Suture

source: Suture

I had seen this movie about 10 years ago, liked it at the time, and was waiting for an HD version to appear to make my own copy. Lo and behold it came on today! Moreover, I just noticed Amazon carries a DVD that I simply have to include in my collection. Had it not been for the obvious twist, this would simply have passed as a predictable crime drama involving one brother trying to pass off the responsibility and consequence of one of his own crimes on to the other. The twist is that one of the brothers cast is black. However, his race, ANY racial overtones OR stereotypes, are EVER mentioned. EVERYONE plays it TOTALLY as if Dennis Haysbert were white. Or, more importantly, as if this has absolutely NOTHING to do with ANYTHING. The cinematography was crisp black and white which perfectly complemented the very unique question the film has posed to me ever since I first viewed it: Could we ever get to this? Haysbert and Dina Merrill (who for me were the biggest names here) give excellent performances driving a very interesting film that uses a simple crime format and elevates it into a thought-provoking and hidden gem that constantly forces the viewer throughout to take the chain offya brain! Seeing it again today reminded me of not so much the story but simply the possibilities it suggests. I hiiiiiiiiiiiiighly recommend as a very worthy addition to any film library.

Shot in black and white, Suture expands our minds by casting a black man (Dennis Haysbert) as Clay and a white man (Michael Harris)as Vincent, the proverbial twins separated at birth, who meet again as adults. While the meaning of this unusual casting seems to have escaped most viewers, I think I've either figured it out, or need another hit of 60's style windowpane to jog my mind back to reality. One thing of which I'm sure---race is irrelevant in this piece. This film is an unique play on the duality of nature, yin and yang, good and evil. Vincent, the evil (white) twin, tries to destroy Clay, the good (black) twin, but ends up losing everything to his opposite. Were we to look at the physical negative image of the film, Vincent would be black and Clay white. Under suspicion for murdering their father, Vincent tries to fake his own death by inviting Clay to his home, leaving town and killing him via a remote-triggered bomb in his car that he insists Clay drive in his absence. However, Clay survives, but with amnesia that prevents him from knowing who he is. As pieces of Clay's memory begin to return he must determine what is real before Vincent returns to finish him off. While not the best movie I have ever seen, it is one of the more interesting.

When I first started viewing Suture, I said to myself "yeah, right what a premise." Mid way through the movie I realized that they really made it work. By the end of the movie even I believed. You've got to let yourself go and truly get into the fantastic acting, great dialog and wonderful use of black and white cinematography. I my humble opinion this movie should be considered a classic in the turnaround genre. Dennis Haysbert does a fine job as the main character. He makes you believe that his ailment of amnesia has truly overcome him. This was one of the first movies I saw him in and his performance made him stand out as a fine character actor.

Very excellent film. The choice of black and white to shoot the film was a very good idea. So was the casting of the 2 brothers. I believe they are chosen to look completely different (although in the narrative they are supposed to look identical) is that the director/writer wanted to show how different their personalities are. Perhaps this could not have been conveyed so easily if 2 actual twins were cast. The dreams with the metaphorical flashback triggers were very clver, i.e. needles in the arm/Needles the town. They don't make films this thrilling anymore unfortunately. Hitchcock couldn't have done this any better. Anyway, this was an excellent film, check it out.

Suture is a beautiful film... great B&W 2.35:1 (Super-35) photography and keen editing. The performances are excellent. Everything is great except for one thing: It relies on such a suspension of disbelief that becomes distracting throughout the film. Don't get me wrong. Dennis Haysbert has the best performance in the film. But I feel that it was a bad idea to make the whole plot hinge on everyone mistaking a black man for a white man. I understand the reason why it was done, but there's no motivation for this. This gimmick ends up being as distracting as Bela Lugosi's stand-in for Plan 9 From Outer Space. There's no reason why the two would be confused with each other, obviously. However, it's never indicated WHY the use of two actors with opposite races would be confused with each other. I wouldn't have a problem with this if they didn't constantly show us how different they are. Vincent mockingly says they look the same (meaning they don't). The plastic surgeon watches a tape and views photographs of Vincent repeatedly. We basically have to let it pass that no one can recognize just basic features of the two (Vincent's gaunt face and receeded hairline). This gimmick was used perfectly in Luis Bunuel's That Obscure Object of Desire - two actresses play the same character for no reason. But that's a surrealist comedy. It almost feels like the directors put the gimmick in Suture just for the intent of being distracting. That's nice, but it's like keeping a hand over half of the lens for a whole reel to show blockage. It's nice, but it gets old. The use of the making the actors completely oblivious to something obvious to the audience can only work in something like a comedy or at least a film that doesn't take itself seriously. This is why Weekend at Bernie's can work, because it's so silly. Suture doesn't seem to be a movie meant to be taken as a jokey film. Maybe it's a parody of art-house films and we just can't accept that. This film basically shows that the switch of a driver's license is enough to switch identities. I really think that without this misfired gimmick, it would have been a great film. Or at least making it a comedy would have worked.

Suture in my opinion uses the effect of displaying the film in black and white well along with casting black and white characters that are deemed similar but in fact look nothing alike. The whole film is generally pleasing and interesting to watch, and includes some interesting (and unlikely) characters in the form of the psychiatrist and the plastic surgeon. The interesting and controversial comparison the film presents is perhaps that a black man cannot lead a white man's life, nor take up his values and lifestyle. But ultimately, although the character manages to unravel his past and his problems, the ending pursues quite an interesting direction, which the psychiatrist presents.

I can remember the first time I saw this movie. I was watching and providing ratings part time for Joe Bob Briggs' newsletter. A box of VHS tapes would show, you'd watch them, send ratings and then pass them on to the next person. Watching this film at that time I didn't get it. It made no sense to me. A black man and a white man identical to one another? And yet it works now. Two brothers, Vincent (Michael Harris) and Clay (Dennis Haysbert) meet at their father's funeral and are stunned at how near identical they look to one another. While Vincent has lived a life of wealth around his father Clay has been poor with less interaction. Vincent invites Clay to stay with him and he thinks things are looking up. Except that in reality Vincent intends to shoot kill Clay and leave his body behind to make everyone think he is dead. Shot in the face, Clay survives the murder attempt. Dealing with amnesia Clay has had his features restored by Dr. Renee Descartes (Mel Harris). As he pieces together the remnants of his memory Clay is now mistaken for Vincent. Few have any idea that Clay actually existed. To complicate matters "Vincent" is the lead suspect in the murder of his father by Lieutenant Weismann (David Graf). As Clay slowly begins to put back together the memories of who he was he is faced with a question: does he go back to being poor Clay or does he take on the mantle of wealthy Vincent? And if so, what of the real Vincent? As I said when I first saw this I didn't get why anyone would think that Haysbert, a black actor, would think he looked identical to Harris, a white actor. The two look nothing alike. But this time around as I watched I saw the method to the madness. If you suspend belief and accept that these two are identical then everything falls into place. It is the concept that we, as an audience, are watching actors in roles rather than reality that sets their differences aside and allows us to accept them as the characters they are playing. Once you get past that then the story becomes a fascinating mystery. Arrow Video has outdone themselves this time with a 4k restoration from the original camera negative. The presentation, shot in black and white, is crystal clear (unlike the old VHS version I saw years ago). Extras include an audio commentary track with writer/directors David Siegel and Scott McGehee, all new interviews with Siegel, McGehee, executive producer Steven Soderbergh, Haysbert, cinematographer Greg Gardiner, editor Lauren Zuckerman and production designer Kelly McGehee, deleted scenes, BIRDS PAST the first short film by Siegel and McGehee, the US trailer, the European trailer and a reversible sleeve with newly commissioned artwork. I fully understand that this movie might not be for everyone but if you give it a chance, if you suspend belief, then you will end up having a movie worth discovering. It is the story that matters not the look of the actors telling it. That they are excellent actors helps with the momentum of the film. When viewed years ago I wouldn't have thought of watching the film a second time. Now it has become a part of my collection, a film to watch every now and then. It's that good.

The first time I watched "Suture", in 1994, it ripped through me like some kind of high speed extra-terrestrial spacecraft, and I found myself asking, "What was that?" A year later I watched it again and the whole thing began to make sense. This film is unapologetically bizarre, mysterious, and aesthetically engaging -- almost everything I desire in a film. It is more like a piece of music, becoming more enjoyable with each viewing. One reason for the films superb milage is that it can be enjoyed on so many different levels. It is both a mirror image of contemporary society and a message from some alternative universe. The Surrealists made the point that the transcendent is found in the mundane, and "Suture" wallows in the mundane. Must be seen more than once.

Since some of the reviews compared "Suture" to a Hitchcock, we watched it waiting for a rationale for why nobody seemed to grasp the lack of resemblance between the presumably half-brothers (one has distinct Afro-American features, the other does not). Could everyone here who pretended not to notice be in a conspiracy to cash in on the white brother's fortune? Didn't seem likely, since nobody was shown even suspecting, but we endured this bore to the bitter end just to find out. No MacGuffin. No relationship to Hitchcock. A complete waste of time, not only for the viewers, but for those involved in making the film.