Story definitely sells. Unforgiven and Open Range, as two more recent examples, have good stories. Unforgiven's is obviously phenomenal, but Open Range's is also pretty good. A good story will move a picture (and move people) irregardless of the genre. Look at Dances with Wolves; if you describe it to someone, it kinda sounds like a trite flick we've maybe seen before. When you watch it, however, its powerful depth of emotion and heart allow it to become substantially magical.
The basic Western themes are still valid and compelling enough for good stories to be built around. Family (pulling together as one, or sacrificing for it), Hope (packing up all roots and heading out to the frontier away from safety nets and civilized influences), Defense (of family, self, property, or rights), and of course the more mundane conflicts that can string these themes together (property or asset disputes, cops-n-robbers stuff, romance with or without the harsh edges of Western life like absence and lack of luxuries, old fashioned hero vs villian standoffs, etc...).
It's not necessary to get overly clever for a good western. They can if they want; combining mysteries with the genre might be a good idea (sheriff tries to figure out which cowboy did a dirty deed). Or maybe a legal western, where a county magistrate has to settle a dispute between two property owners perhaps. But honestly, I think there's enough power in Westerns for them to stand on their traditional ground.
I mean, a classic of cinema is the tumbleweed blowing through the street between the good guys and the bad guys squaring off for a showdown. Quick draw might be a touch silly in real life (not that it doesn't happen), but it looks pretty cool on-screen. There's definitely still life, and audiences, for westerns. As always, the problem isn't the content but the money people who refuse to look beyond anyone not aged 15-25 for a possible ticket buyer.
And I still really really really wish Hollywood would do a big budget Samurai flick. Last Samurai was good but not quite a traditional Samurai movie, and I'd love to see those production values applied to a pure Samurai story. Something tells me it'd be awesome.
That is total BS, even Dances With Wolves had Native antagonists, the Pawnee. The best modern westerns never touched the Indian issue at all or made little more than a passing references to it.
The westerns are religated to nostalgia becuase today's youth seems to want sci-fi and comic book movies. I can not remember the last time I saw kids playing Cowboys and Indians, when I played it no one wanted to be the Indian , now both sides have fallen out of favor.
No matter how good the western is, it will not make as much money as the worst comic book adaptation today. It has nothing to do with demythifying, political correctness, or lack of good stories, actor and directors. The majority of the movie going population would rather have their onscreen heros riding spiderwebs than horses.
ps, give me the reality of the west the myth is just old and played out already, what more is there to explore?
Why have the Pawnee in particular been typecast as "bad Indians"? They are the "enemy" of the Lakota in DANCES WITH WOLVES and of the Cheyenne in LITTLE BIG MAN, but specifically in the context of the perspective of a "white man" who has been allowed to join those tribes. What gives?
The Comanche seem to get cast as antagonists fairly regularly, too. I don't know nearly enough about the west's history to know whether these groups were more hostile/likely to fight back or not, though.
So, what happens if someone makes a Jonah Hex movie?
Cheyenne, Lakota, Comanche, Kiowa anyone part of the plains horse culture are the "sexy" Indians horses, feather headdresses, buffalo hunting etc etc etc. If a movie is filmed from their perspective yes the Pawnee would be the enemy. Most westerns use the plains horse culture becuase they are immediately recognisable by audiences.
No one, to my knowledge has filmed, anything from the Pawnee or Mandan perspective. So the Pawnee are shown as the "bad indians" if the others are shown as "good Indians"
The Comanche were reputed to be rather war-like and exceptionally nasty to people they felt had crossed them. A lot of the stories about the wars between them and the white settlers in Texas are outrageously bloody (The Searchers hints at this but understandably doesn't go into details), although for balance it should be pointed out that they were usually reliable trading partners and reasonable with people that honored their treaties.
Hollywood should probably just stay away from movies with American Indians unless someone really has something new to say that goes beyond the savage villain/noble victim models.
That's a good idea, actually, especially now that there's a new Jonah Hex comic book series out. Outlaw stories are probably the most viable Western ideas left, as Deadwood and the upcoming Brad Pitt Jesse James movie show.