*** Official OPEN RANGE Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[Chris Atkins]

Not to mention the fact that free grazing was legal, and Baxter, et al, were effectively nullifying the law by persecuting Boss, et al, under the guise of the law.

 

[Brent Bridgeman]

I would say that this perspective swap theory could be achieved in 99% of the movies ever made. From Michael Myers perspective, he was doing the right thing, slaughtering all those degenerate teens on Halloween, Hannibal Lecter only ate the insipid, and Bob Ewell was just trying to protect his good name.

The whole point of storytelling is to step into someone else's shoes for a time and see the world from their perspective. Trying to also see it from their antagonist's perspective, will mostly detract from the narrative (IMHO), unless the story (or film) is written around that device (I think there is currently a movie out that sees the same story from the perspective of four different people, but I can't think of the name, and I believe the book "An Instance of the Fingerpost" uses this device also). In other words, you need someone to root for, not say "oh well, they both have a case, so either side can prevail and I don't care".

 

[ChuckSolo]

Great analysis Brent. Here I have to refer to "Shane" again. From the outset, we know that Shane is a gunslinger and killer, but we root for him as opposed to Jack Palance's Wilson character because Shane has endeared himself to people in the movie and we basically see him through their eyes. One could argue that Shane actually deserved to get shot at the end of the film for his past deeds.

 

[Henry Gale]

Did anyone else think the interaction with the recalcitrant bartender was an homage to a similar scene in Lonesome Dove?
That was always a favorite Duvall moment for me, "We didn't tolerate dawdling service back then, and we still don't."
I'll be able to enjoy the Extended Edition, I love watching Michael Gambon work and didn't get enough of him in this version.


Jim

Colorado? I guess someone left before the credits.
:b

 

[Brent Bridgeman]

Jim,

I too thought immediately of that scene, one of my favorites from both the book and the mini-series.

"It ain't no crime, whackin' a surly bartender."

My favorite book of all-time (and I'm not really a big fan of western literature). I've got two copies of the book, the laserdisc set, the DVD, and I bought the book-on-tape (read by Lee Horsley) recently and am in the process of converting it to CD. Usually re-read it (or now re-listen to it) once a year.

 

[Scot_G]

I just watched this movie last weekend on DVD, and for the first half of the movie, I was fairly unimpressed. Cliche plot, slow moving dragged out story. But after the first gunshot of the movie (when he is in the bar), I was instantly hooked. I have never seen a movie who's gunshot sound effects are proportionately louder than the rest of the sound. Speech, ambient backgournd noise, and music are all at their typical relative levels, but the guns...they actually sound like GUNS! Most of the time in movies, the gunshots are heard, but never really "experienced" like they are in Open Range.

Usually, in order to have the guns sound loud, you have to crank up your system, which results in blaring music, and unrealistically loud speech...not in Open Range. It makes you feel like you are really there in the old west in the middle of a shootout.

I just hope this becomes a trend among action movie directors.

 

[Ernest Rister]

OPEN RANGE is a wonderful movie. The best western film since UNFORGIVEN. I've watched it four times since it debuted on DVD, and I can't wait to watch it again.

 

[Tino]

Ditto!

 

[Robert Crawford]

I watched this film twice including once with other HTF Administrators during its theatrical run and one time on dvd. I'm in the middle of watching it again with the Costner commentary. This is a very fine western made by a man that appreciates the western genre. God, I would like to see Costner and Eastwood do a western together.





Crawdaddy

 

[Seth Paxton]

Not to thread fart, but I am reading in here just to see what fans think that I don't.

While I thought the gun battle was outstanding as were the rest of the production values, I had problems with the script down the stretch and some of the directorial choices.

The final few scenes all keep repeating that Costner is agreeing to settle down with Benning, and with basically no scenes in between. I found myself saying "yeah, she knows your coming back" except that she kept acting like she wasn't sure despite the fact that he basically kept saying he was.

All of this on top of the fact that the primary threadline was the showdown which was now over. The settle-down thread was written in the manner of a secondary thread and at times even sounded forced in the dialog, so having the film spend so much denouement time with this thread was distracting to me.


I also hated when Costner went to the slo-mo, it plays so cliche and beneath what most of the film had been. It was just horrible seeing Duvall crash the doorway for the final kill in slo-mo. A disgusting choice by Costner IMO which ruined all the tension and power of the outstanding shoot-out up to that point. Suddenly it became a Bay-Bruck film.


But I'm not trashing the film outright. I love the general story/conflict of these open rangers caught in a vulnerable spot and the idea of 2 different paradigms conflicting. That aspect is truthful and honest conflict. I also thought, as always, that Duvall was stellar. Costner and Benning I'm so-so on, but they didn't diminish the film.

The production was great, reflected in all the settings, sound work, scripting of the shoot-out, etc. I just think the actual script needed work in keeping the middle part tight and a major overhaul in handling the settle-down/love story thread. That ended up keeping me from really loving the film.

To me it was a great film flawed down to the point of merely being good. The comparison between the Unforgiven script and the OR script isn't even in the same ballpark IMO even though the story itself IS on par with that film (as is the production).


Should I mention again that I loved the shootout?

Also the town construction, layout, functionality was all great, especially the streets being flooded in a manner more consistant with many western towns.

Sorry to be disagreeable about the rest guys.

 

[Tino]

Seth

I had read your comments before rewatching this film this past weekend with the wife (who loved it, btw) and while I can see where you are coming from, none of your "complaints" bothered me enough to penalize the film. To me they were very minor annoyances, in a film of major accomplishments.

I thought it was terrific from beginning to end('s).

And let me echo Crawdaddy's wish that Costner and Eastwood collaborate on a western as Perfect World was a very good film and shows that they work very well together.

 

[Robert Crawford]

This criticism is not new and has been expressed by others including myself, whenever I talked with others about this film, but overall it didn't take away from my enjoyment level nor did the slow motion scenes.





Crawdaddy

 

[Seth Paxton]

Well I wasn't trying to be new, its just the first I'd wandered into the thread since I only saw it on DVD a couple of weeks ago.

I did backread some more and saw a few others mentioning it, so I didn't feel so bad in my reaction to the film.

I envy you guys who aren't bothered by it, I really am, because all of those things just bugged the hell out of me and sort of pissed me off because I felt like it was undermining what was otherwise a great story. I understand the complexities of the process but I really don't see how they screened the film and didn't say "why don't we cut out 3 of the last 4 scenes" at least.


Anyway, I also feel better knowing that some of you see these same aspects and just aren't bothered as much by them. That's taste and personality rather than just saying "no, that worked great, what are you talking about".

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Having seen it for the second time over the weekend, it certainly did not bother me. What the heck are you talking about?

~Edwin

 

[Robert Crawford]

Seth,
I can't think of one person I talked to about this film that didn't feel the romance aspect was somewhat awkward and that there were too many false endings. However, I think a reason why many of us overlooked such criticisms is because the ending of the film was resolved to our liking. Almost like the end justified the means.






Crawdaddy

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

It was just horrible seeing Duvall crash the doorway for the final kill in slo-mo. A disgusting choice by Costner IMO which ruined all the tension and power of the outstanding shoot-out up to that point.

It did? Not for me. Did it also ruin the tension for you when Gary Ross in Seabiscuit had to cut to the photos after the bell rang during the first moments of its race with War Admiral?

In both cases, these are artistic choices that worked for me.

~Edwin

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

And the prairie scene was necessary because it also ties up what happens to the rest of the characters, especially, Button and Boss. I'm surprised you are complaining about all these so called "false endings" but in ROTK, they were fine for you. Why am I not surprised.

~Edwin

 

[Robert Crawford]

Edwin,
I didn't know you were such a fan of this film? Anyhow, I like your thoughts on some of Seth's concerns. During those times, a woman of Benning's age who never married would be considered an old maid, so I'm sure she was ready to jump at any chance of matrimony.





Crawdaddy

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

I didn't know you were such a fan of this film?

Yes, I enjoyed the film quite a bit. More so than High Noon. As for an old maid jumping at any chance of matrimony, sure.

But Benning's character and motivations were explained well enough that her actions came at no surprise. She was actually one of those women that had lost hope in marrying. She even said something to the effect that she had seen men come and go in her lifetime for not marrying but never the likes of Costner's character.

She was hopeful in the possibility of having a long-term relationship with Charley but since he still has not asked that M question, she's still not sure. To her and at that time, that was the true sign of commitment. Thus, she still had doubts up until that point.

~Edwin

 

[Robert Crawford]

Now, you've crossed the line. I think it's time for another western genre discussion thread like which of the following Wyatt Earp movies is the best film.

• My Darling Clementine
• Gunfight at the O.K. Corral
• Tombstone
• Wyatt Earp
• Hour of the Gun

Crawdaddy