THE HORSEMEN was released on DVD in the U.S. 10 years ago. Neither the U.S. nor this new British version have any appreciable extras on them, even though the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) made an hour-long documentary about the making of THE HORSEMEN that was shown first in Britain and then in America. At the time of the film’s production, Sports Illustrated published an article on the sport of buzkashi, an ancient Afghani sport requiring an individual on horseback to transport a dead calf over a goal line while being whipped by the other competitors. Each game, which is often brutally violent, can last up to one week and requires specially trained horses.
Joseph Kessel’s novel The Horsemen was sold to Columbia Pictures for $150,000 in November 1968. By April 1969, director John Frankenheimer and producer Edward Lewis planned to begin shooting the film in the late spring, as one of four films to be produced for Columbia. The production had a split schedule to accommodate star Omar Sharif’s previous commitment to the 1971 film THE LAST VALLEY.
As a result, Frankenheimer shot all of the Afghanistan footage, as well as some in Spain, during June--September 1969, then finished filming in Spain from April--July 1970. During the hiatus, Frankenheimer and Edwards worked on the 1970 Gregory Peck picture I WALK THE LINE. Although it was reported that some Afghanistan footage was shot by James Wong Howe, only Claude Renoir receives onscreen credit for photography.
Frankenheimer noted the difficulties of shooting in Afghanistan, including the extreme heat, the threat of military intervention, and the language barriers. Because of religious injunctions against filming female nomads, the director stated that he cast his wife, Evans Evans, as an Afghani woman. He also remarked that he organized a car raffle to attract 5,000 extras for a crowd scene, but when 300,000 people showed up, the army had to be called to disperse them.
Frankenheimer spent two and a half years on the film, which cost $4.5 million, but the studio drastically cut the director’s planned 3 1/2–hour epic and canceled plans for roadshow exhibition, resulting in a severely edited and restructured final version of the picture. Frankenheimer stated that Norm Jackter, head of Columbia’s distribution arm, disliked the picture.
Because of the cancelled roadshow plans, there has always been a dispute as to whether the film was shot in 70mm. This is fueled by the film’s advertising materials, which carry the credit “Super Panavision.” One story, according to the IMDB, is that the film began shooting using 65mm negative but during production, Columbia went through a change in management. The budgets for this and another 65mm production, MACKENNA’S GOLD, were cut, and both films were forced to switch over to 35mm anamorphic Panavision. MACKENNA’S GOLD was released in 70mm, with the later-shot sections blown up. But THE HORSEMEN was released only in 35mm anamorphic prints in the U.S.
Another story (less likely) is that THE HORSEMEN was completely filmed in 35mm, and that Columbia always intended for the 70mm roadshow prints to be blowups. Advertising materials, which should have read “Panavision 70” were erroneously labeled “Super Panavision.” In either case, the previously prepared publicity materials were never changed to reflect the 35mm-only U.S. release. THE HORSEMAN’S onscreen credits read “Filmed In Panavision,” and only 35mm materials for the film are known to exist.
Despite mixed reviews in America, THE HORSEMEN was successful in France and Frankenheimer won France’s 1971 Triomphe Award for Best Director.
This article lists THE HORSEMEN as being "partially shot in 65mm," but no other details. Is this erroneous, or does it mean that certain sequences were filmed in 65/70mm and the rest in 35 like a Christopher Nolan film?
Wonderful score by DELERUE.THE HORSEMAN -71- Did get shown on network TV decades ago. Didn't get a lot of exposure in syndication and has been shown in rare incidents on cable in the past 2 decades.i like this 1-2-3- MALEFICIO, BOB DIMUCCI and then me. In the back of my head when I first saw this thread I said I bet MALEFICIO will comment and BOB will deliver the goods.
This article lists THE HORSEMEN as being "partially shot in 65mm," but no other details. Is this erroneous, or does it mean that certain sequences were filmed in 65/70mm and the rest in 35 like a Christopher Nolan film?
That seems to be the consensus opinion, although the reasons for the dual format may differ from Nolan's reasons. As I noted in my post above:
"One story, according to the IMDB, is that the film began shooting using 65mm negative but during production, Columbia went through a change in management. The budgets for this and another 65mm production, MACKENNA’S GOLD, were cut, and both films were forced to switch over to 35mm anamorphic Panavision. MACKENNA’S GOLD was released in 70mm, with the later-shot sections blown up. But THE HORSEMEN was released only in 35mm anamorphic prints in the U.S."
I would love to see this on the big screen. As well as Frankenheimer's GRAND PRIX. Unfortunately, Seattle appears to be losing one of its movie palaces, The Egyptian, so opportunities to see classic films as they were meant to continue to diminish.
THE HORSEMEN was released on DVD in the U.S. 10 years ago. Neither the U.S. nor this new British version have any appreciable extras on them, even though the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) made an hour-long documentary about the making of THE HORSEMEN that was shown first in Britain and then in America.
I went ahead and picked up a copy of the domestic DVD, which has now gone out of print. I was lucky to find one reasonably priced.
I remember my Dad talking fondly about the movie years ago, so I'll watch it then pass it on to him.
