SPOILER ALERT: If you haven't seen Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight yet, you may want to wait to read this because I reveal the ending.
Now that's out of the way...
I was one of the lucky ones to attend both the historic live stage read of The Hateful Eight at the Theatre at the Ace Hotel in downtown Los Angeles on April 19, 2014 and the Hollywood film premiere at the Cinerama Dome on December 8, 2015.
The live stage read was truly historic because it was not only the first time in Hollywood history that a screenplay written by QT was shared with the public before it was made into a film but it was also shared before he was able to even finish it due to a scandalous script leak.
At the stage read, QT had announced to the 1600 people in attendance that he was in the middle of a rewrite and the ending was definitely going to change from the one we were about to experience. So we were the only humans that would be able to see how QT's creative process including writing, casting and directing evolved from first draft to glorious 70mm.
Since there are few screenwriters that have influenced my own creative approach to writing as much as QT (hence, why I love to write female dramas that kick ass - but with a point), getting a sneak peak into his creative process was particularly exciting for me.
Especially since the ending wasn't the only change to the story.
In fact, there are 3 big differences between QT's first draft presented at the live stage read and it's final version in film.
#1 - There were two major character changes.
The character Bob's nationality is the first change and the other change being the character Jody's age and (let's say...) "connection" to the bounty hunter's prisoner, Daisy Domergue.
In the live stage read, the character Bob was a Frenchman played by Denis Ménochet. Considering Ménochet's amazing performance in Inglourious Bastards as Pierre LaPadite, I have a feeling that QT initially created this character with him in mind. However, Bob was later turned into a Mexican man played by Demian Bichir in the completed film.
Personally, I felt the change worked for the better because it added authenticity considering the story takes place in post-Civil War Wyoming and our nation's history (including present day) of discrimination against Mexicans.
So it made more sense that Minnie of Minnie's Haberdashery would have in fact hated Mexicans more than dogs - a moment in the film that drew laughs as Samuel Jackson's character Major Marquis Warren informs the rest of the hateful eight of this fact in Clue-like fashion.
Of course, since this fact was only known to the Major, it's what tipped him off to the criminal gang's take down to free their beloved gang member Daisy from the noose that was covertly ensuing around him. Since the racist Minnie would have never left her beloved haberdashery to a Mexican of all people, something is definitely wrong.
The other major change occurred to the character Jody, who's the brother of the prisoner, Daisy. In the live stage read, the 61-year-old James Remar played the role and although I don't remember disliking his performance, I can't remember how he was involved in the plot. That's not a good sign.
But in the film, 35-year-old Channing Tatum plays Jody. Although the addition of Tatum's star power added to the marketability of the film, it raised questions for me about how such a pretty boy managed to get these much older, more experienced and overtly hardened criminals to follow his lead.
However, the character's role in the film was far more memorable and it's new twist gives you a real sense that this brother and sister take the word gang bang to a whole new level.
#2 - There was one significant cast change.
Besides the cast changes discussed above, the most notable change between these two fantastic renditions of The Hateful Eight was in the casting of Jennifer Jason Leigh as the infamous Daisy Domergue.
In the live stage read, Amber Tamblyn played Daisy and in all fairness, she did a pretty solid job...until you see Leigh make this character all her own.
With just a sinister smile, Daisy Domergue went from feeling like a mere horse thief to a full-blown sociopath. It wouldn't surprise me if Leigh gets an Oscar for her performance.
#3 - The ending is better in the film.
The most significant difference between the two versions does happen at the end as QT initially warned us at the live stage read - particularly in the way Daisy finally meets her demise.
In the live stage read, the story concluded with the remaining characters (that didn't get poisoned or blown away during act two) killing each other off during a crazy shoot out, which frankly felt too similar to the ending in Django Unchained.
However, in the film's rendition, the bullet-ridden-and-hanging-on-to-dear-life Major Marquis Warren and Sheriff Chris Mannix make sure that Daisy gets the noose like she deserves. This gives the story a more distinctive and satisfying conclusion as the now-slain bounty hunter John Ruth (played by Kurt Russell both on stage and in the film) was taking Daisy into town specifically to seek justice by hanging.
[SIDE NOTE: It's interesting that cops were going to boycott a film that has a military veteran and the sheriff as the heroes in the end. Just saying...]
To sum it all up, despite how absolutely cool it was to experience the likes of Samuel Jackson, Kurt Russell, Tim Roth, etc. reading the script live eight rows in front of me on stage, these 3 big differences did make the completed film's story much better and tells writers like myself that even with creative geniuses like QT, writing is all in the re-writing.