list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Open Range on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Open_Range/220473/default.aspx Title: Open Range
Year: 2003
Director: Kevin Costner
Plot: Kevin Costner stars in and directs the Western Open Range. Robert Duvall stars as Boss Spearman, a rugged old-timer who free-grazes cattle. He and Charley Waite (Costner) have been partners for ten years. As the film opens in the 1880s, the pair and their employees -- the beefy, rugged, likable Mose (Abraham Benrubi) and the impetuous Mexican teenager Buttons (Diego Luna) -- are driving cattle across the West. Mose is attacked and thrown in jail during a visit to a town. The local cattle rancher Baxter (Michael Gambon) wants the free grazers off his land and warns Charley and Boss when they retrieve Mose that they have until the next day to be out of the area. Boss decides to fight back, especially after Baxter's men do harm to the foursome. Charley confesses his past as a killer during the Civil War and strikes up a tentative romance with Sue Barlow -- the sister of the town doctor. The film's centerpiece is an extended gunfight between the duo (with some assistance from sympathetic townsfolk) and Baxter's hired gunmen. ~ Perry Seibert, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 3
Number of Lists: 12
Number of blog posts: 4
Number of discussion threads: 2
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:22:42 GMTOpen Range2003Kevin Costner<a href="/players/P____15189/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kevin Costner</a> stars in and directs the Western Open Range. <a href="/players/P____88530/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Robert Duvall</a> stars as Boss Spearman, a rugged old-timer who free-grazes cattle. He and Charley Waite (Costner) have been partners for ten years. As the film opens in the 1880s, the pair and their employees -- the beefy, rugged, likable Mose (<a href="/players/P___167299/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Abraham Benrubi</a>) and the impetuous Mexican teenager Buttons (<a href="/players/P___196831/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Diego Luna</a>) -- are driving cattle across the West. Mose is attacked and thrown in jail during a visit to a town. The local cattle rancher Baxter (<a href="/players/P____25729/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Michael Gambon</a>) wants the free grazers off his land and warns Charley and Boss when they retrieve Mose that they have until the next day to be out of the area. Boss decides to fight back, especially after Baxter's men do harm to the foursome. Charley confesses his past as a killer during the Civil War and strikes up a tentative romance with Sue Barlow -- the sister of the town doctor. The film's centerpiece is an extended gunfight between the duo (with some assistance from sympathetic townsfolk) and Baxter's hired gunmen. ~ Perry Seibert, All Movie Guide3Slightly Tagged (1-5)12423http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t37132ytlve.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Open_Range/220473/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_July_14_The_Angry_Mob/625/32684/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: leeroy711
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 7/17/2008 2:47:36 PM
Body: [quote user="unclefestering"] Just before I slipped off to sleep last night I suddenly remembered the scene from the Seven Samurai where the samurai are trying to keep the villagers away from the one bandit they have caputured. They hold everyone back except for the old grandmother whose entire family has been killed by bandits. [/quote] Oh yeah!! I had forgotten that one too, freakin' sweeeeeet. There's a similar scene at the end of Open Range when the bad guys have been run off and most of all the action packed gun fight is over and in the background you see the group of townspeople chasing down the remaining member of the gang and killing him as he tries to escape.
]]>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:47:36 GMTleeroy711Weekly Theme7/17/2008 2:47:36 PM[quote user="unclefestering"] Just before I slipped off to sleep last night I suddenly remembered the scene from the Seven Samurai where the samurai are trying to keep the villagers away from the one bandit they have caputured. They hold everyone back except for the old grandmother whose entire family has been killed by bandits. [/quote] Oh yeah!! I had forgotten that one too, freakin' sweeeeeet. There's a similar scene at the end of Open Range when the bad guys have been run off and most of all the action packed gun fight is over and in the background you see the group of townspeople chasing down the remaining member of the gang and killing him as he tries to escape. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/8/32300.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/8/2008 6:00:39 PM
Body: Two westerns on AMC show strong men grappling with the loss of freedom and dignity. The Shootist is John Wayne’s last film, and though the Duke is normally invincible in his movies, this one begins with the premise that he’s dying of cancer. He sets one last goal for himself–to die in a shootout. Then there’s Open Range, the rare film that Kevin Costner is perfect for. Costner plays a haunted Civil War veteran of a killing persuasion, which he unleashes when a friend is cruelly beaten by a group of trigger-happy thugs. Also featuring the excellent Annette Benning and Robert Duvall, and one of the most intense gun battles I’ve ever seen on film. If westerns aren’t your thing, you’ve got the classic Jason and the Argonauts playing on TCM. Not everything about the film has aged well, but Ray Harryhausen’s stop-motion skeletons still give me the creeps. Also playing tonight is the Samuel L. Jackson vehicle S.W.A.T. I only saw the last twenty minutes of it at a drive-in, but if that’s supposed to be the exciting climax I’d hate to see what comes before it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:00:39 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/8/2008 6:00:39 PMTwo westerns on AMC show strong men grappling with the loss of freedom and dignity. The Shootist is John Wayne’s last film, and though the Duke is normally invincible in his movies, this one begins with the premise that he’s dying of cancer. He sets one last goal for himself–to die in a shootout. Then there’s Open Range, the rare film that Kevin Costner is perfect for. Costner plays a haunted Civil War veteran of a killing persuasion, which he unleashes when a friend is cruelly beaten by a group of trigger-happy thugs. Also featuring the excellent Annette Benning and Robert Duvall, and one of the most intense gun battles I’ve ever seen on film. If westerns aren’t your thing, you’ve got the classic Jason and the Argonauts playing on TCM. Not everything about the film has aged well, but Ray Harryhausen’s stop-motion skeletons still give me the creeps. Also playing tonight is the Samuel L. Jackson vehicle S.W.A.T. I only saw the last twenty minutes of it at a drive-in, but if that’s supposed to be the exciting climax I’d hate to see what comes before it. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/shaunhuston/archive/2008/6/18/31390.aspx Post By: ShaunHuston
Post To: ShaunHuston filmblog
Post Date: 6/18/2008 9:01:56 PM
Body: The Western Top 10 is the toughest for me. As some of you may know, while I'm hardly Richard Slotkin or Jane Tompkins, I write, teach, and think about this genre on a regular basis, and, as a result, my views are not only fairly strong, but well-informed. And, where certain well regarded classics are concerned, they are also iconoclastic. This is probably nowhere more obvious than with The Searchers (1956), the film that tops the AFI list. This film does not resonate with me on any level. I have never found the ending credible. John Wayne does not portray Ethan Edwards with any of the complexity needed for his embrace of Debbie (Natalie Wood) to ring true after his 118 (or so) minutes of hard, racist ranting about Native Americans and his intent to kill her. I also find the photography and production design to be garish without purpose, and for all of its superficial sophistication about Native peoples, the talk of ritual, the use of indigenous language, it only serves to perpetuate the myth of white mastery. After all, it is white men who “know” and understand Native peoples, not the other way around. Native Americans are no less the brutish savages in this film than they are in Stagecoach (1939), but at least that film doesn't pretend to be anything but pulpy fantasy (indeed, it remains my favorite John Ford/John Wayne Western). And the landscape changes in The Searchers drive me crazy. Even though no one seems to actually leave Texas, the weather and land change in absurd ways during the course of the quest. Where are these people supposed to be? I fully recognize that I am a freak when it comes to this film, and as a result, I'm not going to make a pitch for taking it off of the list, although I do think that it needs to be demoted. The other film worth arguing about is one that I would knock of the AFI list, and that is Shane (1953). My biggest block with this film is Joey (Brandon de Wilde). The whining, oh the whining. Gah. I can't get past it. At the same time, I don't think that Alan Ladd makes for a convincing hero; he has too much of a “contemporary” presence. Van Heflin's Joe Starrett is virtually the same guy as Dan Evans, Heflin's character in 3:10 to Yuma (1957), and much less interesting. As menacing as Jack Palance's black hatted gunfighter is, he's also more hollow than the norm. And, yes, I understand the subtext about the Frontiersman and his lack of place in civilization, but that theme is punctuated in many a film without Shane's weaknesses. The selection of Cat Ballou (1965) still seems like some kind of a joke, but it is perhaps typical of an industry that has wanted to bury this genre for the past five decades or so. Red River (1948) made no impression on me when I saw it. Is that a reason to take it off the list? I don't know, but I would have no shortage of replacements if it is. Part of the difficulty with these lists is how the boundary is drawn around “American” film. I can see where Sergio Leone's movies with Clint Eastwood might be precluded as “American”, but, given some of the other selections on other lists, Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) seems perfectly fair game to me (it was, after all, co-produced by Paramount, not to mention featuring a group of notable American actors in all of the lead male roles). Were it up to me, this film would certainly be on the list, and possibly even on top (I might just elevate High Noon, 1952, to the top spot depending on how much of a classisist I want to be). Undoubtedly, The Wild Bunch (1969) is Sam Peckinpah's magnum opus, but that's hardly a reason to make it his only film on the list. Ride the High Country (1962), for example, is an early elegiac Western that explores Western archetypes in more interesting ways than most of the films on the list from its same general period. The AFI's definition of the Western - “a genre of films set in the American West that embodies the spirit, the struggle and the demise of the new frontier” - also seems to leave room for a movie like Lone Star (1996), or, and I know I'm pushing it here, Serenity (2005) (and you can scoff at this if you want, but Joss Whedon's movie re-imagines the Frontier and the supposed line between savagery and civilization in interesting and vital ways; I think that it certainly makes a more original contribution to the genre than does Shane). Two other recent Westerns for which I have a great deal of affection are The Claim (2000) and Open Range (2003). I'm not sure I'd end up placing all of the films listed above on a reconstructed list, but I do think that there is a tendency to treat the Western as a “dead” genre, killed at some point in the 1960s, with an occasional raising from the dead, and it's not so. It's also a genre with a fairly well-rehearsed canon. Placing The Searchers at the top of a list like this is much like putting Citizen Kane (1941) at the top of the AFI's ur-list: it's almost reflexive. Link to introduction. Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs
]]>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:01:56 GMTShaunHustonShaunHuston filmblog6/18/2008 9:01:56 PMThe Western Top 10 is the toughest for me. As some of you may know, while I'm hardly Richard Slotkin or Jane Tompkins, I write, teach, and think about this genre on a regular basis, and, as a result, my views are not only fairly strong, but well-informed. And, where certain well regarded classics are concerned, they are also iconoclastic. This is probably nowhere more obvious than with The Searchers (1956), the film that tops the AFI list. This film does not resonate with me on any level. I have never found the ending credible. John Wayne does not portray Ethan Edwards with any of the complexity needed for his embrace of Debbie (Natalie Wood) to ring true after his 118 (or so) minutes of hard, racist ranting about Native Americans and his intent to kill her. I also find the photography and production design to be garish without purpose, and for all of its superficial sophistication about Native peoples, the talk of ritual, the use of indigenous language, it only serves to perpetuate the myth of white mastery. After all, it is white men who &ldquo;know&rdquo; and understand Native peoples, not the other way around. Native Americans are no less the brutish savages in this film than they are in Stagecoach (1939), but at least that film doesn't pretend to be anything but pulpy fantasy (indeed, it remains my favorite John Ford/John Wayne Western). And the landscape changes in The Searchers drive me crazy. Even though no one seems to actually leave Texas, the weather and land change in absurd ways during the course of the quest. Where are these people supposed to be? I fully recognize that I am a freak when it comes to this film, and as a result, I'm not going to make a pitch for taking it off of the list, although I do think that it needs to be demoted. The other film worth arguing about is one that I would knock of the AFI list, and that is Shane (1953). My biggest block with this film is Joey (Brandon de Wilde). The whining, oh the whining. Gah. I can't get past it. At the same time, I don't think that Alan Ladd makes for a convincing hero; he has too much of a &ldquo;contemporary&rdquo; presence. Van Heflin's Joe Starrett is virtually the same guy as Dan Evans, Heflin's character in 3:10 to Yuma (1957), and much less interesting. As menacing as Jack Palance's black hatted gunfighter is, he's also more hollow than the norm. And, yes, I understand the subtext about the Frontiersman and his lack of place in civilization, but that theme is punctuated in many a film without Shane's weaknesses. The selection of Cat Ballou (1965) still seems like some kind of a joke, but it is perhaps typical of an industry that has wanted to bury this genre for the past five decades or so. Red River (1948) made no impression on me when I saw it. Is that a reason to take it off the list? I don't know, but I would have no shortage of replacements if it is. Part of the difficulty with these lists is how the boundary is drawn around &ldquo;American&rdquo; film. I can see where Sergio Leone's movies with Clint Eastwood might be precluded as &ldquo;American&rdquo;, but, given some of the other selections on other lists, Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) seems perfectly fair game to me (it was, after all, co-produced by Paramount, not to mention featuring a group of notable American actors in all of the lead male roles). Were it up to me, this film would certainly be on the list, and possibly even on top (I might just elevate High Noon, 1952, to the top spot depending on how much of a classisist I want to be). Undoubtedly, The Wild Bunch (1969) is Sam Peckinpah's magnum opus, but that's hardly a reason to make it his only film on the list. Ride the High Country (1962), for example, is an early elegiac Western that explores Western archetypes in more interesting ways than most of the films on the list from its same general period. The AFI's definition of the Western - &ldquo;a genre of films set in the American West that embodies the spirit, the struggle and the demise of the new frontier&rdquo; - also seems to leave room for a movie like Lone Star (1996), or, and I know I'm pushing it here, Serenity (2005) (and you can scoff at this if you want, but Joss Whedon's movie re-imagines the Frontier and the supposed line between savagery and civilization in interesting and vital ways; I think that it certainly makes a more original contribution to the genre than does Shane). Two other recent Westerns for which I have a great deal of affection are The Claim (2000) and Open Range (2003). I'm not sure I'd end up placing all of the films listed above on a reconstructed list, but I do think that there is a tendency to treat the Western as a &ldquo;dead&rdquo; genre, killed at some point in the 1960s, with an occasional raising from the dead, and it's not so. It's also a genre with a fairly well-rehearsed canon. Placing The Searchers at the top of a list like this is much like putting Citizen Kane (1941) at the top of the AFI's ur-list: it's almost reflexive. Link to introduction. Originally posted on:Short-Circuit Signs http://www.spout.com/blogs/dj4our/archive/2008/2/21/25419.aspx Post By: dj4our
Post To: dj4our Blog
Post Date: 2/21/2008 11:33:18 AM
Body: OPEN RANGE (2003) ****R for violence.2 hrs. 18 min.written by: Craig Storper (screenplay) & Laruan Paine (novel, The Open Range Men)produced by: Kevin Costner, Jake Eberts & David Valdesdirected by: Kevin Costner I like it when I find myself sitting in a movie theater watching a film and actually realize that I'm really enjoying the experience. That was the case on a one hot summer day in August back in 2003, when I watched this movie. I remember sitting there thinking how I'd love to get away and live off the vast open plains as I maintained and defended what was mine. I also remember thinking about how this film would be received. I knew that most people already loathed Costner for movies like "Waterworld" and "The Postman" yet I remained optimistic about his work. There are, after all, worse actors out there. He's worked on enough movies that have succeeded to warrant my attention and this film was no different.Turns out, Costner's return to the western genre wearing both acting and directing hats once again was actually a success. Many were surprised. Most critics really enjoyed his expansive tale of nomadic cattlemen making a living on the open range who take a stand against a corrupt landowner. Some say that it was an "older audience" that made the film into an unlikely hit, as audiences saddled up and headed to the cinema to the tune of $58 mil, doubling the picture's minimal budget of $26 mil. I saw many factors that contributed to this western being a modern-day masterpiece but I'll get into all of that later. There, I said the "m" word for a Kevin Costner movie. Go ahead and hang me. Charley Waite (Kevin Costner) is a quiet and somewhat mysterious cattleman who has ridden with Boss Spearman (Robert Duvall) as his right-hand man for many years. Boss is a straightforward, kind man who serves as an unspoken mentor to Charley, who we come to find out is haunted by his time as a gunslinger and before that, a Civil War soldier. The two mind their own business, making their living as free-range cattlemen, moving their herd across the open range. They've recently taken on some hired hands to manage their load, the gentle giant Mose (Abraham Benrubi) and the orphan Button (Diego Luna) and together with their dog Tig, they make their way cross-country. With supplies a lil low, they send Mose to the local town of Baxter on an errand, but are worried when he doesn't return. The town is controlled by a greedy and corrupt land baron, Denton Baxter (Michael Gambon), who hates free-rangers. Charley and Boss arrive in town only to find Mose severely beaten by Baxter's men and jailed by Sheriff Poole, whom Baxter "owns." It is soon revealed that many townspeople look past Baxter's greedy dealings and accept the situation, while others secretly harbor animosity and anger towards him.Mose needs a doctor right away, so they find one after receiving a stern warning from Baxter regarding their free-ranging. The two of them find Doc Barlow (Dean McDermott), while Charley finds a love interest in the doc's sister, Sue Barlow (Annette Bening). Although at first he mistakens her for the doc's wife which results in some humorous interplay between Bening and Costner. Baxter allowed the group to leave once, he doesn't intend on leaving the matter settled - joined with marshal Poole (James Russo), the two round up a group to finish off Boss and his men. After all, what he really wants is their herd. Boss and Charley are able to subdue some of the men but things don't go as planned after a death and a severe injury. The two face a difficult decision and eventually decide to go back into the town to seek medical help for Button and try to plan their next move. Knowing that the inevitable showdown with Baxter and his men is looming, Charley and Boss gather themselves for the violent encounter. Leaving Button in the doctor's care, they enter town where during a flash flood consumes them and everyone around. Charley saves a townsperson's dog and the owner buys him and Boss some coffee. They learn more about the mixed feelings of the inhabitants of the town and who might possibly be able to help them. One of those fellas is a bearded old, hobble-legged coot named Percy (played by the late, great Michael Jeter) who runs a stable in town. He's an actor I've enjoyed since "The Fisher King" and I really liked him channeling the classic supporting actor role often seen in older westerns.Before the final shootout, Boss and Charley go to a drugstore to spend their money on cigars and chocolate, reasoning that they might be unable to spend it later. Charley leaves money with a sympathetic townsperson to buy Sue a new tea set if he is killed. The showdown itself is an amazing cacophony of jarring gunfire with realistic ramifications. There's no crazy stunts or special effects here. With every shot fired you feel the pull-back and the smell of gunsmoke. It's a violent ballet of revenge and justice. most of the townspeople flee but the rest eventually chip in and help out Charley and Boss seeing it as their opportunity to finally stand up for what's right. After all the bloodshed, there's no rousing celebration just the dead and survivors left with decisions to either move on or rebuild.This realism is not uncommon for modern-day westerns such as Eastwood's "Unforgiven" and the recent "Seraphim Falls", that have a morality tale to tell but spends little time romanticizing that tale. So, for those who relegate westerns to sprawling yarns where everyone looks nice, has poor aim and Indians are always the enemy....there have been and still are westerns with realism and purpose. The violence in this film is a depiction of how violent the west was. In the Old West, it wouldn't be an uncommon sight for someone to be walking down main street and BLAM! he's shot in the back or in the head and slumped to the dirt. The film doesn't just show violence for violence sake, it just shows how it would all go down in those adrenalized moments.Costner and Duvall not only provide great work here, they were great together. Right away, I was interested in these characters and their interaction. Earlier when I hinted at the many factors that contribute to this being a masterpiece....Robert Duvall, so no more. The guy is just amazing. Anything he's in, I'll see it (even when he's Will Ferrell's soccer coach dad) and enjoy it, just cuz it's him. Here, he gives a decency and vulnerability to a character that has learned much from life. He wants to mind his own business and handle his herd but he will fight for what is his. I'll never know why he didn't get nominated for this. Probably cuz people saw Costner was attached and rolled their eyes and that's too bad cuz this is not a Costner film. Duvall owns this film in his most humble manner.The story was adapted from a novel and doesn't really bring anything terribly new to the table in terms of the genre, although I've read reviews that it's actually better than the novel. As rare as that is, it's not too hard to imagine seeing as how much love Costner has for the genre. The writers provided subtle layers to characters and wind up turning a basic revenge tale into an intense and compelling picture. Many complained about the length of the film, something I initially did not notice. It's a minor issue to me, I've spent the same amount of time watching movies that were much worse. Because of James Muro's stunning cinematography, excellent production and costume design, the film is an example of a picture that appears to have cost twice as much as it did. The late Michael Kamen's score is also very enjoyable. The cast is fantastic together and the movie somehow takes a great deal of the old cliches from the genre and make it all wonderfully entertaining.
]]>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:33:18 GMTdj4ourdj4our Blog2/21/2008 11:33:18 AMOPEN RANGE (2003) ****R for violence.2 hrs. 18 min.written by: Craig Storper (screenplay) &amp; Laruan Paine (novel, The Open Range Men)produced by: Kevin Costner, Jake Eberts &amp; David Valdesdirected by: Kevin Costner I like it when I find myself sitting in a movie theater watching a film and actually realize that I&#39;m really enjoying the experience. That was the case on a one hot summer day in August back in 2003, when I watched this movie. I remember sitting there thinking how I&#39;d love to get away and live off the vast open plains as I maintained and defended what was mine. I also remember thinking about how this film would be received. I knew that most people already loathed Costner for movies like &quot;Waterworld&quot; and &quot;The Postman&quot; yet I remained optimistic about his work. There are, after all, worse actors out there. He&#39;s worked on enough movies that have succeeded to warrant my attention and this film was no different.Turns out, Costner&#39;s return to the western genre wearing both acting and directing hats once again was actually a success. Many were surprised. Most critics really enjoyed his expansive tale of nomadic cattlemen making a living on the open range who take a stand against a corrupt landowner. Some say that it was an &quot;older audience&quot; that made the film into an unlikely hit, as audiences saddled up and headed to the cinema to the tune of $58 mil, doubling the picture&#39;s minimal budget of $26 mil. I saw many factors that contributed to this western being a modern-day masterpiece but I&#39;ll get into all of that later. There, I said the &quot;m&quot; word for a Kevin Costner movie. Go ahead and hang me. Charley Waite (Kevin Costner) is a quiet and somewhat mysterious cattleman who has ridden with Boss Spearman (Robert Duvall) as his right-hand man for many years. Boss is a straightforward, kind man who serves as an unspoken mentor to Charley, who we come to find out is haunted by his time as a gunslinger and before that, a Civil War soldier. The two mind their own business, making their living as free-range cattlemen, moving their herd across the open range. They&#39;ve recently taken on some hired hands to manage their load, the gentle giant Mose (Abraham Benrubi) and the orphan Button (Diego Luna) and together with their dog Tig, they make their way cross-country. With supplies a lil low, they send Mose to the local town of Baxter on an errand, but are worried when he doesn&#39;t return. The town is controlled by a greedy and corrupt land baron, Denton Baxter (Michael Gambon), who hates free-rangers. Charley and Boss arrive in town only to find Mose severely beaten by Baxter&#39;s men and jailed by Sheriff Poole, whom Baxter &quot;owns.&quot; It is soon revealed that many townspeople look past Baxter&#39;s greedy dealings and accept the situation, while others secretly harbor animosity and anger towards him.Mose needs a doctor right away, so they find one after receiving a stern warning from Baxter regarding their free-ranging. The two of them find Doc Barlow (Dean McDermott), while Charley finds a love interest in the doc&#39;s sister, Sue Barlow (Annette Bening). Although at first he mistakens her for the doc&#39;s wife which results in some humorous interplay between Bening and Costner. Baxter allowed the group to leave once, he doesn&#39;t intend on leaving the matter settled - joined with marshal Poole (James Russo), the two round up a group to finish off Boss and his men. After all, what he really wants is their herd. Boss and Charley are able to subdue some of the men but things don&#39;t go as planned after a death and a severe injury. The two face a difficult decision and eventually decide to go back into the town to seek medical help for Button and try to plan their next move. Knowing that the inevitable showdown with Baxter and his men is looming, Charley and Boss gather themselves for the violent encounter. Leaving Button in the doctor&#39;s care, they enter town where during a flash flood consumes them and everyone around. Charley saves a townsperson&#39;s dog and the owner buys him and Boss some coffee. They learn more about the mixed feelings of the inhabitants of the town and who might possibly be able to help them. One of those fellas is a bearded old, hobble-legged coot named Percy (played by the late, great Michael Jeter) who runs a stable in town. He&#39;s an actor I&#39;ve enjoyed since &quot;The Fisher King&quot; and I really liked him channeling the classic supporting actor role often seen in older westerns.Before the final shootout, Boss and Charley go to a drugstore to spend their money on cigars and chocolate, reasoning that they might be unable to spend it later. Charley leaves money with a sympathetic townsperson to buy Sue a new tea set if he is killed. The showdown itself is an amazing cacophony of jarring gunfire with realistic ramifications. There&#39;s no crazy stunts or special effects here. With every shot fired you feel the pull-back and the smell of gunsmoke. It&#39;s a violent ballet of revenge and justice. most of the townspeople flee but the rest eventually chip in and help out Charley and Boss seeing it as their opportunity to finally stand up for what&#39;s right. After all the bloodshed, there&#39;s no rousing celebration just the dead and survivors left with decisions to either move on or rebuild.This realism is not uncommon for modern-day westerns such as Eastwood&#39;s &quot;Unforgiven&quot; and the recent &quot;Seraphim Falls&quot;, that have a morality tale to tell but spends little time romanticizing that tale. So, for those who relegate westerns to sprawling yarns where everyone looks nice, has poor aim and Indians are always the enemy....there have been and still are westerns with realism and purpose. The violence in this film is a depiction of how violent the west was. In the Old West, it wouldn&#39;t be an uncommon sight for someone to be walking down main street and BLAM! he&#39;s shot in the back or in the head and slumped to the dirt. The film doesn&#39;t just show violence for violence sake, it just shows how it would all go down in those adrenalized moments.Costner and Duvall not only provide great work here, they were great together. Right away, I was interested in these characters and their interaction. Earlier when I hinted at the many factors that contribute to this being a masterpiece....Robert Duvall, so no more. The guy is just amazing. Anything he&#39;s in, I&#39;ll see it (even when he&#39;s Will Ferrell&#39;s soccer coach dad) and enjoy it, just cuz it&#39;s him. Here, he gives a decency and vulnerability to a character that has learned much from life. He wants to mind his own business and handle his herd but he will fight for what is his. I&#39;ll never know why he didn&#39;t get nominated for this. Probably cuz people saw Costner was attached and rolled their eyes and that&#39;s too bad cuz this is not a Costner film. Duvall owns this film in his most humble manner.The story was adapted from a novel and doesn&#39;t really bring anything terribly new to the table in terms of the genre, although I&#39;ve read reviews that it&#39;s actually better than the novel. As rare as that is, it&#39;s not too hard to imagine seeing as how much love Costner has for the genre. The writers provided subtle layers to characters and wind up turning a basic revenge tale into an intense and compelling picture. Many complained about the length of the film, something I initially did not notice. It&#39;s a minor issue to me, I&#39;ve spent the same amount of time watching movies that were much worse. Because of James Muro&#39;s stunning cinematography, excellent production and costume design, the film is an example of a picture that appears to have cost twice as much as it did. The late Michael Kamen&#39;s score is also very enjoyable. The cast is fantastic together and the movie somehow takes a great deal of the old cliches from the genre and make it all wonderfully entertaining. http://www.spout.com/blogs/hoss75/archive/2007/10/10/20572.aspx Post By: Hoss75
Post To: Hoss75 Blog
Post Date: 10/10/2007 4:06:24 AM
Body: Here's the most basic way to put it: It's a classic western. If you truly liked the spaghetti Westerns or more classic testosterone laden flicks like the Dirty Dozen, or Death Hunt---- you will enjoy this film. If you don't like the old school manly tales were a cursing, drinking, fighting, every-man wins the day rather than some roid laden pretty boy---- you won't like this movie.That was the litmus test amongst everyone that saw this film. I know a lot of people that hated it, but they never liked the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly or Lonesome Dove. However, my friends and I saw this film in the theatre two days in a row (something we never did before or since).
]]>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 08:06:24 GMTHoss75Hoss75 Blog10/10/2007 4:06:24 AMHere&#39;s the most basic way to put it: It&#39;s a classic western. If you truly liked the spaghetti Westerns or more classic testosterone laden flicks like the Dirty Dozen, or Death Hunt---- you will enjoy this film. If you don&#39;t like the old school manly tales were a cursing, drinking, fighting, every-man wins the day rather than some roid laden pretty boy---- you won&#39;t like this movie.That was the litmus test amongst everyone that saw this film. I know a lot of people that hated it, but they never liked the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly or Lonesome Dove. However, my friends and I saw this film in the theatre two days in a row (something we never did before or since). http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_Westerns/190/5928/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Windbreaker
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 3/2/2007 3:14:46 PM
Body: For me, westerns usually fall into 1 of 3 categories: lousy (wasted my time), mediocre (glad I only rented it), and excellent (it's on my shelf).In no particular order, 5 of my favorites are...- For A Few Dollars More- Once Upon A Time In The West- Unforgiven- Open Range- The Magnificent Seven (but it's still no Seven Samurai!)
]]>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:14:46 GMTWindbreakerTop 53/2/2007 3:14:46 PMFor me, westerns usually fall into 1 of 3 categories: lousy (wasted my time), mediocre (glad I only rented it), and excellent (it&#39;s on my shelf).In no particular order, 5 of my favorites are...- For A Few Dollars More- Once Upon A Time In The West- Unforgiven- Open Range- The Magnificent Seven (but it&#39;s still no Seven Samurai!) http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 980

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:20 GMT6791154980Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/corruption/MemberTagFilms.aspxcorruption
Number of films tagged: 1236

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 108

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT123647108Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sheriff/MemberTagFilms.aspxsheriff
Number of films tagged: 700

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 22

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:53:34 GMT7001122Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/wildwest/MemberTagFilms.aspxwildwest
Number of films tagged: 123

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 15

]]>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:27:27 GMT1231015Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/showdown/MemberTagFilms.aspxshowdown
Number of films tagged: 128

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 9

]]>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:56:35 GMT12879Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gunfighter/MemberTagFilms.aspxgunfighter
Number of films tagged: 446

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Fri, 22 May 2009 13:15:00 GMT44644Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/not-bad/MemberTagFilms.aspxnot-bad
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Tue, 15 May 2007 00:03:00 GMT222Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/overlooked/MemberTagFilms.aspxoverlooked
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:31:10 GMT222Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rancher/MemberTagFilms.aspxrancher
Number of films tagged: 92

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:02:48 GMT9211Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/well-paced/MemberTagFilms.aspxwell-paced
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:17:30 GMT111Tag