I rarely go to the theater these days and cannot remember the last time I did prior to this. I had a unique situation twice in the past few weeks where the times I went the movie had problems starting. The first one was during The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, but they got it to work by starting over. The second time was during True Grit. They eventually got it to work, but with the opening minutes having a jazz theme from their quiz slideshow they show in between movies. I got my money back, but was given a free pass too. So, it kind of worked out in that I got to see True Grit for free the next day.
First, Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader is good for a family movie. I enjoyed the books when I was kid, so I hope they film the rest of the books.
Second, I think the True Grit by the Coen brothers is worth seeing. I am not going to give it a full review here, but let me hit a few points. Some of what I am about to say are things I have mentioned before a few times.
When watching westerns you are watching the myth of the west in American history. Westerns are not the real history of the west. Yes, there are some historical nuggets here and there, but usually you are seeing some exaggerations and exceptions to the common way of life. As I have said before, if someone were to think westerns were real history he or she would come to the conclusion that all anyone did back then was try to kill each other. The violence on the frontier was quite rare. It did happen like all crime has happened in the history of humanity, but generally not in the way you see it in a typical western.
Why did the western develop in this way? This goes back to the days of the west where dime novel storytellers would hear some story on the frontier then exaggerate and warp it to create larger than life heroes and violent episodes. The public loved it and this continued into motion pictures.
Some of the reactions I see of recent westerns and the new True Grit movie is there is this idea that a movie should tell you how to live your life, how the community should live, or some statement about how the state should be run. For example, if a western has the bad guys get hanged at the end of the movie it means that we should approve of the death penalty. Another one, when you see a group of vigilantes take the law into their own hands that means you should too. Westerns are not really like that though. They appeal to the myth of the west where gunfighter gods could deal out justice. It might be nice if the world were really that way, but it is not and never was. It does appeal to one's sense of there being many injustices in the real world that needed to be made right, but what is nice in a western you get to see an injustice defeated once and for all in less than two hours.
I do see some simple moral virtues that can be emulated in western movies like courage. A western might use violence to show how the character shows courage. However, to suggest that a western is advocating violence is really going beyond the simple virtues.
My second point is that westerns are typically very simple stories. Someone has committed an injustice and it needs to be made right. Most movies are like this, but westerns especially so. A lot of westerns are just variations of the same story. In many ways they are predictable. There are certain things you expect to see in a western. It is just a matter of seeing or experiencing the trials of the main characters as they get to the final confrontation with the villain(s).
Now regarding the new True Grit, while I think it is worth seeing I cannot tell you right now whether I think it is a really great western. I will have to watch it again on dvd when that time comes. Certainly, the actors did a good job of playing their parts. It does have some good authenticity in that it really looked and felt like being in the old west. Of course, the cinematography and Texas scenery are very good. It did seemed to drag at points during the first hour, but I think the Coen brothers did what needed to be done with what they were working with. Whether this movie should have been remade (based on the book) I do not know.
The reason I mentioned the two points about the western myth and simplicity of story was because I have seen a lot of comments on this movie where people were expecting something completely different. The Coen brothers are well known for movies like No Country for Old Men where the stories are really different and the endings are complicated. One comment that rang with me is this movie it is an "outdated western." That's redundant right there, but it shows a lack of understanding of the two points I mentioned. At the end of the day, all the Coen brothers set out to do was make an authentic mythological western.
Showing posts with label Thoughts on Westerns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thoughts on Westerns. Show all posts
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Thursday, March 06, 2008
My Favorite Westerns
I was tempted into calling these last two entries, Diary of a Madman, parts 1-2, Due to the length. I wrote them to get some ideas out, but if someone is not in the mood for that then I bold faced all the westerns so one can skip to what he or she wants to read. I just did not want to make a list which leads to my next paragraph.
One thing I purposely avoid doing online is rating my favorite movies on a top 5, top 10, top 100 movies, etc. list. On the links I list on the right side of my blog there is usually many threads and messages dedicated to this sort of thing. One thing I have seen on IMDB is just about every variation of a “top something” list. I might take a cursory look at some messages, but those really do not tell me much. This is why I started with the last entry where I wanted to clarify what I mean by a “western” and some really broad criteria as to what I look for in judging my favorites.
Something I did not mention, but I think I should mention here is related to the storytelling. I good western does not take that long to tell the story. The reason for this goes back to the B-western era where the movie was only about an hour long. The movie was short enough to support the A-movie playing on the same night. Eventually, these B-movies evolved into co-features and, by the end of the evening, you would have seen about 3 hours of movies. Since westerns tend to be more visual than depend on the spoken word they do not really need hours to be told. In my view, a good western can be told in less than an 1 1/2 hours long. Any western that goes beyond this time length has to do more to justify its extended use of time. This goes contrary to a lot of recent western movies where over 2 1/2 hours are used to tell the story. There are some good reasons they do this, but I will not go into it here.
Relating to what I just mentioning, let me start this by mentioning one of the best western director/actor teams of all time. That would be director John Ford and actor John Wayne. These men made a lot of really good movies. You can not talk about westerns without these men. This may come as a shock to those who have read this blog in the past, but I am not most hardcore fan of those type of westerns. I have watched them in the past and on occasions will do so in the future. The problem is they tend to be a little too epic with storylines that I do not have interest in. The main story I find interesting, but then there is usually something I do not care about that takes up a lot of the movie. So, I would encourage people to watch the Ford/Wayne epic movies, but those are not my favorites. Watch Stagecoach, The Searchers, My Darling Clementine, and Fort Apache. Those tend to be the most talked about of the Ford/Wayne team. I can not honestly say I could watch these over and over again like I can some others, but they are some good ones. A lot of those have Monument Valley in them which is a very awesome scenery location.
On the other hand, let me give an epic movie that really is worth the extra time. That would be Red River directed by Howard Hawks with John Wayne. This is the best movie I can think of that illustrates the big cattle drive. I will mention a few others, but I think this is my favorite in this regard. Like a lot of old movies and westerns, sometimes the endings are weak to create a happy ending, or the old Hays Code would prevent the director from creating a downbeat satisfying ending. This is the case here, but this should not stop one from enjoying the whole movie.
Another one often listed is the movie Shane. This is a must see. Alan Ladd plays the iconic gunfighter versus the evil Jack Palance gunfighter. What I really like, and I think this is part of Alan Ladd’s acting, and probably his personality, is his slowness. This is a tradition in western movies that the gunfighter is really slow and does not speak much. Then at the very last second he has lightning fast reflexes when he pulls his gun out. Meanwhile, Jack Palance is considered by many to have the best western villain role with this movie. The thing that is interesting is, in some ways, the two gunfighters are very similar to each other. Van Heflin and Jean Arthur have good roles as the parents of the young boy, Joey. A lot of the movie is seen through the young boy’s eyes. The bonding Shane and Joey have is really “cute.” I think that is the best way to describe it since Joey, like most young boys and girls, has a very sincere way of dealing with Shane. The ending of this movie fits perfectly with this and may bring a tear or two to the eye. Finally, the Grand Tetons in Wyoming are a beauty to see.
High Noon with Gary Cooper is a classic. There are lots of stories out there about why this movie is left-wing politically; do a google search. From what I have been told this is the most requested movie of an President in office. I do not really look at this movie politically though, nor do I look at this movie as the realistic old west. I mentioned in my last entry why this would not bother me. Here is why it is great. If you have ever been in stressful situation where you think the world is not on your side then this is the movie for you. Guess what, you will have a clock in just about every scene letting you know that time is running down on our hero. The movie is almost in real time. You can check the clock and see what time it is. Can Will Kane convince others to help him against the villain who will reach his men in town at noon? One thing interesting about me liking this movie, is that there really is not scenery since it takes place all in town. What is cool though is the one chance you get at real scenery you do not really want to see it because it means the villain might arrive soon. The claustrophobia works really well here. The movie is not relaxed and filled with open scenery. This is an example of where scenery was not used and it works. The music helps create the tension, along with the Tex Ritter sung theme.
I wanted to get out some of the 5-6 classic western movies that I do not think one can skip. The movies listed above are the most common ones talked about being the “Greatest Westerns Ever.” Just writing about them makes me want to watch them again.
Another team of classic movies are the ones from director Anthony Mann and actor Jimmy Stewart. Winchester ’73, Bend of the River, The Far Country, The Man from Laramie, and The Naked Spur. Stewart has some nice emotional moments in these movies, “Oh, You Scum!” from The Man From Laramie. The Naked Spur might be the one I like the most, but I can not say for sure. The others lesser known Mann movies that are classics are The Man of the West with Gary Cooper. Originally, it was intended to be another Stewart movie. This will get a dvd release in May, 2008. Another being The Tin Star with Henry Fonda and Anthony Perkins. The Tin Star is a nice one with Fonda showing Perkins the ropes of being a lawman. I like the practical advice he gives.
Now, let me give my absolute favorite team, Director Budd Boetticher and actor Randolph Scott. Seven Men From Now, The Tall T, Ride Lonesome, Comanche Station, Decision at Sundown, and Buchanon Rides Alone. Anyone that has read my blog knows I have talked about the first four repeatedly. I know the exact locations for those movies almost inside and out, and if not, I can tell you the general area where they took place. They specifically filmed these movies with the scenery being an important part of the storyline. They would create new scenes just to film extra scenery. Someone online criticized Ride Lonesome as one of the worst westerns of the 50’s. Then he said, only the cinematography of the Eastern Sierra is the highlight. Imagine being in a court of law and a defense attorney says, “Apart from your eyewitnesses, the prosecution's case is very poor!” That is they way I felt when I read that review of the movie. The way I see it, the first five movies I mentioned are variations of the same story. The story is simple. Randolph Scott is dealing with the death of his wife. There is usually another woman he bonds with, but she is usually already married. Darn! The villains are charismatic themselves. Sometimes old friends of Scott’s. Boetticher’s strength is making the most out of simplicity. The movies are only about 80 minutes long. Burt Kennedy wrote and reused a lot of the dialogue in different ways, but it is not a real talky series. There are key conversations, but just enough to figure things out and keep the movie going. Unfortunately, only Seven Men From Now is officially released on dvd. The rest are seen on Encore Westerns and sometimes on TCM.
I wanted to say one more thing about the movie Decision at Sundown. This movie is looked at as one of the lesser efforts compared to the other movies. By itself, this maybe true. I see it as a High Noon turned upside down. It one looks at it from this perspective then they may appreciate it more.
Three other Alabama Hills movies I want to mention are The Violent Men, Rawhide (1951), and The Yellow Sky. I love those movies. Rawhide, with Jack Elam giving my favorite villain role in westerns, will get a dvd release in May. I have said some in the past and will do more in the future. I have tons of location stuff on those movies, but since I do a lot of that in other entries I will skip here.
Sam Peckinpah was a great film director that many know because of his ultra-violent movies like The Wild Bunch. My favorite is Ride the High Country. This was partially filmed in Mammoth for the nice scenery and the town was filmed at Bronson Canyon. It ended up being Randolph Scott's retirement movie. As far as I am concerned this was the last golden age western. A nice realistic western gunfight at the end, as well as, the final picture shot with the Joel McCrea with the mountain behind him makes me like this one right up there with the Boetticher movies. I can watch this one over and over. I like Peckinpah’s Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid a lot too.
Audie Murphy, our most decorated WW2 veteran, is one of my favorite western actors. He, like Randolph Scott, acts in pretty much a way you can expect in every movie. The advantage he had was that he actually had seen violence in the real world. The classic movie that is his best role is No Name on the Bullet. He walks into a town and everyone freaks out since no one knows who is going to kill. He did three in the Alabama Hills that I have mentioned before and intend to do more of in the future: Hell Bent For Leather, Showdown, and Posse From Hell.
Robert Mitchum is always cool to watch. The Man with the Gun will be coming out on dvd in May. Pursued is tad long, but good. Blood on the Moon is a favorite, but not on dvd. The above three are black and white noir westerns.
Speaking of noir westerns, The Gunfighter, with Gregory Peck, is a nice gloomy one about a gunfighter trying to settle down with his wife and son. It is getting a dvd release in May. In westerns there is that old gunfighter that tries to retire, but can not escape is past.
The Shootist, deals with the theme that I just mentioned. John Wayne plays an aging gunfighter who is dying of cancer. What really makes this movie is Wayne was going through the same problem with his real life problems with cancer. If I had to throw out every western John Wayne ever did, but could only keep one this would be it. With that said, True Grit, Rooster Cogburn, The Sons of Katie Elder, and Hondo are some others I come back to every few years.
The Ox-Bow Incident and Silver Lode are my anti-mob favorite movies. I am not a big fan of mob justice in the old west. This probably deserves another entry, but I am not a big fan of “let’s gang up on people,” or the idea that a fair fight is 10 on 1. These two movies show the problems of “mob justice.”
My two favorite Steve McQueen westerns are Nevada Smith and Tom Horn. Nevada Smith is a revenge story with many locations I have been to. Tom Horn is based on the end of the life of the hired gunman.
Vera Cruz with Gary Cooper and Burt Lancaster as gunfighter mercenaries in Mexico is important viewing for people that like European Spaghetti Westerns. Made in 1954, it is the master plan for those movies.
The Professionals with Burt Lancaster, Lee Marvin, Robert Ryan, Jack Palance, and Claudia Cardinale is a good one with use of Death Valley and other desert areas.
3:10 to Yuma (1957) with Glenn Ford and Van Heflin is a classic. I talked about this movie a over a year ago on a message forum, and did not get much response because no one knew what I was talking about. I suspect now most know the recent movie was a remake. The opening song is good for that period of movie. The problem this movie and the remake had is trying to figure out how to end it. I can live with the original ending, but I do not know of a way to do it any better.
How the West Was Won is okay to watch. It combines three generations of stories with different directors into a huge epic story. I really like parts of it. Visually, part of the problem with it is the old dvd has a 3 frame view. One feels they are watching three parts of the same movie combined. There is supposed to be a new remastered version of this coming out this year correcting this problem. If someone fixes that then I eagerly await seeing the Indian raid in all its glory. One of these days I have to head back to Convict Lake to show where Jimmy Stewart met up with the Indians at the beginning. Wait, I thought Nevada Smith was there? They both were.
I like Henry Fonda in most westerns he has done. Warlock, with Richard Widmark and Anthony Quinn is a good psychological western. It is a bit long, but here is why I like it. It is a Wyatt Earp fictional film. Change the names around, but it is essentially the Wyatt Earp legend. Sometime soon I will talk about how I feel about the Wyatt Earp history legend. The relationship between Fonda and Quinn is seen by some as controversial. I really do not believe it is anymore than Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday’s friendship. There was a certain dependence on the each other to survive in the west.
I have said very little about European Spaghetti Westerns. I mentioned them in the last entry and regarding Vera Cruz. I am not the biggest fan of them compared to when I was younger. Of the 500 made, I only like, at the most, about 25-50 of them. I haven’t seen all of them, but from what I have read, talked to others about, and seen I would rather spend my time on other movies. A Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Once Upon a Time in the West, and Duck, You Sucker! are good, but I have seen them so many times since I was kid I would rather spend my time on other movies. Sergio Corbucci would be the other director I like because he had some good scenery in his movies. The Great Silence is my favorite of his. It takes place all in the snow with a mute gunfighter who fights bounty hunters. The ending puts people off, but this is a western where everything is turned upside down. There are a few others, but I need more than violent action to sustain my interest.
This leads me to the 1970’s. I am going to put Will Penny in this category even though it was made in 1968. At this point, most American Westerns took the “realistic” turn. I am not the biggest fan of this time period. A lot of these westerns are meant to be dirty, depressing, and un-heroic. Will Penny is probably my favorite of these movies. The Culpepper Cattle Co., Bad Company, Mr. McCabe & Mrs. Miller, and Heaven’s Gate all have something worth seeing in them. Again, I refer you to my last entry on this. The recent The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is much like this. That actually had good use of cinematography, but did not feel like a western to me.
Jeremiah Johnson, with Robert Redford, is the best mountain man movie out there. I love this one since the first 20 minutes reminds me of some of the places I have hiked, but during the summer.
High Plain's Drifter is probably my favorite Clint Eastwood, apart from his Leone movies. It is as if High Noon went wrong. It is sort of like High Noon 2: The Nightmare. Filmed exclusively at Mono Lake I usually visit the old area, or drive by it once a summer.
Progressing a little further to 1988, the tv mini-series, Lonesome Dove, is much like the above showing the ugly conditions of the western era. It is good, kept my interest, but not something I want to watch too much of.
Up into this point, I have thrown out mentioning any b-westerns of the 1930-40’s. I’ll just say that Hopalong Cassidy movies are really good to watch along with the kids. Nice visuals with Hopalong Cassidy and his sidekicks helping western society. About half of the 66 movies were filmed at the Alabama Hills. Tim Holt was another cool b-movie western hero.
Finally, my favorite tv series is Richard Boone’s Have Gun, Will Travel. Richard Boone easily made one of the coolest roles in the history of television. A gunfighter who is well traveled and well read in the classics hires himself out to those who need him. Even though this show is over 50 years old now I am still amazed with the writing they did on this show. Some of those Gene Roddenberry (Star Trek creator) episodes continue to amaze me.
Writing long entries like this is rare thing for me. Somewhere down the line I need to do a few more of these on other topics. One on comedy westerns I skipped, any other westerns I have forgotten, and one on my martial arts movies interests. My next entry will be back to normal. In the meantime, get the netflix queue filled up, watch TCM, Encore Westerns, and FOX Movie Channel.
One thing I purposely avoid doing online is rating my favorite movies on a top 5, top 10, top 100 movies, etc. list. On the links I list on the right side of my blog there is usually many threads and messages dedicated to this sort of thing. One thing I have seen on IMDB is just about every variation of a “top something” list. I might take a cursory look at some messages, but those really do not tell me much. This is why I started with the last entry where I wanted to clarify what I mean by a “western” and some really broad criteria as to what I look for in judging my favorites.
Something I did not mention, but I think I should mention here is related to the storytelling. I good western does not take that long to tell the story. The reason for this goes back to the B-western era where the movie was only about an hour long. The movie was short enough to support the A-movie playing on the same night. Eventually, these B-movies evolved into co-features and, by the end of the evening, you would have seen about 3 hours of movies. Since westerns tend to be more visual than depend on the spoken word they do not really need hours to be told. In my view, a good western can be told in less than an 1 1/2 hours long. Any western that goes beyond this time length has to do more to justify its extended use of time. This goes contrary to a lot of recent western movies where over 2 1/2 hours are used to tell the story. There are some good reasons they do this, but I will not go into it here.
Relating to what I just mentioning, let me start this by mentioning one of the best western director/actor teams of all time. That would be director John Ford and actor John Wayne. These men made a lot of really good movies. You can not talk about westerns without these men. This may come as a shock to those who have read this blog in the past, but I am not most hardcore fan of those type of westerns. I have watched them in the past and on occasions will do so in the future. The problem is they tend to be a little too epic with storylines that I do not have interest in. The main story I find interesting, but then there is usually something I do not care about that takes up a lot of the movie. So, I would encourage people to watch the Ford/Wayne epic movies, but those are not my favorites. Watch Stagecoach, The Searchers, My Darling Clementine, and Fort Apache. Those tend to be the most talked about of the Ford/Wayne team. I can not honestly say I could watch these over and over again like I can some others, but they are some good ones. A lot of those have Monument Valley in them which is a very awesome scenery location.
On the other hand, let me give an epic movie that really is worth the extra time. That would be Red River directed by Howard Hawks with John Wayne. This is the best movie I can think of that illustrates the big cattle drive. I will mention a few others, but I think this is my favorite in this regard. Like a lot of old movies and westerns, sometimes the endings are weak to create a happy ending, or the old Hays Code would prevent the director from creating a downbeat satisfying ending. This is the case here, but this should not stop one from enjoying the whole movie.
Another one often listed is the movie Shane. This is a must see. Alan Ladd plays the iconic gunfighter versus the evil Jack Palance gunfighter. What I really like, and I think this is part of Alan Ladd’s acting, and probably his personality, is his slowness. This is a tradition in western movies that the gunfighter is really slow and does not speak much. Then at the very last second he has lightning fast reflexes when he pulls his gun out. Meanwhile, Jack Palance is considered by many to have the best western villain role with this movie. The thing that is interesting is, in some ways, the two gunfighters are very similar to each other. Van Heflin and Jean Arthur have good roles as the parents of the young boy, Joey. A lot of the movie is seen through the young boy’s eyes. The bonding Shane and Joey have is really “cute.” I think that is the best way to describe it since Joey, like most young boys and girls, has a very sincere way of dealing with Shane. The ending of this movie fits perfectly with this and may bring a tear or two to the eye. Finally, the Grand Tetons in Wyoming are a beauty to see.
High Noon with Gary Cooper is a classic. There are lots of stories out there about why this movie is left-wing politically; do a google search. From what I have been told this is the most requested movie of an President in office. I do not really look at this movie politically though, nor do I look at this movie as the realistic old west. I mentioned in my last entry why this would not bother me. Here is why it is great. If you have ever been in stressful situation where you think the world is not on your side then this is the movie for you. Guess what, you will have a clock in just about every scene letting you know that time is running down on our hero. The movie is almost in real time. You can check the clock and see what time it is. Can Will Kane convince others to help him against the villain who will reach his men in town at noon? One thing interesting about me liking this movie, is that there really is not scenery since it takes place all in town. What is cool though is the one chance you get at real scenery you do not really want to see it because it means the villain might arrive soon. The claustrophobia works really well here. The movie is not relaxed and filled with open scenery. This is an example of where scenery was not used and it works. The music helps create the tension, along with the Tex Ritter sung theme.
I wanted to get out some of the 5-6 classic western movies that I do not think one can skip. The movies listed above are the most common ones talked about being the “Greatest Westerns Ever.” Just writing about them makes me want to watch them again.
Another team of classic movies are the ones from director Anthony Mann and actor Jimmy Stewart. Winchester ’73, Bend of the River, The Far Country, The Man from Laramie, and The Naked Spur. Stewart has some nice emotional moments in these movies, “Oh, You Scum!” from The Man From Laramie. The Naked Spur might be the one I like the most, but I can not say for sure. The others lesser known Mann movies that are classics are The Man of the West with Gary Cooper. Originally, it was intended to be another Stewart movie. This will get a dvd release in May, 2008. Another being The Tin Star with Henry Fonda and Anthony Perkins. The Tin Star is a nice one with Fonda showing Perkins the ropes of being a lawman. I like the practical advice he gives.
Now, let me give my absolute favorite team, Director Budd Boetticher and actor Randolph Scott. Seven Men From Now, The Tall T, Ride Lonesome, Comanche Station, Decision at Sundown, and Buchanon Rides Alone. Anyone that has read my blog knows I have talked about the first four repeatedly. I know the exact locations for those movies almost inside and out, and if not, I can tell you the general area where they took place. They specifically filmed these movies with the scenery being an important part of the storyline. They would create new scenes just to film extra scenery. Someone online criticized Ride Lonesome as one of the worst westerns of the 50’s. Then he said, only the cinematography of the Eastern Sierra is the highlight. Imagine being in a court of law and a defense attorney says, “Apart from your eyewitnesses, the prosecution's case is very poor!” That is they way I felt when I read that review of the movie. The way I see it, the first five movies I mentioned are variations of the same story. The story is simple. Randolph Scott is dealing with the death of his wife. There is usually another woman he bonds with, but she is usually already married. Darn! The villains are charismatic themselves. Sometimes old friends of Scott’s. Boetticher’s strength is making the most out of simplicity. The movies are only about 80 minutes long. Burt Kennedy wrote and reused a lot of the dialogue in different ways, but it is not a real talky series. There are key conversations, but just enough to figure things out and keep the movie going. Unfortunately, only Seven Men From Now is officially released on dvd. The rest are seen on Encore Westerns and sometimes on TCM.
I wanted to say one more thing about the movie Decision at Sundown. This movie is looked at as one of the lesser efforts compared to the other movies. By itself, this maybe true. I see it as a High Noon turned upside down. It one looks at it from this perspective then they may appreciate it more.
Three other Alabama Hills movies I want to mention are The Violent Men, Rawhide (1951), and The Yellow Sky. I love those movies. Rawhide, with Jack Elam giving my favorite villain role in westerns, will get a dvd release in May. I have said some in the past and will do more in the future. I have tons of location stuff on those movies, but since I do a lot of that in other entries I will skip here.
Sam Peckinpah was a great film director that many know because of his ultra-violent movies like The Wild Bunch. My favorite is Ride the High Country. This was partially filmed in Mammoth for the nice scenery and the town was filmed at Bronson Canyon. It ended up being Randolph Scott's retirement movie. As far as I am concerned this was the last golden age western. A nice realistic western gunfight at the end, as well as, the final picture shot with the Joel McCrea with the mountain behind him makes me like this one right up there with the Boetticher movies. I can watch this one over and over. I like Peckinpah’s Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid a lot too.
Audie Murphy, our most decorated WW2 veteran, is one of my favorite western actors. He, like Randolph Scott, acts in pretty much a way you can expect in every movie. The advantage he had was that he actually had seen violence in the real world. The classic movie that is his best role is No Name on the Bullet. He walks into a town and everyone freaks out since no one knows who is going to kill. He did three in the Alabama Hills that I have mentioned before and intend to do more of in the future: Hell Bent For Leather, Showdown, and Posse From Hell.
Robert Mitchum is always cool to watch. The Man with the Gun will be coming out on dvd in May. Pursued is tad long, but good. Blood on the Moon is a favorite, but not on dvd. The above three are black and white noir westerns.
Speaking of noir westerns, The Gunfighter, with Gregory Peck, is a nice gloomy one about a gunfighter trying to settle down with his wife and son. It is getting a dvd release in May. In westerns there is that old gunfighter that tries to retire, but can not escape is past.
The Shootist, deals with the theme that I just mentioned. John Wayne plays an aging gunfighter who is dying of cancer. What really makes this movie is Wayne was going through the same problem with his real life problems with cancer. If I had to throw out every western John Wayne ever did, but could only keep one this would be it. With that said, True Grit, Rooster Cogburn, The Sons of Katie Elder, and Hondo are some others I come back to every few years.
The Ox-Bow Incident and Silver Lode are my anti-mob favorite movies. I am not a big fan of mob justice in the old west. This probably deserves another entry, but I am not a big fan of “let’s gang up on people,” or the idea that a fair fight is 10 on 1. These two movies show the problems of “mob justice.”
My two favorite Steve McQueen westerns are Nevada Smith and Tom Horn. Nevada Smith is a revenge story with many locations I have been to. Tom Horn is based on the end of the life of the hired gunman.
Vera Cruz with Gary Cooper and Burt Lancaster as gunfighter mercenaries in Mexico is important viewing for people that like European Spaghetti Westerns. Made in 1954, it is the master plan for those movies.
The Professionals with Burt Lancaster, Lee Marvin, Robert Ryan, Jack Palance, and Claudia Cardinale is a good one with use of Death Valley and other desert areas.
3:10 to Yuma (1957) with Glenn Ford and Van Heflin is a classic. I talked about this movie a over a year ago on a message forum, and did not get much response because no one knew what I was talking about. I suspect now most know the recent movie was a remake. The opening song is good for that period of movie. The problem this movie and the remake had is trying to figure out how to end it. I can live with the original ending, but I do not know of a way to do it any better.
How the West Was Won is okay to watch. It combines three generations of stories with different directors into a huge epic story. I really like parts of it. Visually, part of the problem with it is the old dvd has a 3 frame view. One feels they are watching three parts of the same movie combined. There is supposed to be a new remastered version of this coming out this year correcting this problem. If someone fixes that then I eagerly await seeing the Indian raid in all its glory. One of these days I have to head back to Convict Lake to show where Jimmy Stewart met up with the Indians at the beginning. Wait, I thought Nevada Smith was there? They both were.
I like Henry Fonda in most westerns he has done. Warlock, with Richard Widmark and Anthony Quinn is a good psychological western. It is a bit long, but here is why I like it. It is a Wyatt Earp fictional film. Change the names around, but it is essentially the Wyatt Earp legend. Sometime soon I will talk about how I feel about the Wyatt Earp history legend. The relationship between Fonda and Quinn is seen by some as controversial. I really do not believe it is anymore than Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday’s friendship. There was a certain dependence on the each other to survive in the west.
I have said very little about European Spaghetti Westerns. I mentioned them in the last entry and regarding Vera Cruz. I am not the biggest fan of them compared to when I was younger. Of the 500 made, I only like, at the most, about 25-50 of them. I haven’t seen all of them, but from what I have read, talked to others about, and seen I would rather spend my time on other movies. A Fistful of Dollars, For a Few Dollars More, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Once Upon a Time in the West, and Duck, You Sucker! are good, but I have seen them so many times since I was kid I would rather spend my time on other movies. Sergio Corbucci would be the other director I like because he had some good scenery in his movies. The Great Silence is my favorite of his. It takes place all in the snow with a mute gunfighter who fights bounty hunters. The ending puts people off, but this is a western where everything is turned upside down. There are a few others, but I need more than violent action to sustain my interest.
This leads me to the 1970’s. I am going to put Will Penny in this category even though it was made in 1968. At this point, most American Westerns took the “realistic” turn. I am not the biggest fan of this time period. A lot of these westerns are meant to be dirty, depressing, and un-heroic. Will Penny is probably my favorite of these movies. The Culpepper Cattle Co., Bad Company, Mr. McCabe & Mrs. Miller, and Heaven’s Gate all have something worth seeing in them. Again, I refer you to my last entry on this. The recent The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is much like this. That actually had good use of cinematography, but did not feel like a western to me.
Jeremiah Johnson, with Robert Redford, is the best mountain man movie out there. I love this one since the first 20 minutes reminds me of some of the places I have hiked, but during the summer.
High Plain's Drifter is probably my favorite Clint Eastwood, apart from his Leone movies. It is as if High Noon went wrong. It is sort of like High Noon 2: The Nightmare. Filmed exclusively at Mono Lake I usually visit the old area, or drive by it once a summer.
Progressing a little further to 1988, the tv mini-series, Lonesome Dove, is much like the above showing the ugly conditions of the western era. It is good, kept my interest, but not something I want to watch too much of.
Up into this point, I have thrown out mentioning any b-westerns of the 1930-40’s. I’ll just say that Hopalong Cassidy movies are really good to watch along with the kids. Nice visuals with Hopalong Cassidy and his sidekicks helping western society. About half of the 66 movies were filmed at the Alabama Hills. Tim Holt was another cool b-movie western hero.
Finally, my favorite tv series is Richard Boone’s Have Gun, Will Travel. Richard Boone easily made one of the coolest roles in the history of television. A gunfighter who is well traveled and well read in the classics hires himself out to those who need him. Even though this show is over 50 years old now I am still amazed with the writing they did on this show. Some of those Gene Roddenberry (Star Trek creator) episodes continue to amaze me.
Writing long entries like this is rare thing for me. Somewhere down the line I need to do a few more of these on other topics. One on comedy westerns I skipped, any other westerns I have forgotten, and one on my martial arts movies interests. My next entry will be back to normal. In the meantime, get the netflix queue filled up, watch TCM, Encore Westerns, and FOX Movie Channel.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
What is a Western and How do I Judge My Favorites?
This post will be a long one. Usually I do not like to do long ones like this because I think the average internet reader does not like to read long articles. I used to write long ones, but in the past few years I really like to keep things simple. Joe over at http://maddrey.blogspot.com/ wanted me to do a write up of my favorite westerns, but before I do that I want to lay down some groundwork about what a western is. Then I want to mention the criteria that I use in determining what my favorites are.
What is a Western?
Let me start with some loose criteria as to what I consider a western. I say this because there are a lot of movies out there that one might consider a western, but I do not. Although one should not watch a western thinking it is the same as reading a scholarly historical book on the old west, there are some things to take into account in regarding the historical time period and geography of the old west.
What a lot of people think of as the western time period usually deals with the cowtown era. The heart and soul of the old west in the public mind is the cowboy, and this was his time. After the Civil War, during the late 1860’s to the mid-1880’s, Texas cow hands drove their cattle to Kansas. The cattle were shipped on trains to the east. There were five major towns: Abilene, Ellsworth, Caldwell, Wichita, and Dodge City. This was a very temporary period since most of these towns lasted only a few years doing this, and that is all they wanted of the cattle trade. It was a way to build up their towns using the cattle trade, but then move on to sustain themselves by other means. At best we are only talking about 15 years of the golden age of the cattle trade. This period covers a good portion of western movies.
The tradition date of the closing of the American Western Frontier is 1890. Historian Fredrick Jackson Turner came up with this thesis. The 1890 census came in and it was decided there was no more frontier that needed to be settled. There was still Alaska, but from coast to coast the country was explored and settled. The final Indian conflicts were ending as well.
If one really wants to expand the frontier era out I think one can argue that it really started with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Anything prior to this really should be in the context of the American Revolution period. If this is the case, then anything regarding explorers like Louis and Clark a few years after the purchase, the mountain men era after that until the 1840’s, the Oregon Trail, the California Gold Rush, and at least some territory of the Civil War years in the west (more on this later) can be considered a western. However, keep in mind, most of the above are not westerns in the mind of the average movie watcher. This is due to the popularity of the cowboy era. Historically speaking, what really made the majority of people come west was the California Gold Rush. But, stories and movies about people mining for gold are not as interesting as the taming of cattle towns or cowboys in the trail.
On the other end of the timeline I think one can go past 1890 in regard to westerns. One can probably push the final years of the western era to right before World War I. So, we are talking somewhere in the 1910’s. Again, this is way outside the classic era of the cowboys, but there is a good reason one can push it this far. It has to do with the common transportation. Although the trains had made going long distances in a few days commonplace, the use of the horse was still prevalent in many areas up until this time. Once the car became of use I think it is safe to say that the western period was over.
The western period, using the most broad criteria, can be cast between 1803-1910’s. There is a lot of “but’s,” and “if’s” about this. Anything prior to the earliest date or after the latest date really should be considered something else.
Another thing to consider is the geography. My rule of thumb is anything west of the Mississippi River to the west coast is the frontier of the western. Crossing into Canada is okay, as well as, crossing into Mexico. Anywhere else the movie really can’t be considered a western. Why? It is not taking place in the American West. Earlier I mentioned the Civil War. I don’t really think of these movies as westerns. The true struggle between the Union and the Confederacy took place in the east. The exception, which I made above, is if the Civil War movie took place somewhere on the western frontier. A movie like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly had a Civil War scene regarding the taking of a bridge. I am not going to say that movie is not a western because of that scene. The thing to keep in mind is that a western really has to have the less settled western frontier as a setting.
Those are my main criteria of what I consider a western. When it comes to things like history and authenticity I am not that strict. This is because I try to keep movie entertainment separate from historical accuracy. I do not expect a writer or director of a movie to be a historian. On the same note, I do not expect the historians I read to try to entertain me by changing the facts around where things may not be very exciting. I feel the same way about samurai movies and almost any historical movie. I have seen too many people really get hung up over this online. For some reason many people seem to think that some of these movies are really documentaries, and if they are not factually accurate then this lessons their value.
Western stories grew out of the old dime novel era of the time they represent. Most of those novels were overly exaggerated stories published in the east of things supposedly taken place on the frontier. These stories were very sensational. This carried over into western movies. If one were to watch nothing other than westerns and never read history, then one would think that all anyone wanted to do on the frontier is get a gun and kill others. The reality was that people died mostly from the harsh environment, disease, bad working conditions, or just old age. One had a better chance dying working on the railroad than a violent death at a cow town. If one met an Indian on the frontier the chances were very good that he or she would try to be friendly, would pursue trade, and be helpful. The gunfighters one always hears about were really rare. Most of the famous ones usually only had a few kills and lived off that reputation. The dime novels would play off this, and stories would be created where a gunfighter had killed dozens of people. With these stories, and what might be reported in newspapers over and over again, the public mind had the idea that the west was a very violent place. This really was not the case. The exception to this was if the area was hotbed of hostility or conflict. Passing through Texas right after the Civil War one might encounter violent areas. Certain Indian territories might not have been the safest to travel through during different periods based on if a conflict had arisen. For the most part, the historical reality of violence in the west as portrayed in westerns is overstated.
I mention all of that because a lot of what one sees in a western movie is really fantasy based on the actual year it was made. As long as I don’t see airplanes flying around, cars driving around, space ships, laser guns, disco era clothing, etc. I am fine with what I see in westerns. Okay, I spent this entire article trying to show why Star Wars is not a western! It might be, had I not mentioned the time frame and the geography parts. The funny thing is a lot of people think of Gene Autry and Roy Rogers b-movies as westerns. Practically everything they ever did was in the modern era of the 1930’s-1940’s. It was a cowboy in the depression era taking on whatever news events were current. They would look in the newspaper and get their stories from there. Taking on the mafia, dealing with government subsidy issues, trying to stop the Nazis, international espionage, etc. were stories they might come up with. These movies were designed as family fun during the hard era of the depression that one might watch on the weekend. One of my favorites is The Phantom Empire series Gene Autry did. Again, fun to laugh at, watch it once, and probably throw it away after viewing these days, but not really a real western since the time period is more of a “modern era.”
What Makes a Good Western?
With the time period, the geography, and very loose ideas of history/authenticity mentioned let me say what I really enjoy a western for. As one might expect from just about everything I have done on this blog, part of what makes a really good western is the scenery. I look for really beautiful places in these films. Compared to other genres, the western has the biggest opportunity to film in awesome environments. Honestly, a great many westerns have common themes and stories, but put into the right environment they can greatly be magnified. I will tell you in the next entry there are stories that have are basically the same with a few variations, but the director knew exactly the best areas to film the movies and with that made them really good. There are some exceptions to this where showing a lot of scenery may not work for the movie, but usually this is what I look for. One example of a recent movie that I do not think worked out for the best because of this. The recent 3:10 to Yuma could have been a lot better had this allowed for more scenery to be shown. The editing was very quick at some points. As side note, even though it is fantasy, I love The Lord of the Rings movies for this. Although a lot was CGI, I think it is so cool to see men on horses or people hiking through enormous terrain that dwarfs and towers over them. You can probably see how this connects to places I love to hike to.
Action scenes are important, but not as important to me as when I was younger. A lot of the 1950’s-1960’s westerns are pretty tame by today’s standards. There are few reasons for that. A lot of it had to deal with the Hay’s Code that did not allow certain types of violence. By the late 1960’s when the code was lifted this would change allowing more of the in your face bloody violence. For me, a few gunfights in these movies and I am fine with it. The people that tend to want more violence in their movies tend to enjoy spaghetti westerns more. I liked them in my younger days, but have a hard time watching too many of them these days. Apart from the Leone movies and a few others, they are a little too one dimensional in this respect. It is more important to see how the story builds to the violence rather than violence just for the sake of violence.
Finally, the story and the actors are other considerations. You need both to have a good western. Most stories tend to be about taming cattle towns, water rights, mining rights, land rights, cattle rustling, the cattle trail, saving lost kin, dealing with Indians, being a captive, and a little bit of revenge mixed in based on whatever the villain(s) had done. One of the key themes usually is the strong hero(s) protecting the weak and that justice is done in the end.
That pretty much covers what I wanted to say about defining westerns and what I look for in my favorites. In my next entry I will mention a bunch of my favorites.
What is a Western?
Let me start with some loose criteria as to what I consider a western. I say this because there are a lot of movies out there that one might consider a western, but I do not. Although one should not watch a western thinking it is the same as reading a scholarly historical book on the old west, there are some things to take into account in regarding the historical time period and geography of the old west.
What a lot of people think of as the western time period usually deals with the cowtown era. The heart and soul of the old west in the public mind is the cowboy, and this was his time. After the Civil War, during the late 1860’s to the mid-1880’s, Texas cow hands drove their cattle to Kansas. The cattle were shipped on trains to the east. There were five major towns: Abilene, Ellsworth, Caldwell, Wichita, and Dodge City. This was a very temporary period since most of these towns lasted only a few years doing this, and that is all they wanted of the cattle trade. It was a way to build up their towns using the cattle trade, but then move on to sustain themselves by other means. At best we are only talking about 15 years of the golden age of the cattle trade. This period covers a good portion of western movies.
The tradition date of the closing of the American Western Frontier is 1890. Historian Fredrick Jackson Turner came up with this thesis. The 1890 census came in and it was decided there was no more frontier that needed to be settled. There was still Alaska, but from coast to coast the country was explored and settled. The final Indian conflicts were ending as well.
If one really wants to expand the frontier era out I think one can argue that it really started with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Anything prior to this really should be in the context of the American Revolution period. If this is the case, then anything regarding explorers like Louis and Clark a few years after the purchase, the mountain men era after that until the 1840’s, the Oregon Trail, the California Gold Rush, and at least some territory of the Civil War years in the west (more on this later) can be considered a western. However, keep in mind, most of the above are not westerns in the mind of the average movie watcher. This is due to the popularity of the cowboy era. Historically speaking, what really made the majority of people come west was the California Gold Rush. But, stories and movies about people mining for gold are not as interesting as the taming of cattle towns or cowboys in the trail.
On the other end of the timeline I think one can go past 1890 in regard to westerns. One can probably push the final years of the western era to right before World War I. So, we are talking somewhere in the 1910’s. Again, this is way outside the classic era of the cowboys, but there is a good reason one can push it this far. It has to do with the common transportation. Although the trains had made going long distances in a few days commonplace, the use of the horse was still prevalent in many areas up until this time. Once the car became of use I think it is safe to say that the western period was over.
The western period, using the most broad criteria, can be cast between 1803-1910’s. There is a lot of “but’s,” and “if’s” about this. Anything prior to the earliest date or after the latest date really should be considered something else.
Another thing to consider is the geography. My rule of thumb is anything west of the Mississippi River to the west coast is the frontier of the western. Crossing into Canada is okay, as well as, crossing into Mexico. Anywhere else the movie really can’t be considered a western. Why? It is not taking place in the American West. Earlier I mentioned the Civil War. I don’t really think of these movies as westerns. The true struggle between the Union and the Confederacy took place in the east. The exception, which I made above, is if the Civil War movie took place somewhere on the western frontier. A movie like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly had a Civil War scene regarding the taking of a bridge. I am not going to say that movie is not a western because of that scene. The thing to keep in mind is that a western really has to have the less settled western frontier as a setting.
Those are my main criteria of what I consider a western. When it comes to things like history and authenticity I am not that strict. This is because I try to keep movie entertainment separate from historical accuracy. I do not expect a writer or director of a movie to be a historian. On the same note, I do not expect the historians I read to try to entertain me by changing the facts around where things may not be very exciting. I feel the same way about samurai movies and almost any historical movie. I have seen too many people really get hung up over this online. For some reason many people seem to think that some of these movies are really documentaries, and if they are not factually accurate then this lessons their value.
Western stories grew out of the old dime novel era of the time they represent. Most of those novels were overly exaggerated stories published in the east of things supposedly taken place on the frontier. These stories were very sensational. This carried over into western movies. If one were to watch nothing other than westerns and never read history, then one would think that all anyone wanted to do on the frontier is get a gun and kill others. The reality was that people died mostly from the harsh environment, disease, bad working conditions, or just old age. One had a better chance dying working on the railroad than a violent death at a cow town. If one met an Indian on the frontier the chances were very good that he or she would try to be friendly, would pursue trade, and be helpful. The gunfighters one always hears about were really rare. Most of the famous ones usually only had a few kills and lived off that reputation. The dime novels would play off this, and stories would be created where a gunfighter had killed dozens of people. With these stories, and what might be reported in newspapers over and over again, the public mind had the idea that the west was a very violent place. This really was not the case. The exception to this was if the area was hotbed of hostility or conflict. Passing through Texas right after the Civil War one might encounter violent areas. Certain Indian territories might not have been the safest to travel through during different periods based on if a conflict had arisen. For the most part, the historical reality of violence in the west as portrayed in westerns is overstated.
I mention all of that because a lot of what one sees in a western movie is really fantasy based on the actual year it was made. As long as I don’t see airplanes flying around, cars driving around, space ships, laser guns, disco era clothing, etc. I am fine with what I see in westerns. Okay, I spent this entire article trying to show why Star Wars is not a western! It might be, had I not mentioned the time frame and the geography parts. The funny thing is a lot of people think of Gene Autry and Roy Rogers b-movies as westerns. Practically everything they ever did was in the modern era of the 1930’s-1940’s. It was a cowboy in the depression era taking on whatever news events were current. They would look in the newspaper and get their stories from there. Taking on the mafia, dealing with government subsidy issues, trying to stop the Nazis, international espionage, etc. were stories they might come up with. These movies were designed as family fun during the hard era of the depression that one might watch on the weekend. One of my favorites is The Phantom Empire series Gene Autry did. Again, fun to laugh at, watch it once, and probably throw it away after viewing these days, but not really a real western since the time period is more of a “modern era.”
What Makes a Good Western?
With the time period, the geography, and very loose ideas of history/authenticity mentioned let me say what I really enjoy a western for. As one might expect from just about everything I have done on this blog, part of what makes a really good western is the scenery. I look for really beautiful places in these films. Compared to other genres, the western has the biggest opportunity to film in awesome environments. Honestly, a great many westerns have common themes and stories, but put into the right environment they can greatly be magnified. I will tell you in the next entry there are stories that have are basically the same with a few variations, but the director knew exactly the best areas to film the movies and with that made them really good. There are some exceptions to this where showing a lot of scenery may not work for the movie, but usually this is what I look for. One example of a recent movie that I do not think worked out for the best because of this. The recent 3:10 to Yuma could have been a lot better had this allowed for more scenery to be shown. The editing was very quick at some points. As side note, even though it is fantasy, I love The Lord of the Rings movies for this. Although a lot was CGI, I think it is so cool to see men on horses or people hiking through enormous terrain that dwarfs and towers over them. You can probably see how this connects to places I love to hike to.
Action scenes are important, but not as important to me as when I was younger. A lot of the 1950’s-1960’s westerns are pretty tame by today’s standards. There are few reasons for that. A lot of it had to deal with the Hay’s Code that did not allow certain types of violence. By the late 1960’s when the code was lifted this would change allowing more of the in your face bloody violence. For me, a few gunfights in these movies and I am fine with it. The people that tend to want more violence in their movies tend to enjoy spaghetti westerns more. I liked them in my younger days, but have a hard time watching too many of them these days. Apart from the Leone movies and a few others, they are a little too one dimensional in this respect. It is more important to see how the story builds to the violence rather than violence just for the sake of violence.
Finally, the story and the actors are other considerations. You need both to have a good western. Most stories tend to be about taming cattle towns, water rights, mining rights, land rights, cattle rustling, the cattle trail, saving lost kin, dealing with Indians, being a captive, and a little bit of revenge mixed in based on whatever the villain(s) had done. One of the key themes usually is the strong hero(s) protecting the weak and that justice is done in the end.
That pretty much covers what I wanted to say about defining westerns and what I look for in my favorites. In my next entry I will mention a bunch of my favorites.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)