Watch Suture For Free

Purely Joyful Movie!

Powerful

Captivating movie !

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

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.

Excellent modern noir, though could've had a better ending as I will explain later. Elements of Hitchcock and David Lynch could be seen/felt, but definitely had it's own style. Acting was great, though not in a completely realistic way, more like the other worldly, slightly dreamlike delivery found in a Lynch film, but it didn't get as bizarre or unfathomable as Lynch often does (don't get me wrong, I love David Lynch!). Direction, Cinematography and Editing, again, excellent. So many interesting shots and sequences. A lot has been said about the choice of actor for Clay and the fact that everyone in the film sees the brothers as identical. My interpretation is that they ARE identical twins and that there just happens to be a black actor playing Clay and a white one playing Vincent. If the director decides they are identical twins in the film and that everyone in the film will see them as that, then they are. If a director has a prop of the Grand Canyon made for a film that doesn't look like the Grand Canyon, but he decides it is and has all the characters in the film treat it as the Grand Canyon, then in that film, it is the Grand Canyon. Obviously this was done on purpose to give more weight to the theme of identity. I don't think race had anything to do with the story of the film except in the mind of the viewer, which is valid, as it is such an issue in our society and why i think the director chose a black actor (rather than another white actor) so that the viewer will think even more about identity. I believe the twins were born to Mrs. Lucerne and separated at birth. There is a sequence where she describes this. I think this is when he received the St Christopher. Why Vincent was kept by Mrs Towers we don't know. Why Clay didn't stay with Mrs Lucerne, we don't know. Mrs Towers must have known there was another twin because he was at the funeral. Where did the St Christopher appear from after going missing? Was it put there by Vincent or Mrs Towers?I would have given this 10 stars, but for the ending, which was OK, but could've had a choice of twists. 1. He assumes the identity of Vincent, but then some new evidence comes to light and he ends up being charged with the murder of his father. 2. Even better, the Clay we see at the beginning of the film before the explosion is a facade and he actually killed the father after finding out about the details of his birth. this is why he also shot Mrs Lucerne because she gave him away to a poor life in a poor town. He was then planning to kill Vincent and assume his identity, but Vincent got to him first. I think this is borne out by the fact that, once he realises who he is, he's not as nice a guy as at the beginning of the film. I think he decides to remain as Vincent because that was his plan all along. And then the new evidence comes to light and he ends up being charged with the murder of his father. I think Mrs Lucerne, Mrs Towers and the St Christopher could've been woven into a much better ending, but even so, one of the best films I've seen for a while

A few years ago a friend and I were picking out a movie to watch. Since we had seen just about everything we decided to give this movie a try. The film ended up being a huge surprise to us, clever, well shot and nicely paced, with strong acting. This film is overflowing with Hitchcock style themes and also has a 1960s Twilight Zone feel to it. This was also the first time I have seen Dennis Haysbert (24, All State Commercials) in a film and he does a fantastic job. Some of the compositions and the overall cinematography are also handled with skill with some shots being smartly composed. What really made a lasting impression was the way the film handles reality, and the reality that the camera sees. Don't let the silly title and the black and white film stock keep you away from this unique movie.

The thing that makes this film kind of odd, is the fact that they use two completly differant looking people to be confused as the same person. While it is kind of a bothersome gimmick at first, it grows on you, and you soon forget it. Not bad, there is some good acting, and I kind of like the fact that it was in black and white. This is not for everybody though.