time shot,
but essentially 

the same film 

and was hailed

as an instant classic 
forever - last year. Now.

A hard-hitting new
documentary and expose dares
to ask: can its legacy 
survive daring revelations
and trenchant critical reassessment
on this, 

almost the anniversary? 

Of what became the most epochal 
influential paradigm-shocker 
the film world's seen since. 

For the answer? Wait 

for next year's installment 
of what
has been
inaugurated as 
an annual reexamination
of this 

deeply-seminal workhorse 
of a film. Popcorn anyone?