I read somewhere on another internet forum that the final cut of Flanders was drastically different from the original screenplay. According to this forum poster, the people funding the film made Dumont edit Flanders in a way which totally changed the originally narrative. Apparently, Demester originally comes back from the war and eventually goes on a shooting spree of the town. I was pretty incredulous when I first read this; however, recently I came upon a production still on Dumont’s official website which could be interpreted as lending weight to the theory. The still is here:
As you can see, Demester is shaven-headed (back from the war) and he has his gun. There is no other scene in the current cut of the film which presents him as such.
I was wondering if anybody here is in the know and could confirm this. It just seems very strange that Dumont, one of the most uncompromising directors working today, would waver his right to having the final cut.
I am pretty sure that, while a lot of the dialogue is improvised/created by the actors themselves, the scenario (narrative and plot) is always complete before shooting, Yes, Dumont doesn’t write traditional screenplays. He writes what appear as novels and aims to film what he has written. The actors never know the plot, yet Dumont always does. He says he needs to know exactly what is happening plotwise in order ro capture the “improvisation” of his actors.
I just found it strange that someone would mention the fact that Flanders was re-edited and changed from its original form, and even stranger that Dumont would be happy re-cut his film. As I mentioned, I didn’t think too much of it until I saw that production stil withl Demester and his gun.
BRUNO DUMONT - GENIUS OR SOCIOPATH WITH A CAMERA? over 2 years ago
I read somewhere on another internet forum that the final cut of Flanders was drastically different from the original screenplay. According to this forum poster, the people funding the film made Dumont edit Flanders in a way which totally changed the originally narrative. Apparently, Demester originally comes back from the war and eventually goes on a shooting spree of the town. I was pretty incredulous when I first read this; however, recently I came upon a production still on Dumont’s official website which could be interpreted as lending weight to the theory. The still is here:
http://www.brunodumont.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=6:flandres&Itemid=2&lang=en#
As you can see, Demester is shaven-headed (back from the war) and he has his gun. There is no other scene in the current cut of the film which presents him as such.
I was wondering if anybody here is in the know and could confirm this. It just seems very strange that Dumont, one of the most uncompromising directors working today, would waver his right to having the final cut.
Go to Comment
BRUNO DUMONT - GENIUS OR SOCIOPATH WITH A CAMERA? over 2 years ago
“A lot of Bruno Dumont is improvisation”
I am pretty sure that, while a lot of the dialogue is improvised/created by the actors themselves, the scenario (narrative and plot) is always complete before shooting, Yes, Dumont doesn’t write traditional screenplays. He writes what appear as novels and aims to film what he has written. The actors never know the plot, yet Dumont always does. He says he needs to know exactly what is happening plotwise in order ro capture the “improvisation” of his actors.
I just found it strange that someone would mention the fact that Flanders was re-edited and changed from its original form, and even stranger that Dumont would be happy re-cut his film. As I mentioned, I didn’t think too much of it until I saw that production stil withl Demester and his gun.
Go to Comment
Bruno Dumont's Hadewijch about 2 years ago
I remember seeing these shots when they were first uploaded, but they have since been taken down. Does anybody know if they are available elsewhere?
Go to Comment
Cannes 2011 Lineup announced about 2 years ago
I’ve heard there’s an excellent buzz around Domont’s “Hors Satan.
Go to Comment