User reviews

I caught this film upon it's cinematic release, and thought it to be one of the freshest films for the whole of the 1990s. It was interesting to catch it again recently on BBC2, and find it still stands up well.

The nods to noir and Hitchcock are there for all to see. This partnership finally has another film (U.K release before 31/12/01) due out, and I await it with bated breath.

Suture is written and directed by Scott McGehee and David Siegel. It stars Dennis Haysbert, Mel Harris, Sab Shimono, Dina Merrill and Michael Harris. Music is by Cary Berger and cinematography by Greg Gardiner.

Identity is the crisis can't you see - X-Ray Spex 1978

Suture is an unusual film that on the surface hangs its chief premise on a most ridiculous concept. Yet what is most striking about the film's heart and soul is that it embraces a number of staple film noir narrative threads. Photographed in spanking monochrome, and featuring an unnerving musical score, this surreal like play works with a cheeky glint in its eye as it challenges the viewer's perception of the unfurling story.

Wrapped around a suggested agony of identity, Suture revels in films and styles of film making it is influenced by. Name checking them all is folly, but as the amnesia angle blends with surgical reconstruction, and the murder plot betrayal sidles up to the voiceover, other potent pics spring instantly to mind. And yet in a piece heavy on identity, Suture, in spite of its reliance on influences, does have its own identity, very much so.

It's quite a debut from McGehee and Siegel, one that begs the question of why they didn't go on to greater things? Here they have great camera craft, with close ups, overheads and frame blends in action, while there's some striking imagery and noirville shadow play to take in as mood setting accompaniments. It could be argued that much of it is highfalutin, and that the philosophical probing is overkill, but the film remains unique and intriguing, if not as remotely thrilling as one hoped. 7/10

The construction worker Clay Arlington (Dennis Haysbert) meets his wealthy half-brother Vincent Towers (Michael Harris) in their father's funeral and sooner Clay travels from Needles to the city to visit Vincent. When Clay arrives, Vincent changes their IDs, gives his clothes to Clay and tells that he needs to travel but would be back on the next day. Clay drives Vincent to the airport in his car and Vincent explodes a bomb planted in the car. However Clay survives with amnesia and with his face and bones are restored by the specialist Dr. Renee Descartes (Mel Harris) that uses a video and pictures of Vincent to rebuild his face. The amnesic Clay assumes the identity of Vincent and learns that he is the prime suspect of Lieutenant Weismann (David Graf) for the suspicious murder of his father. Further, Renee and he fall in love for each other. With the support Dr. Max Shinoda ( Sab Shimono), Clay finally retrieves his memory and has to decide which life shall be buried.

"Suture" has a good story but the viewer shall buy first that the African American Dennis Haysbert and the Caucasian Michael Harris resemble each other. The plot has many flaws, and I believed that the brotherhood of Vincent and Clay had been kept in secret due to racial issues. Therefore, there is no explanation why the brothers have different social conditions having a wealthy father. And what about the fingerprints of Clay and Vincent, how could they match each other? The black and white cinematography is very beautiful and the camera work is excellent. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): Not Available.

Brothers Vincent (rich playboy) and Clay (average construction worker) meet up for the first time after their father's funeral and remark on how similar they look. But unknown to Clay, who thinks his life is taking a turn for the better, Vince is actually plotting to kill him with a car bomb and pass the corpse off as his own, planning to start a new life elsewhere with his father's inheritance.

Before the script was even written, those involved were looking into identity, paranoia and amnesia, and drew strong influences from Hiroshi Teshigahara's "The Face of Another", "Seconds" and "Manchurian Candidate", among others. (One of the writer-directors almost pursued a PhD in Japanese film, actually.) Mix that in with the tropes and cinematography of film noir, and you have the birth of "Suture", a minor masterpiece that anticipates such films as "Memento" (which unfortunately have overshadowed this).

Being an independent film, the budget was low, and the production ironically benefited from the recent S&L crisis and scandals. Shooting in Phoenix, they found some buildings closed down, including a bank that became Vincent's palatial estate. This was fortuitous, as the space works perfectly (I would never have known it wasn't an actual mansion.) Other corners were cut in more clever ways... watch close to see how they afforded blowing up a car -- they use an almost Troma-esque maneuver.

There seems to be a deeper message in the writing, with an obvious nod to Descartes, and a psychiatrist who seems overly reliant on quoting Freud. I am not sure what I missed. But you have to love the brilliance of the casting. Maybe I am a little bit daft, but it took me forever to get past the two brothers looking identical... while looking nothing alike. That was a purely genius move. (Not surprisingly, producers balked at the film's central "conceit" and their insistence of filming in black and white... this could easily have ruined some careers.)

The Arrow Video release is packed with goodies. Not only does it have the full-length audio commentary (with no less a person than Steven Soderbergh), but we have a 30-minute behind-the-scenes series of interviews with just about everyone. We have deleted scenes. And, perhaps best of all, we have "Birds Past", a short film from the directors that has very rarely been seen anywhere. This is a must-own film, and for true film geeks, you will want to listen to the commentary: there is as much discussion about this film as there is about film-making in general, with plenty of stories about "sex, lies and videotape", Terrance Malick, and more.

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.

Suture is a wry, if overly self-conscious, and relatively amusing rumination on race, subjectivity (of the Cartesian variety, and its attendant mind-body dualism), class mobility, and perhaps to a lesser extent, the American criminal justice system.

Comparisons to Hitchcock are misguided, as Suture better resembles, if pays homage to, John Frankenheimer's classic Seconds (1966). Yet whereas the latter explores fickle desire as constitutive of subjectivity as its protagonist transforms from beleaguered banker to artist playboy (a lateral move in terms of class), Suture considers subjectivity's more social aspects. It plays with filmic conventions such as black-and-white imagery and period costumes and scenery as denoting the past, while providing us with the central conceit of a race-blind society (mirroring perhaps our 'post-racial' one?) The difficulty or discomforting level of dissonance required to accept the film's premise, and the implications such a conceit has for the film's characters, is perhaps itself the 'message' of the film.

I'd recommend a triple feature, watching first Seconds, then Suture, then the documentary 13th.

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.

The debut feature of US filmmaker-duo Scott McGehee and David Siegel is a pristine-looking psychological forensics of an individual's confused identity, shot in widescreen black-and-white cinematography, SUTURE has its unmissable neo-noir panache awash but also undeniably undercut by its slight story-telling stratagem.

McGehee-Siegel's conceit is surprising and madcap, the purportedly identical half-brothers Vincent Towers (a dour-looking Harris) and Clay Arling (Haysbert) are diametrically different in their appearances (the racial distinction strikes as a self-aware but caustic jape), which at once impels viewers to suspend our disbelief and blatantly dissociates its scenario from any pretension of realism, as if to declare in its opening: don't trust what you've seen.

Truly, what we see is a rather simple identity-swapping scheme goes amiss, after murdering his minted father, Vincent plots to liquidate Clay, his doppelganger half-brother, whose existence is conveniently sealed from the outside, thus Clay would be the whipping boy passing off as Vincent, guilty and perished, then the real Vincent can return as Clay to claim his munificent inheritance. The plan is seamless a priori, but miraculously Clay survives the car comb and ends up with a disfigured visage and severe amnesia. Treated by Dr. Renee Descartes (Harris) to reconstruct his face, now believing he is Vincent, Clay's memory has to take a longer divagation to recover his true identity under the psychoanalysis of Dr. Max Shinoda (Shimono), who is welded together with the image of Rorschach test and passes wisdom in shrink's parlance by rote, and it goes without saying, the real Vincent will not have Clay usurping his heirdom for too long, danger and myth (for instance, what is the ulterior motive of Vincent's recently widowed mother Alice Jameson, played by an elegantly dressed, seemingly benignant Dina Merrill?) are hovering like dark cumuli, and the film's ending sternly keeps the lid on its barbed irony of Clay's ultimate choice.

In lieu of salting the plot, McGehee-Siegel duo resolves to making the mark of their cinematic style with their puny budget ($900,000). Potentially intensified by the sagacious choice of monochrome, the film emanates a beguiling retro-experimental flair with its punctiliously arranged compositions, high contrasted lighting and shades (inside the post-modern edifice equipped with bed-sheet- covered furniture and unadorned walls functioning as Vincent's clinical abode) and jumpy montages.

Another boon to this glossy debut is Dennis Haysbert, a straight-up leading man material endowed with virility, sensibility and fine fettle, who totally has it in him to rival Denzel Washington's prominent status in Hollywood only if we were living in a world of justice, and SUTURE, at any rate, is the bona-fides of the overlooked standing of McGehee-Siegel's oeuvre.

"Plan 9 From Outer Space" is a brilliant accomplishment compared to this piece of crap. Whatever possesses some people to write reviews saying this movie has merit is beyond me. Whenever the discussion of the worst movie of all time comes up, I immediately think of this film "Suture". Some movies are so bad, they leave a vestigial imprint on your memory cells which one wishes could be obliterated. This is such a film. The visual imagery of having two individuals exchange identities, and then no one notices, is absurd. Nothing hangs together throughout the film. The script is preposterous. The miracle is the fact that funding was obtained, a greater miracle that the film was produced, unbelievable that copies are out there for you to rent, and mind-boggling that some people like it.

A masterpiece of black and white Cinemascope, a brilliant use of the format. Every frame is beautifully composed with meticulous production design and art direction. It is so stylized that perhaps only ardent cinephiles can really appreciate it.

The story is about a rich murderer who discovers that he has a long lost brother who looks so much like him that, if he is killed by a car bomb (in the murderer's car, in his clothes, carrying his identification), nobody will guess it isn't the murderer. The innocent brother is so poor and naive that he allows himself to be set up, but, instead of dying, he survives with a smashed face and no memory.

The justification for this implausible setup is the opportunity to explore the idea of identity by positing an amnesia patient who is fitted with a very different person's face and past. If this story had been told in a conventional way with color, a narrower screen size, realistic rather than stylized acting, and the casting of two actors who looked very similar, it would have made a reasonably interesting thriller.

The brilliance lies in the artifice, especially in casting the wonderful Dennis Haysbert in a role written for his directly opposite physical type. The filmmakers seem to expect the audience to be able to watch the movie on more than one level. The story allows the audience to consider the obvious questions about the nature of identity, but the stylization allows the audience to consider the different questions about the nature of the film experience.

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.

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.

Dennis Haysbert is widely known as the president on "24" and the man in the Allstate commercials, so it might surprise people to learn that he appeared in this surreal thriller from the early '90s. Scott McGehee's and David Siegel's "Suture" casts Haysbert as the half-brother of a yuppie who tries to kill him, but then the movie takes an even stranger turn.

The black-and-white cinematography gives it the feel of a film noir. Overall, the movie poses the question of identity and how far you can go to be what you're not (kind of like "The Talented Mr. Ripley"). Indeed, throughout the movie I kept wondering it everything on screen was real or just in the protagonist's head. This is one movie that's bound to disturb you. Check it out if you can find a copy.

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.

The filmmakers have created a stylish suspenser that would make the master of suspense proud. Filmed in black and white, "Suture" weaves a tale of two brothers, one whom wants to use the other as a pawn for his devious scheme involving murder and mistaken identity. If I could mention two scenes that reminded me of Hitchcock, it would be these: 1) the first scene that sets up the film, and 2) Vincent explaining his dreams to a psychiatrist--reminiscent of "Spellbound." This is an excellent thriller that should be seen.

Highly artistic. The black and white was definitely accentuated through the filming style. Pretty crazy trippy.

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.