Westerns year by year--recommend the best for blu (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Cinescott

I'd agree that both he and Ansel Adams had a lot to do with it. Adams' photographs are what first attracted me there. They both photographed the valley around the same time. Adams I believe took some of his earliest shots there in the late 40s to 1950. By the time "The Searchers" was made, many could have easily spotted it on a map.

Oklahoma's a little different, although I don't think most people believe there are mountains there Funny how John Wayne seems to be in many of these.

Ford filmed one of the greatest westerns there in 1938 which is Stagecoach. How is Oklahoma different? Neither area was highly populated over 55 years ago.

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford

Yes, it would be difficult, but it makes great filmmaking. Also, we really don't know at what moment did he expired? He might have died just as he pulls ahead of them and his horse slowly walks towards them.

Yeah, that's a possible explanation. He had a heart attack a couple of minutes before, and as he's expiring is able to barely hold on to his horse. Just as they get to him he's finally dead. Maybe. Still, it broke the spell of the movie for me a bit.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by benbess
Yeah, that's a possible explanation. He had a heart attack a couple of minutes before, and as he's expiring is able to barely hold on to his horse. Just as they get to him he's finally dead. Maybe. Still, it broke the spell of the movie for me a bit.

Another example of how film appreciation is so subjective because it's one of my favorite parts of the movie.






Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Crawford]

All this western talk got me in the mood to watch one. I've been thinking about Tall in the Saddle for a couple of days after seeing Ella Raines again in Phantom Lady recently. A very underrated John Wayne western with a hot Ella Raines playing a cowgirl. Also, a great fistfight between Wayne and Ward Bond. Anyhow, off to movieland for me as I'll talk with you guys later on.







Crawdaddy

 

[Cinescott]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Ford filmed one of the greatest westerns there in 1938 which is Stagecoach. How is Oklahoma different? Neither area was highly populated over 55 years ago.

Although it's been a long time since I saw Wayne's "True Grit," the mountains there are a little different, since they're fairly generic, not Pike's Peak or El Capitan. It's the very popularity of Ford's vision of Monument Valley in "The Searchers" that breaks a bit of the fantasy for me. Not only in Ford's movies, but in others, characters will ride for days and still be in the same valley that's no more than a few miles across. Traveling in circles at only 20 miles per hour, my Navajo tour bus was able to cover the entire valley in little more than an hour. Yes, I'm probably more critical of these "artistic liberties" than others, I just think it could have been avoided with no cost and little effort. Simply have a different title card in the beginning or better yet no card at all.

I doubt anyone still believes that the West was really like this, any more than they think "How the West Was Won" is how it was really settled. They're cultural fantasies. No more, no less. Great movies, but not very truthful. There was a lot of death and suffering all around, not just by whites, which is why the Wayne "swagger" can be a little bitter in the 21st century, and I'm from Scandinavian heritage. The scene where the white girls have been recaptured and someone calls them "not human" because they were with the Indians would never work today. It's both fascinating and repelling to watch. It's a microcosm of the values America held in the 50s for better or worse.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Cinescott
Although it's been a long time since I saw Wayne's "True Grit," the mountains there are a little different, since they're fairly generic, not Pike's Peak or El Capitan. It's the very popularity of Ford's vision of Monument Valley in "The Searchers" that breaks a bit of the fantasy for me. Not only in Ford's movies, but in others, characters will ride for days and still be in the same valley that's no more than a few miles across. Traveling in circles at only 20 miles per hour, my Navajo tour bus was able to cover the entire valley in little more than an hour. Yes, I'm probably more critical of these "artistic liberties" than others, I just think it could have been avoided with no cost and little effort. Simply have a different title card in the beginning or better yet no card at all.

I doubt anyone still believes that the West was really like this, any more than they think "How the West Was Won" is how it was really settled. They're cultural fantasies. No more, no less. Great movies, but not very truthful. There was a lot of death and suffering all around, not just by whites, which is why the Wayne "swagger" can be a little bitter in the 21st century, and I'm from Scandinavian heritage. The scene where the white girls have been recaptured and someone calls them "not human" because they were with the Indians would never work today. It's both fascinating and repelling to watch. It's a microcosm of the values America held in the 50s for better or worse.

I'm not going to go in great detail, but The Searchers is regarded as one of the greatest films of all-time. You can debate the Monument Valley, but for most people I've talked to about the film, the use of Monument Valley has never came up until this discussion.

As far as repelling to watch. I think The Searchers was a brave film by Ford and it helped make western filmmaking more realistic and honest about racism and this is coming from an African-American that grew up during the Civil Rights era and attended college in the south during some eventful times for this nation.





Crawdaddy

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Another example of how film appreciation is so subjective because it's one of my favorite parts of the movie.






Crawdaddy

+1! Indeed. You said it. And sometimes I find that I myself change my mind. Sometimes something doesn't work for me the first time, but then does work when I watch it again later. And sometimes talking with people or reading things can make you look at something differently.

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
All this western talk got me in the mood to watch one. I've been thinking about Tall in the Saddle for a couple of days after seeing Ella Raines again in Phantom Lady recently. A very underrated John Wayne western with a hot Ella Raines playing a cowgirl. Also, a great fistfight between Wayne and Ward Bond. Anyhow, off to movieland for me as I'll talk with you guys later on.







Crawdaddy

Sounds like fun. Hope you'll give us a little review when you're done...

 

[Cinescott]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
I'm not going to go in great detail, but The Searchers is regarded as one of the greatest films of all-time. You can debate the Monument Valley, but for most people I've talked to about the film, the use of Monument Valley has never came up until this discussion.

As far as repelling to watch. I think The Searchers was a brave film by Ford and it helped make western filmmaking more realistic and honest about racism and this is coming from an African-American that grew up during the Civil Rights era and attended college in the south during some eventful times for this nation.





Crawdaddy

I never said "The Searchers" wasn't great. In fact, I explicitly say it is great in my post. I realize that the time period of the 1950s has to be taken into account, but to portray a movie with Indians that uses whites as stand ins for Indians as "honest" and "realistic" about racism may be stretching it. This was a move in the right direction, yes. A big move. It dealt with some hard issues that hadn't been brought up much before this in a public way, but it's hardly realistic.

 

[benbess]

I could be wrong, but I think Scott and Robert and many other fans of Westerns, and of The Searchers in particular, would probably agree with much of the last, grand, summing-up paragraph of Edward Buscombe's book on the film (p.68-69). I'll quote the whole thing if my typing fingers hold out...


At the dawn of the second century of cinema The Searchers stands, by general assent, as a monument no less conspicuous than the towers of stone which dominate its landscapes. The strength yet delicacy of its mise en scene, the splendour of its vistas, the true timbre of its emotions, make it a touchstone of American cinema. The Searchers is one of those films by which Hollywood may be measured. But the judgement of its worth cannot only be in terms of its beauty. The film has claims not only upon our eyes or feelings, but upon our minds. Ford set out, according to his own lights, to make a film about the perennial American problem of race. His desire to make a statement is clear: 'The audience likes to see Indians get killed. They don't consider them as human beings--with a great culture of their own--quite different from ours.' Being Ford, he both shows Ethan for what he is, a murderous racist, and yet draws out our pity for him. To some, perhaps, this will seem like equivocation. But in my view it's the greatness of the film. The contradictions of Ethan's character, his compelling strength matched only by his repellent bigotry, cannot be easily resolved, forcing us to a more painful awareness than the pieties of more obviously liberal films. Only once, in the coarse comedy of the 'marriage' to Look, does Ford's touch falter. Otherwise, his gaze is steady but compassionate. At the end, just at the moment of truth when Ethan has found love in his heart and not hate, Ford does not shirk the stern judgement. The door closes on him and shuts him out from human warmth and companionship. Yet who as the screen goes black does not feel Ethan's tragedy?

 

[Cinescott]

Originally Posted by benbess
I could be wrong, but I think Scott and Robert and many other fans of Westerns, and of The Searchers in particular, would probably agree with much of the last, grand, summing-up paragraph of Edward Buscombe's book on the film (p.68-69). I'll quote the whole thing if my typing fingers hold out...


At the dawn of the second century of cinema The Searchers stands, by general assent, as a monument no less conspicuous than the towers of stone which dominate its landscapes. The strength yet delicacy of its mise en scene, the splendour of its vistas, the true timbre of its emotions, make it a touchstone of American cinema. The Searchers is one of those films by which Hollywood may be measured. But the judgement of its worth cannot only be in terms of its beauty. The film has claims not only upon our eyes or feelings, but upon our minds. Ford set out, according to his own lights, to make a film about the perennial American problem of race. His desire to make a statement is clear: 'The audience likes to see Indians get killed. They don't consider them as human beings--with a great culture of their own--quite different from ours.' Being Ford, he both shows Ethan for what he is, a murderous racist, and yet draws out our pity for him. To some, perhaps, this will seem like equivocation. But in my view it's the greatness of the film. The contradictions of Ethan's character, his compelling strength matched only by his repellent bigotry, cannot be easily resolved, forcing us to a more painful awareness than the pieties of more obviously liberal films. Only once, in the coarse comedy of the 'marriage' to Look, does Ford's touch falter. Otherwise, his gaze is steady but compassionate. At the end, just at the moment of truth when Ethan has found love in his heart and not hate, Ford does not shirk the stern judgement. The door closes on him and shuts him out from human warmth and companionship. Yet who as the screen goes black does not feel Ethan's tragedy?

You're absolutely right, Ben. I agree with this analysis completely. Wayne's character is an in-your-face bigot through much of the movie and there's a large tragic component to the way it ends for him.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by Cinescott
I never said "The Searchers" wasn't great. In fact, I explicitly say it is great in my post. I realize that the time period of the 1950s has to be taken into account, but to portray a movie with Indians that uses whites as stand ins for Indians as "honest" and "realistic" about racism may be stretching it. This was a move in the right direction, yes. A big move. It dealt with some hard issues that hadn't been brought up much before this in a public way, but it's hardly realistic.

Then we just disagree because I clearly stated it helped westerns become more realistic as you don't go from point A to Z with just one film. It was a journey for westerns that basically started with The Searchers and continued for the next 55 plus years.






Crawdaddy

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
One more thing, the WWII years weren't good years quality-wise for westerns except for a few exceptions. The western genre doesn't really pick up until 1946.







Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy: You are sure right. I didn't know that. After a mini boom in "A" Westerns from 1939 to 1941 they seem to practically die off again by 1942. Are there any good "A" Westerns from the years 1942, 1943, 1944, and 1945?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by benbess
Crawdaddy: You are sure right. I didn't know that. After a mini boom in "A" Westerns from 1939 to 1941 they seem to practically die off again by 1942. Are there any good "A" Westerns from the years 1942, 1943, 1944, and 1945?

Besides the ones I already mentioned there is The Spoilers, a western starring Wayne, Randolph and Dietrich. Glenn Ford made a couple of entertaining westerns like Texas and The Desperadoes. IMO, the best western made during those years was The Ox-Bow Incident starring Henry Fonda. Another beautiful Technicolor western was Buffalo Bill starring Joel McCrea. Also, John Wayne had a few decent westerns, but nothing approaching what he did starting with Fort Apache in 1948.

 

[benbess]

Well my brief search shows almost no "A" Westerns during World War II. Why was that? There must be an explanation of some kind, or at least a guess. So, not only did Stagecoach not truly bring the Western back to life (that was the Plainsman), but it died again shortly afterward....Interesting.

And it seems like we might have none other than Selznick to thank for the Western being reborn after the war, because of his epic Western Duel in the Sun. I haven't seen this one, and so hold your spoilers please. It seems to have been a huge hit, and perhaps it you take away the rereleases of Song of the South maybe even the number one film of the year. He paid for it in part with Hitchcock's huge hit from the year before, Spellbound. Anyway, surely this landmark film deserves blu-ray? Or does it? What do people here think?

 

[Robert Crawford]

IMO, Duel in the Sun is overrated. The best western film from 1946 was without a doubt the historically inaccurate My Darling Clementine. I actually prefer Canyon Passage and California over Duel in the Sun. The latter has some great scenes in it, but for entertainment value I prefer the two former films.






Crawdaddy

 

[benbess]

Thanks, Robert, you're saving me here. The Ox Bow Incident. I saw this one a long, long time ago. Good, clear, bitter, thought provoking film. Made in 1943. If the negative survives (which is doubtful, I imagine) this one might deserve a blu-ray release. It's only an hour and 15 minutes long--about the length of one episode of The Virginian. Is there a movie that could be paired with it to make a good double feature?

 

[Robert Crawford]

If might be a short film, but unlike most films with longer running times, it does stay with you and leaves with something to think about.







Crawdaddy

 

[benbess]

Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
If might be a short film, but unlike most films with longer running times, it does stay with you and leaves with something to think about.







Crawdaddy

That's sure true. That's why it deserves to be on blu if the negative or a really good print exists. And I think you've found our double feature, the also very fine John Ford film My Darling Clementine from the same studio and with the same star. I saw this one a very long time ago too, and it's time to revisit it. Is the DVD the "director's cut"?

 

[Robert Crawford]

Originally Posted by benbess
That's sure true. That's why it deserves to be on blu if the negative or a really good print exists. And I think you've found our double feature, the also very fine John Ford film My Darling Clementine from the same studio and with the same star. I saw this one a very long time ago too, and it's time to revisit it. Is the DVD the "director's cut"?

Without me having to look to confirm, I think the DVD has two different versions of My Darling Clementine in which the endings are different.






Crawdaddy