Payback: Straight Up

Payback revisited and a whole new ending. I wanna get this off to begin with; I really like the original cut. It's been circulating for years that it was the result of studio tinkering and the director wasn't all that pleased with the final version. Given that many films suffer similar fate and with disastrous results I thought maybe Payback was the exception.

Gone here is the blue bleach filter look, a lot of the music score which has been filled in with new cues, some alternate scenes throughout and some excised and a whole new final act. Everything is good here. I liked Porter's confrontation with his wife (brutal and uncompromising), the music score does help in giving it a darker tone and the new ending is fitting.

But I must say that the difference in quality between this Director's Cut and the original theatrical one isn't huge. Call me crazy but I actually miss Mel's voice over and I thought the bluish look suited the film. The humour has been downsized drastically and Porter's mean side has been fleshed out a bit more, which is good by the way. I just don't think one can be called great and the other crap.

The film plays more like a direct homage to the old 70's crime flicks and as the director explains that was what he was going for. The original does feel a bit lighter but that wasn't maybe such a bad thing. This darker version leaves more unanswered as to how Porter got back from the dead (but probably everyone has already seen the theatrical cut so they already know) and is more understated and mood driven.

To sum it up; Payback: Straight Up is an excellent companion piece to a first rate film. It's good to see director Helgeland's cut restored to his liking and it thoroughly deserves to be seen. Now fans can pop the film in the player that best suits their mood. The original a bit lighter and the latter more moody. It doesn't go wrong either way.

What I was hoping for in the director's cut of Payback is extended roles for Maria & Lucy. Lucy is absolutely hilarious in this film, with some great lines ("I need some satisfaction"), and her interaction with Porter ("I have a few minutes", "Go boil an egg") was just magnificent. There is some extension to the scene where Rosie & Porter meet up again, and she gets more of a part in the finale of the film. But Lucy definitely needed more of a role! Having watched both versions of Payback within the same day, I was shocked at how different they are. The original version of Payback is a lot darker, almost black & white in some parts, but this version keeps the colour. The beginning loses the opening of a doctor digging bullets out of Porter's back, and starts with him returning to the city, with no indication of a double-cross just yet until the flashback appears. It also appears to be cut together much better, and give the first few scenes a much quicker feeling. Porter no longer has a voice-over either. The scene with his wife is extended as well, leading to a more brutal confrontation, which leads more into him carrying her into the bedroom. Also, Porter the dog doesn't survive in this version. Big awww. The torture scenes are also cut from the film, and the boss's son who was originally going to get together with Rosie as his birthday present.

The finale is a load better, as in the old version, I did find myself getting bored, but the finale is more abrupt, and unexpected. Maria Bello gets a bigger role in the finale, although it does leave viewers hanging a bit, but I won't spoil it for anyone that hasn't seen it yet.

The only thing I'm gutted at is the low-class hooker, who Porter approaches when he's looking for Rosie, is completely cut from the film. Which is a shame, as she totally reminded me of the hooker from Pretty Woman that was Julia Robert's roommate. She's funny as well, despite the shortness of her scene.

Overall, I have to say I prefer the director's cut of Payback. Sometimes you find with some directors cuts, they tend to go a bit OTT, and keep in all the scenes which really weren't necessary, but this is well edited, and changing the finale was a really good idea. And seeing it in HD is well worth while too, if you can get your hands on it. I do like the idea of having it almost black & white, and I did miss it in this version. But it's well worth seeing if you want a different take on the film.

Director's Cut could mean any number of things...studio interference, re- shoots, poor test screenings. Most of the time that just means a couple more minutes added but sometimes there are drastic differences from the original released. This is one of those big changes. I liked this movie with it's sharp writing and nice mix of violence with dark humor. 'Like' has become 'love'. If you've never seen it and your a big film buff I'd say watch both versions to see the difference. If you've never seen it, Straight Up is hands down the way to go.

I was as curious to see Helgeland's cut of "Payback" as the next guy. It was years before I even knew there were on-set complications, and I've been dying to see what he'd had in mind.

It certainly isn't better, but I can appreciate where he was going with this. The hardened noir angle is heightened, and the original's steely blue filter is gone - but so is the '70s revenge movie vibe, and in its place is something a little more generic. The new score certainly doesn't do the movie any favors. Gibson used to have a wry grin underneath the violence, and now it's just brutality. He's no longer someone to root for.

None of these are negatives towards "Straight Up"; just strong differences. These are two completely different movies, each offering its own flavor. As curiosities go, this is on the entertaining side, but I've always been partial to the sheer style of the original movie.

7/10

Before studio execs and Mel Gibson got all uppity with Brian Helgeland, Payback was a darker, meaner film. But after an apparently poor test screening in 1997(honestly, what IS the point of these?) they put Payback on hold for over a year so Mel could do Lethal Weapon 4 before going back for some re-shoots, with a new director, to make the film happier.

So they approved a script of a dark, moody revenge thriller, green-lighted it for production and changed their minds to make it lighter because a ragtag audience didn't understand/like it? Man, Hollywood is one weird town.

The resulting film, which was eventually released in 1999, seemed a bit tacked together. There were scenes that just seemed out of place and irregular. It was obvious that any scene actually shot back in 1997 was shot on location and any scene shot for the 1999 cut was just shot in the generic 'street set' on the Warner back-lot. Despite all of this, Payback was still a fun film that failed to go all the way with it's concept.

The new DC is a superior version, no doubt and is about 33% different. There are new scenes and odds and ends through out the running time and the last act is completely different. Kris Kristoffersen is gone and replaced by Sally Kellerman (voice only, Bronson is never seen). James Coburn and John Glover also have smaller roles. The narration from Porter is gone as well as the blue tint to most of the film. Now most scenes are just lit as normal without any post-production filtering.

There is also a new musical score. The jazzy feel to the opening scenes is still there but through-out the rest of the film the score is more atmospheric and understated. Both are as good as each and fit the differing tones, so there's no better of the two.

It does end a bit abruptly and without any truly satisfying conclusion. I guess this is what annoyed test audiences. But a disgruntled audience should not be a decision-making committee when it comes to making movies.