list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Lone Star 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/Lone_Star/93275/default.aspx Title: Lone Star
Year: 1996
Director: John Sayles
Plot: Reminiscent of a fine novel in depth and complexity, writer-director John Sayles' acclaimed drama uses the investigation of a 25-year-old murder as the framework for a detailed exploration of life in a Texas border town. The nominal center of the film is Sheriff Sam Deeds (the superb, subtle Chris Cooper), the chief law officer of the town of Frontera. The low-key Sam is also the son of the late Buddy Deeds (played in flashbacks by Matthew McConaughey), who also served as town sheriff and still maintains a legendary status for ousting the vicious, corrupt Charlie Wade (a memorably vicious Kris Kristofferson). The discovery of Wade's decades-old skeleton, however, calls this legend into question, and forces Sam to begin an investigation. During this search for the truth, Sam must come to terms with his own troubled emotions about his father and his still-lingering romantic feelings for Pilar (Elizabeth Peña), a Hispanic woman that Buddy had prevented him from seeing as a young man. Lone Star's scope encompasses not only this story but the whole town, addressing Pilar's difficulties as a schoolteacher, the conflict between incoming immigrants and border patrol officers, and the troubles faced by the African-American commander of the local military base. Sayles expertly moves between past and present, weaving his stories together to illustrate, as in his earlier City of Hope (1991), how the seemingly disparate parts of a community are in fact intimately interconnected. Raising issues of race, politics, and identity, Lone Star nevertheless focuses most of its attention on its complex, believable characters, well-performed by an excellent ensemble cast. One of the most financially successful of Sayles' low-key movies, Lone Star received glowing notices and an Academy Award nomination for Best Original Screenplay. ~ Judd Blaise, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 10
Number of Lists: 11
Number of blog posts: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:53:21 GMTLone Star1996John SaylesReminiscent of a fine novel in depth and complexity, writer-director <a href="/players/P___110025/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Sayles</a>' acclaimed drama uses the investigation of a 25-year-old murder as the framework for a detailed exploration of life in a Texas border town. The nominal center of the film is Sheriff Sam Deeds (the superb, subtle <a href="/players/P____14803/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Chris Cooper</a>), the chief law officer of the town of Frontera. The low-key Sam is also the son of the late Buddy Deeds (played in flashbacks by <a href="/players/P___196967/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Matthew McConaughey</a>), who also served as town sheriff and still maintains a legendary status for ousting the vicious, corrupt Charlie Wade (a memorably vicious <a href="/players/P____98154/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kris Kristofferson</a>). The discovery of Wade's decades-old skeleton, however, calls this legend into question, and forces Sam to begin an investigation. During this search for the truth, Sam must come to terms with his own troubled emotions about his father and his still-lingering romantic feelings for Pilar (<a href="/players/P____55879/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Elizabeth Peña</a>), a Hispanic woman that Buddy had prevented him from seeing as a young man. Lone Star's scope encompasses not only this story but the whole town, addressing Pilar's difficulties as a schoolteacher, the conflict between incoming immigrants and border patrol officers, and the troubles faced by the African-American commander of the local military base. Sayles expertly moves between past and present, weaving his stories together to illustrate, as in his earlier <a href=/films/6260/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>City of Hope</a> (1991), how the seemingly disparate parts of a community are in fact intimately interconnected. Raising issues of race, politics, and identity, Lone Star nevertheless focuses most of its attention on its complex, believable characters, well-performed by an excellent ensemble cast. One of the most financially successful of Sayles' low-key movies, Lone Star received glowing notices and an Academy Award nomination for Best Original Screenplay. ~ Judd Blaise, All Movie Guide10Taggedy Taggged (6-10)1143http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t06457639lr.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Lone_Star/93275/default.aspxFilm 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/jimbell/archive/2008/3/19/26402.aspx Post By: JimBell
Post To: JimBell Blog
Post Date: 3/19/2008 3:09:28 PM
Body: Lone Star is a sprawling movie full of action and suspense, and replete with good acting. Writer and director John Sayles builds a complex portrait of a Texas border town where everyone seems related to everyone else in some way, shape, or form. The ending—which I will not give away here—is particularly challenging and interesting. After the main mystery of who killed the powerful old sheriff is finally solved, the new sheriff decides to let sleeping dogs lie. But this is followed immediately by a shocking discovery about the new sheriff’s romance, and, again, he decides to let sleeping dogs lie. If you, the viewer, agreed with his first decision, you are challenged to agree with his second—not such an easy thing to do—so you will be thinking about it for awhile.
]]>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:09:28 GMTJimBellJimBell Blog3/19/2008 3:09:28 PMLone Star is a sprawling movie full of action and suspense, and replete with good acting. Writer and director John Sayles builds a complex portrait of a Texas border town where everyone seems related to everyone else in some way, shape, or form. The ending&mdash;which I will not give away here&mdash;is particularly challenging and interesting. After the main mystery of who killed the powerful old sheriff is finally solved, the new sheriff decides to let sleeping dogs lie. But this is followed immediately by a shocking discovery about the new sheriff&rsquo;s romance, and, again, he decides to let sleeping dogs lie. If you, the viewer, agreed with his first decision, you are challenged to agree with his second&mdash;not such an easy thing to do&mdash;so you will be thinking about it for awhile. http://www.spout.com/blogs/erico_77375/archive/2007/7/22/15547.aspx Post By: erico_77375
Post To: erico_77375 Blog
Post Date: 7/22/2007 6:43:15 AM
Body: Two men pace around an abandoned military firing range discussing the ignorance of people's perceptions as they salvage for old bullets to make into art. The scene gets interesting when one of the men finds a skull. Where in an average film, this would be the start of a murder mystery. In the world of Writer/Director John Sayles, this is beginning of a catalyst of personal choices and connections of a handful of people who are connected to an event almost forty years prior.To talk about Lone Star isn't to talk about the murder, but to talk about those who are affected by the outcome, most of which even after the mystery is solved will never know exactly how they're affected. The dead man's identity is quickly revealed as Charlie Wade (Kris Kristopherson), a sheriff of Rio County and from the stories you hear, the worst man you'll ever meet. His successor, Buddy Deeds (Matthew McConaughey) is considered a legend in present times, about to have his name plastered on the courthouse. His son Sam (Chris Cooper) is now sheriff, but not because he wants the job. He's there to get away from a life that was less suitable than the one he has now. "I'm just a jailer" he says with resentment. "The job wasn't what I thought it would be". But there might be a second chance with a high school sweetheart Pilar (Elizabeth Pena), and the chance to dispell the legend that his father had cast with his investigation. But this film isn't entirely about Sam, but also about people like Otis (Ron Canada), whose trying to get a second chance with his estranged son (Joe Morton) and a budding relationship with his grandson. It's about Pilar's mother (Miriam Colon), who is a successful businesswoman in town using migrant workers but requires they speak English in her presence. And I haven't even talked about only half of the characters in this film.Lone Star is a Texas tale, but in the same sense Taxi Driver is a New York tale. You can change the scene, but it wouldn't feel natural. Border towns in Texas have an almost forced integration of many personalities who thrive and depend on each other. Racism won't get you too far when three-quarters of your population is held by other races.This film is also about the culture shock of a changing of the ethnic guard occurs, where hispanic leaders emerge to take over where white leaders used to thrive. There's a great scene near the beginning of the film with Pilar discussing to white and hispanic parents about the way she teaches a non-biased look of Texas History. A white mother shouts appaulingly "that's what I'm concerned about!".And on top of all this is something I have not really seen in other movies: Characters are given the chance to think about things, to mill them over and to make important decisions not on the fly, but in moments of reflection. The final scene is a perfect illustration of this. It's easy to see love conquering all if there's not that much to risk. Sam and Pilar deeply love each other, no one can deny that. But the last roadblock (and revelation) is so cruel that any choice made is cruel. I love Pilar's line when the film ends, "Forget the Alamo". When you realize the context she's using that, you'll understand why I love it.But this isn't like Altman's work in Nashville where everything overlaps. These characters are bound by the death of a bad man in very small but significant ways. And for me to say anything about how they are connected would be to say too much.It's not difficult to see what John Sayles is interested in this film for. If you watch each scene, you'll see that as much as they're connected to the whole in small ways, that they also play as self-sufficient character scenes with dialogue that touches the right moment with the right impact. Take a scene like where the two men who found the skull talk later in the film about marriage while working with shells. It doesn't require you to see the other scenes to enjoy this scene. In fact, most of the scenes have two or more characters bonding through communication. I'm so glad that Chris Cooper is now as big a name as he is. There's not many actors who are able to display the wide range of emotions as he can. From rugged to sullen, witty to cruel, he's been looked over for years. With Sam, he gives a performance that generates sympathy for a man who should have led a different life. Take a scene where he listens to his ex-wife (Francis MacDormand) with sweet concern, but also a hint of meloncholly. But I am in love with Elizabeth Pena in this film. This woman caught in a mix of feelings and sensations about her second chance with Sam blended in with the grown-up maturity of a mother of two teenagers. When a conversation comes up about teenage love, she doesn't condescend it because she knows it's power all too well. But I also love Ron Canada's performance as a man who never quite left his son's life, but has made choices that have left his son with a bitter anger towards him.And yet this film does have a mystery to it. And yet it doesn't really take much precidence. Sayles is too interested in the characters and ideas to be bogged down into simple terms. He's more interested letting characters choosing their own fates over giving us a rehash of clues and sleuthing. Besides, this is Texas. The only use for a magnifying lens is to burn ant hills.
]]>Sun, 22 Jul 2007 10:43:15 GMTerico_77375erico_77375 Blog7/22/2007 6:43:15 AMTwo men pace around an abandoned military firing range discussing the ignorance of people&#39;s perceptions as they salvage for old bullets to make into art. The scene gets interesting when one of the men finds a skull. Where in an average film, this would be the start of a murder mystery. In the world of Writer/Director John Sayles, this is beginning of a catalyst of personal choices and connections of a handful of people who are connected to an event almost forty years prior.To talk about Lone Star isn&#39;t to talk about the murder, but to talk about those who are affected by the outcome, most of which even after the mystery is solved will never know exactly how they&#39;re affected. The dead man&#39;s identity is quickly revealed as Charlie Wade (Kris Kristopherson), a sheriff of Rio County and from the stories you hear, the worst man you&#39;ll ever meet. His successor, Buddy Deeds (Matthew McConaughey) is considered a legend in present times, about to have his name plastered on the courthouse. His son Sam (Chris Cooper) is now sheriff, but not because he wants the job. He&#39;s there to get away from a life that was less suitable than the one he has now. &quot;I&#39;m just a jailer&quot; he says with resentment. &quot;The job wasn&#39;t what I thought it would be&quot;. But there might be a second chance with a high school sweetheart Pilar (Elizabeth Pena), and the chance to dispell the legend that his father had cast with his investigation. But this film isn&#39;t entirely about Sam, but also about people like Otis (Ron Canada), whose trying to get a second chance with his estranged son (Joe Morton) and a budding relationship with his grandson. It&#39;s about Pilar&#39;s mother (Miriam Colon), who is a successful businesswoman in town using migrant workers but requires they speak English in her presence. And I haven&#39;t even talked about only half of the characters in this film.Lone Star is a Texas tale, but in the same sense Taxi Driver is a New York tale. You can change the scene, but it wouldn&#39;t feel natural. Border towns in Texas have an almost forced integration of many personalities who thrive and depend on each other. Racism won&#39;t get you too far when three-quarters of your population is held by other races.This film is also about the culture shock of a changing of the ethnic guard occurs, where hispanic leaders emerge to take over where white leaders used to thrive. There&#39;s a great scene near the beginning of the film with Pilar discussing to white and hispanic parents about the way she teaches a non-biased look of Texas History. A white mother shouts appaulingly &quot;that&#39;s what I&#39;m concerned about!&quot;.And on top of all this is something I have not really seen in other movies: Characters are given the chance to think about things, to mill them over and to make important decisions not on the fly, but in moments of reflection. The final scene is a perfect illustration of this. It&#39;s easy to see love conquering all if there&#39;s not that much to risk. Sam and Pilar deeply love each other, no one can deny that. But the last roadblock (and revelation) is so cruel that any choice made is cruel. I love Pilar&#39;s line when the film ends, &quot;Forget the Alamo&quot;. When you realize the context she&#39;s using that, you&#39;ll understand why I love it.But this isn&#39;t like Altman&#39;s work in Nashville where everything overlaps. These characters are bound by the death of a bad man in very small but significant ways. And for me to say anything about how they are connected would be to say too much.It&#39;s not difficult to see what John Sayles is interested in this film for. If you watch each scene, you&#39;ll see that as much as they&#39;re connected to the whole in small ways, that they also play as self-sufficient character scenes with dialogue that touches the right moment with the right impact. Take a scene like where the two men who found the skull talk later in the film about marriage while working with shells. It doesn&#39;t require you to see the other scenes to enjoy this scene. In fact, most of the scenes have two or more characters bonding through communication. I&#39;m so glad that Chris Cooper is now as big a name as he is. There&#39;s not many actors who are able to display the wide range of emotions as he can. From rugged to sullen, witty to cruel, he&#39;s been looked over for years. With Sam, he gives a performance that generates sympathy for a man who should have led a different life. Take a scene where he listens to his ex-wife (Francis MacDormand) with sweet concern, but also a hint of meloncholly. But I am in love with Elizabeth Pena in this film. This woman caught in a mix of feelings and sensations about her second chance with Sam blended in with the grown-up maturity of a mother of two teenagers. When a conversation comes up about teenage love, she doesn&#39;t condescend it because she knows it&#39;s power all too well. But I also love Ron Canada&#39;s performance as a man who never quite left his son&#39;s life, but has made choices that have left his son with a bitter anger towards him.And yet this film does have a mystery to it. And yet it doesn&#39;t really take much precidence. Sayles is too interested in the characters and ideas to be bogged down into simple terms. He&#39;s more interested letting characters choosing their own fates over giving us a rehash of clues and sleuthing. Besides, this is Texas. The only use for a magnifying lens is to burn ant hills. http://www.spout.com/blogs/hairylime/archive/2007/3/22/6431.aspx Post By: HairyLime
Post To: HairyLime Blog
Post Date: 3/22/2007 4:29:00 PM
Body: Early John Sayles film that I saw once years and years ago, and then revisited again recently. It still holds up pretty well. Joe Morton gives an outstanding understated performance without uttering a sound, and the endless parade of oddball characters he comes into contact with throughout the movie are wonderful little set pieces, expecially the regulars at the bar where a lot of the action takes place. As usual with Sayles, he can say much more on a limited buget than movies three times the size. The drug message is a little heavy handed, and the ending is a bit confusing and abrupt (is he saying something here about the Black experience of being displaced, about the ideas of where you are FROM versus where you ARE?) - Like I've said before, ambiguous endings keep me coming back.It says a lot for Sayles that he can manage to keep bringing back the same stable of talented actors to work with him again and again, and you will notice a lot of familiar faces from his other films years later. other Sayles favorites: Lone Star, City of Hope, Matewan, Eight Men Out
]]>Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:29:00 GMTHairyLimeHairyLime Blog3/22/2007 4:29:00 PMEarly John Sayles film that I saw once years and years ago, and then revisited again recently. It still holds up pretty well. Joe Morton gives an outstanding understated performance without uttering a sound, and the endless parade of oddball characters he comes into contact with throughout the movie are wonderful little set pieces, expecially the regulars at the bar where a lot of the action takes place. As usual with Sayles, he can say much more on a limited buget than movies three times the size. The drug message is a little heavy handed, and the ending is a bit confusing and abrupt (is he saying something here about the Black experience of being displaced, about the ideas of where you are FROM versus where you ARE?) - Like I&#39;ve said before, ambiguous endings keep me coming back.It says a lot for Sayles that he can manage to keep bringing back the same stable of talented actors to work with him again and again, and you will notice a lot of familiar faces from his other films years later. other Sayles favorites: Lone Star, City of Hope, Matewan, Eight Men Out http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 831

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:42:29 GMT8748157831Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/history/MemberTagFilms.aspxhistory
Number of films tagged: 999

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 156

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:15:22 GMT99948156Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/killing/MemberTagFilms.aspxkilling
Number of films tagged: 7191

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 96

]]>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 13:01:54 GMT71913196Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/investigation/MemberTagFilms.aspxinvestigation
Number of films tagged: 5883

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 125

]]>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 20:19:25 GMT588329125Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Texas/MemberTagFilms.aspxTexas
Number of films tagged: 39

Number of people who tagged: 19

Number of times used: 44

]]>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 19:05:36 GMT391944Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/immigration/MemberTagFilms.aspximmigration
Number of films tagged: 239

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 28

]]>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:04:22 GMT2391128Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/falseaccusation/MemberTagFilms.aspxfalseaccusation
Number of films tagged: 2361

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 10

]]>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 13:02:37 GMT2361810Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/border/MemberTagFilms.aspxborder
Number of films tagged: 7

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 8

]]>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 01:44:22 GMT768Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fatherson/MemberTagFilms.aspxfatherson
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 6

]]>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:34:57 GMT566Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/generationgap/MemberTagFilms.aspxgenerationgap
Number of films tagged: 574

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:02:19 GMT57444Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/macguffin/MemberTagFilms.aspxmacguffin
Number of films tagged: 2

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:25:51 GMT233Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/place/MemberTagFilms.aspxplace
Number of films tagged: 11

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 11

]]>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:27:43 GMT11311Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cadillac/MemberTagFilms.aspxcadillac
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 15 May 2006 19:40:02 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/civex/MemberTagFilms.aspxcivex
Number of films tagged: 88

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 88

]]>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:14:43 GMT88188Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/southwest/MemberTagFilms.aspxsouthwest
Number of films tagged: 69

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:02:32 GMT6911Tag