Alcazar's Tapia vs. HBO's hackwork

I've noticed that, among the usual japes and tomfoolery common to boxing forums, we have a whole bunch of really passionate and discerning boxing fans here, so I thought I might find some sympathy on this topic.

I assume some other ESB'ers will have seen both versions of the Tapia documentary, and I'm curious to know if anyone was as aggrieved as I was.

While I can appreciate that the HBO re-cut might be perfectly viewable to those who hadn't already seen the original cut of Eddie Alcazar's film (the one which showed at the LA Film Festival), the two versions are like night and day in terms of integrity and enduring power. It's the difference between a harder hitting, extended edition of 24/7 or Legendary Nights and the most affecting boxing documentary since Kassim The Dream.

When HBO finally screened it a couple years or so back, I was dismayed. With the impression of the director's cut still fixed in my mind even after the passing of a year, I found the network's version unwatchable.

Chief complaints;

• The obligatory Liev Schreiber treatment is too heavyhanded and jars with Eddie's much less pontificating approach, which latter allows the subject matter to speak for itself without need for pseudo-profound exposition. Not to mention that Tapia's hauntingly curious and gently spoken opening words ("There was that light... There was a little light... I kept on looking at the light... And what does it represent?") are sacrificed in favor of Liev's third-rate philosophizing.

• When Alcazar does impose some additional interpretation upon the subject matter, he does so with fine taste, via some beautifully shot desert imagery featuring a young boy and Johnny himself. HBO's edit chops up and rearranges these carefully placed sequences, destroying their symbolism, in seeming ignorance of the full-circle motif Alcazar was reverently observing.

• Thirty minutes of valuable content is cut. Removing sections to fit a sixty minute slot would be more forgivable if not for the other complaints, but it just seems like an extra kick in the teeth to Alcazar's work in light of the other liberties taken, which did nothing positive for the quality of the film and only ironed out its wrinkles of creativity and sensitivity toward its subject into commercial uniformity for the sake of unneeded company branding.


In summary, HBO perpetrated a tragic dumbing down of a tremendous boxing film, insulting both the intelligence of their audience and the creator of the document.


I'm sure Alcazar was happy to see some kind of mass exposure for his film, given that he's been sadly unable to secure any home entertainment release for it (I guess companies don't see enough demand) - but I'd love to hear his unfiltered thoughts on the butchery HBO performed on his work, as it was clearly a labor of love for him.


Or I could just be being much too precious with my sensibilities, as somebody with an affinity for filmmaking.


Either way, thoughts?



P.S. I'm aware of the board's policy re. open sharing of material that might present a copyright hazard. This isn't a request for a stream of the original edit, nor a prompt for others to publically enquire about where to find it (I have no idea if it's made it to the internet streaming sites), but just a vent to those who may already have seen both versions and a recommendation to everyone else to catch it if/when they get a chance.

 

Good brief review of Alcazar's original cut from an uninitiated perspective;

This content is protected

 

Yeah, there's much more of that kind of material in the 30 minutes that HBO chopped out. The tone of the network version is very different as a result, basically a 'lite' version of the film.