Best Westerns

I've heard the grumblings about the film's PC-influenced negative portrayal of whites in general and also its supposed romanticized portrayal of Natives as super-virtuous, yet most of these criticisms are hogwash. No kidding. The film rings of authenticity and the characters are anything but one-dimensional. Want proof?

• The Pawnee are the first Indians the viewer encounters in the film and they are portrayed as completely hostile to whites and other NA tribes, so hostile that they'll kill a white person on sight without mercy. I'd say this is a negative, stereotypical portrayal of Indians, wouldn't you agree?

• Also, Wind In His Hair (Rodney A. Grant) clearly states that the Sioux should kill Dunbar at the council meeting; I'm sure there were others who agreed with him but it was ultimately decided that killing Dunbar would likely cause more problems than solve.

• Not all white people are shown in a negative light; in fact, Dunbar himself -- the film's protagonist -- is white. What about the "foul" guy, Timmons, who escorts Dunbar to the abandoned fort? I've met people just like him. He's not portrayed as evil, but merely uncouth in dress and manners. When Timmons is savagely murdered by a band of Pawnee he begs over and over that the Indians not hurt his mules; his dying words are words of love (for his animals!). Also, when he says goodbye to Dunbar at the fort he says, "Good luck, Lieutenant" and you know he means it; the words show love and respect. Obviously this was a physically disgusting guy with a heart of gold. Again I know people just like him; it rings of authenticity.

• The story takes place during the Indian Wars where there's very little love & compassion of whites towards Natives and vice versa. The U.S. Army is there to do a job and, as usual, go by the book. Is this a negative portrayal or simply the way it was? The answer is obvious. Hence, most of the officers are not shown in a negative light but merely as military leaders carrying out their duty. While some of the main enlisted soldiers come off as clueless sheetheads, the characters ring of true life. I met people just like 'em in the military.

• Besides, I repeat, not all Natives are depicted as virtuous. The Pawnee are obviously ruthless villains and quite a few Indians are shown helping the U.S. Army and are, therefore, traitors to their people.

• Is the small tribe of Lakota Sioux really super-virtuous? Is their lifestyle really a paradise? No, they're merely portrayed as real people living, pursuing happiness, uncertain about the amassing whites, fighting and persevering through hardships (like the winter camp).

• Is the massive annihilation of Bison (leaving their skinless carcasses to rot in the sun) a negative depiction of whites or just the way it was? Such people would likely shoot a wolf for the "fun" of it. Again, it smacks of reality.

Brando Stars and directs -- the only film he ever directed. Marlon's at his captivating best as Kid Rio, an outlaw in need of redemption and intent on evening the score with his ex-pardner who abandoned him to rot in a Mexican prison for five years.

The film addresses the clash of the misfit with conventional society. Since society is composed of a bunch of conformist misfits, the misfit must learn to conform if s/he wants to fit-in and succeed. In other words, if you want to 'make it' in society it's necessary to hide your problematic past & flaws and put on a front of respectability. Dad Longworth has figured this out and he's not about to allow Rio to ruin it for him.

The problem is that one's past always has a way of haunting us, which is another theme of the film; hence, Rio walks back into Dad's life 5 years later and his American dream is seriously threatened. Notice Dad's rage when he whips/beats Rio to an inch of his life; he's doing everything in his power to kill the ugly phantoms of his past, which is why he tries to get Rio hung on false charges later in the story.

Another theme is how love is tied to redemption. Both Dad and Rio are criminals, but both desire redemption and a better life. The love of Dad's wife and the Monterey general populace brings this out in Dad, whereas Louisa's love for Rio slowly changes him. In addition, Dad's love for Katie, his Mexican wife, is what delivered Katie and Louisa "from the beanfields," as Dad puts it.

Love goes hand-in-hand with loyalty or faithfulness. We see this in Rio's likable Mexican sidekick, Chico (Larry Duran).

Marlon Brando stars as Lee Clayton, an Irish sharp-shooting assassin, who's an intriguing nutjob: He's utterly fearless, eccentric and intimidating.

Why does Clayton (Brando) insist on finishing his job of assassinating each member of a gang of rustlers (led by Jack Nicholson) even after he's informed he's not going to get paid? Clayton says that he doesn't care about money. What then are his motivations? The simple thrill of killing? Or does he believe he's a some sort of righteous agent carrying out divine justice?

Lawrence Kasdan's "Wyatt Earp" got a raw deal in 1994 when it was released; the movie "Tombstone" -- essentially the same story -- came out six months earlier and stole its thunder. The difference in these two films can be observed in their names: "Tombstone" focuses on Earp's conflict with the 'Cowboys' gang in the Arizona town, whereas "Wyatt Earp" is an epic Western detailing Earp's life from youth to old age, although the Tombstone events are certainly the center piece.

"Wyatt Earp" runs 3 hours 11 minutes and "Tombstone" is an hour shorter. Both are top-of-the-line modern Westerns and whether you'll like one or the other depends on what you're in the mood for. If you want kinetic mythmaking "Tombstone" fills the bill, but if you want realistic storytelling with the details and mundaneness thereof then "Wyatt Earp" is the way to go. Regardless, both are noticeably superior to the talky 1957 version with Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas, "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral."

Shot in remote areas of California and running 2 hours and 46 minutes, "The Big Country" is engrossing from beginning to end. As with all great films, it has excellent character development. These people seem real. They have good points and bad. For instance, Patricia and her father are introduced as protagonists, but we slowly discover that they're selfish and immature in some ways. Rufus Hannessey starts out as somewhat of a villain but the viewer can't help but respect him as the story unfolds. Conners is excellent as the loathsome Buck Hannessey and Jean Simmons is perfect as the angelic owner of the watering hole.

I like how McKay refuses to take Leech's bait and handles him on his own terms. Also his refusal to try to prove his manhood to anyone other than himself. Despite his conditional pacifism (which is different than absolute pacifism), McKay proves he's ten times the man Major Terrill is. Note how he treats the Hispanic stableman and his family with respect and appreciation while Terrill speaks down to them like they're his slaves.

It's inexplicable why "The Big Country" isn't normally cited with the best Westerns.

The Civil War is over and the remaining rebels in Missouri are encouraged to turn over their weapons and pledge loyalty to the Union, but Josey Wales (Clint Eastwood) hold out and thus a generous reward is put on his head. Josey heads to West Texas and maybe Mexico to find sanctuary, but will he make it alive? The cast includes the likes of Bill McKinney, John Vernon, Sondra Locke, Chief Dan George, Sam Bottoms and Will Sampson.

This is Eastwood’s best Western and a standout of the genre. Everything clicks for a top-of-the-line drama/adventure. A critic said that Wales’ encounter with the Federals in the first act establishes him as invincible and thus destroys any sense of suspense. No, it just means that he caught the soldiers by surprise and he escaped the clash unscathed with a mixture of skill and luck. A later scene reveals he’s decidedly mortal. The movie starts with the typical Bob Steele revenge plot and soon morphs into a trail movie (similar to a “road movie,” but with horses). As such, some interesting characters come-and-go (or, more accurately, come-and-die), but several stay on. It’s a string of memorable episodes on the long trail, like the river crossing and Josey’s well-done pow-wow with Ten Bears (Will Sampson). I like the emphasis on how an outcast can acquire an unconventional family, even if inadvertently.

This remake involves the capture of a notorious outlaw, Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), who is then escorted to the town of Contention to await the train to Yuma, where he'll be hanged. A desperate rancher, Dan Evans (Christian Bale), hires on for the escort job because he needs the $200 for his family to survive. Wade plays psychological games the entire time trying to corrupt Evans, but things turn out differently.

The cast is outstanding (which also features the beautiful Gretchen Mol and Peter Fonda), the New Mexican locations are great and the score ranks with the all-time best. Most importantly the picture is engaging throughout its 2 hour runtime, not to mention the story gives the viewer a lot to chew on.

The first hour of the film is realistic but the second morphs into a MYTHIC Western with an potent message. If you can't handle strong mythic elements in Westerns look elsewhere.

When I first saw the film I didn't get the ending and it turned me off. But it was clear that there was more to the picture than what first meets the eye so I decided to view it again. It DOES make sense, it's just that you might miss it on your initial viewing because the events flash by so quickly. When you DO see it, it'll blow you away. See my review for details.

Great 50's Western and character study about a sad sack sheriff and the charismatic gunfighter he tries to bring back from Mexico.

Plot-wise, the film is reminiscent of another B&W 1957 Western, "3:10 to Yuma," but "The Ride Back" was released about 4 months prior to "3:10" and was adapted from a "Gunsmoke" radio program episode. Conrad played Matt Dillon on the radio show in the 50s and early 60s but was too short and portly for the TV version that premiered in 1955 with James Arness starring as Marshal Dillon. Conrad produced "The Ride Back" in response.

Viewing "The Ride Back" for the first time, it is interesting to see William Conrad some 15 years before starring in "Cannon" and Anthony Quinn is as larger-than-life as ever, not to mention the stunningly beautiful Lita Milan as Quinn's Mexican girlfriend. Yet I discovered that the true appeal of "The Ride Back" transcends these surface attractions.

The first thing that happily struck me about the movie is that the filmmakers strove for realism in the manner of notable 50s Westerns like "The Last Wagon." This can be observed in the heavy use of Spanish in the early Mexican segments and the film's depiction of Indians. The Native Americans here are elusive wraiths more than anything else, but that's the best route to go at a time when more close-up portrayals of Indians typically came off artificial and even laughable, especially as seen through modern eyes.

After the first half-hour the film morphs into a moving character study.

The first 45 minutes involves the capture, attempted hanging, and escape of the Bishop Gang, and it's simply one of the most memorable sequences in Western film history. Some people complain about Stewart and Martin as brothers but I've seen many brothers in real life that look more different than they do.

Even though Martin plays an outlaw he's portrayed in a likable, sympathetic manner. He's weary of the outlaw lifestyle and desperately wants out. Stewart and Welch offer him succor by way of stolen money and true love respectively. They all dream of a new life in Montana. There are just two problems: Kennedy & his posse and a gang of wild Mexican bandits (bandoleros).

Although there are some fun elements, the film is essentially a serious Western adventure/drama. It potently explores themes of loyalty, temptation, pursuing/finding true love, the folly of the criminal path and dreams of a better life. Some complain that the ending is too downbeat, but I've always loved it. In fact, it wouldn't have been right to end it any other way.

The score by Jerry Goldsmith is great. Jerry obviously borrowed the basic melody from Neal Hefti's magnificent composition for "Duel at Diablo," which was released two years earlier.

This is an excellent American Western with Spaghetti Western elements featuring Tarantino’s typical artistic flourishes. It takes place in the West AND in the South, which is reminiscent of the underrated “Nevada Smith” (1966), one of my favorite Westerns. Waltz is magnetic as the nonchalant protagonist and he & Foxx have good chemistry. There’s a nice mix of interesting dialogues and over-the-top action.

Unfortunately, but to be expected, Tarantino goes overboard with the ‘n’ word and the blood-letting, the latter to the point of cartoonish-ness. Nevertheless, this is an original Western that is vibrant with creativity, including stunning locations, cinematography and a great amalgamated soundtrack/score, which includes cuts by Ennio Morricone, like the excellent “Hornets’ Nest,” the imaginative "The Braying Mule" and the moving “Ancora Qui.” Unlike the one-dimensional, intentionally offensive and absurdly overdone “The Hateful Eight” (2015), “Django Unchained” is an all-around great modern Western.

The success of "Shane" hinged on whether or not Ladd could pull of the key role. One critic criticized that he lacked the "charismatic stature" for the part. While he was only a little over 5'6" he made up for it with his laconic, but noble charisma and thus towers in the role. It was the same with his underrated 1948 Western "Whispering Smith." I knew a guy in High School who was a little shorter than Ladd, but he had this Fonzy-like charisma that attracted the hottest babes and no one dared mess with him because he was a genuinely badaxx dude, short or not. It's the same with Ladd in "Shane."

Speaking of attracting women, this is a somewhat subtle sub-theme of "Shane." Marian is naturally attracted to the drifter, but she's too wise to do something morally foolish. So she sticks faithfully to her (lesser) man and keeps the flames of her attraction to Shane down to loving admiration & respect, but it's obviously not easy at times.

There are numerous other highlights, like Ryker's fascinating and understandable explanation for WHY he does what he does and finds it justifiable. Then there's the knock-down-drag-out brawl at the end of the first act, which is totally serious and lacks the lame this-is-all-a-joke element of some Wayne Westerns (speaking as one who loves most of Wayne's Westerns). The magnificently shocking death of Stonewall Torrey (Cook Jr.) and the closing showdown are other standout sequences. Then there's the spectacular Grand Teton locations and Shane's notable refusal of filthy lucre. Not everyone can be bought at the expense of righteousness.

Yeah, it's a total rip-off of the "Shane," but it properly modernizes the story and adds a mysterious supernatural quality. Megan's love for The Preacher is understandable and touching. Best line: "If there was more love in the world there'd be a lot less dying."

It beat "Wyatt Earp" to the theater by six months and stole it's thunder because it is a well done modern Western. But "Wyatt Earp" is even better, at least in terms of epic realistic Westerns.

"Tombstone" is just as good, albeit in a mythmaking, kinetic way. The characters and drama are expertly meshed with increasing action, highlighted by the infamous 30-second gunfight.

As for the dramatic walk to the O.K. Corral and the gunfight itself I favor "Wyatt Earp," but "Tombstone" has a much better build-up to the confrontation. Unfortunately, "Tombstone" spins its wheels in the last 35 minutes with redundant gunfights between Wyatt & his men and the remaining Cowboys. "Wyatt Earp" maintains better momentum after the gunfight.

James Garner stars as the independent scout. Garner is, of course, the quintessential Westerner, and this is his best Western role, in my opinion, more serious than Maverick. Sidney Poitier plays a man contracted by the US Army to break-in horses. Although a black man, he's not at all out-of-place in this yarn. There's a lot of cavalry vs. Indians action.

The movie is highlighted by magnificent Southern Utah locations and a phenomenal score by Neal Hefti. The opening and ending sequences with Hefti's great score are memorable and moving.

One critic argued that the tone is "too light," but the film has the same air as "True Grit" and Wayne's other latter-day Westerns. It's an entertaining Western mix of serious drama with intermittent spurts of violence and occasional moments of amusement. Isn't that the way real life is? This is one of the things I like about the movie, it's not one-dimensional. Another beef is that Ms. Goodnight constantly spouts platitudes and homilies and it gets old after a while, but this ties-in to her character arc: She just lost her father and many Native friends and so when she meets Rooster she's grim and intent on justice. But, as she & Wolf get to know the Marshal, she increasingly lets her hair down, so to speak.

Speaking of which, the highlight of the movie is the relationship that develops between Cogburn and Eula, as well the father/son rapport that grows between Cogburn and Wolf. They develop into a family of sorts and it's heartwarming. The banter between Rooster and Ms. Goodnight is well-written and consistently amusing, particularly if you're familiar with the Bible. Another highlight is the Oregon locations, some of which are spectacular, like the river canyon in the final act. Not many Westerns were/are shot in Oregon and this makes for a unique Western ambiance.

"Ride with the Devil" realistically details Quantrill's raiders and their infamous attack on Lawrence, KS. It's not just a great Western, it's a great movie and one of my all-time favorites.

The story shines the spotlight on the son of a German immigrant (Tobey Maguire aka Spider-man), a beautiful woman (Jewel) and an ex-slave (Jeffrey Wright), all of whom take up the Southern cause. I enjoyed how Tobey and Wright slowly develop a close friendship, as well as Wright's growing sense of freedom as the story progresses. Jewel makes an impressive acting debut and should do more films, she's a natural.

Steve McQueen stars as Max Sand, a half-breed youngster who is driven to avenge the heinous murders of his mother and father. After a gun merchant mentors him in the ways of gunfighting and human nature (Brian Keith) he tracks down the three scumbags one by one (Martin Landau, Arthur Kennedy and Karl Malden).

This is an outstanding and realistic revenge Western reminiscent of 1958's "The Bravados" and pre-dating the similar "Hang 'em High" by two years, but superior to both. One of the best sequences is the long prison chapter that takes place in the Louisiana bayous, which is unique for a Western. Another highlight is the women, starting with Janet Margolin as Neesa, the Kiowa girl, followed by Thordis Brandt as the curiously uncredited saloon babe and, best of all, Susan Pleshette as the precious Cajun girl, Pilar.

BEST LINE: "Yer yella! You haven't got the guts; you haven't got the guts!!!"

The plot is simple: Chato, a half-breed Indian (Charles Bronson), shoots an arrogant, racist lawman in a saloon and a large posse is assembled where they chase Chato in his own element, which is why it's called "Chato's Land." The story focuses on the large posse rather than the half-breed they're chasing; it's an interesting and realistic character study.

The group dynamics of the posse and their interplay is where the film shines. Four or five of the men are good men, but they're too blinded by cultural bigotry toward a half-breed to realize the injustice of their cause. It never occurs to them that Chato has rights and that the slain lawman was in the wrong. All they focus on is that a sheriff is dead and a half-breed did it. Most of the rest of the posse are unlikable or repugnant, particularly a character played by Richard Jordan and his father, played by Simon Oakland.

Due to their differences, the loosely put-together posse lacks solidarity. Some are hell-bent on apprehending or killing Chato while others are rather half-hearted on the issue, pretty much just doing a favor for the former Confederate Captain, played by Palance. You have to listen closely because sometimes the dialogue isn't too clear, but the quality writing brings these characters to life.

Why does Chato become increasingly merciless as the story progresses? At first, he does things to simply deter the group and provoke them to give up, like destroy their water supply, but at a certain point some of the members of the posse cross the line and do something particularly heinous, not to mention utterly criminal, proving that they are the true criminals and not Chato. Some of the members object, which is respectable, but not enough to stop the atrocities and so they become guilty by association. It's called cowardly condoning.

Bronson is stunning at the end.

Richard Widmark is a great antihero in this memorable 50's Western, highlighted by a couple beautiful women (Felicia Farr and Susan Kohner). Widmark plays a white man raised by Comanches and under arrest for murder. Deep in hostile Apache territory he soon finds himself the leader of a small group of youthful survivors of an attacked wagon train.

The film successfully takes you back to the late 1800s and gives a good glimpse of what it must have been like to travel out West during that time.

Felicia Farr and Susan Kohner stand out in the supporting cast; both are incredibly beautiful. Each youth has his/her issue(s) and grows much as a result of their experiences with Comanche Todd and the dire situation. For instance, Susan (Jolie) is ashamed that she's half-Indian but Todd teaches her to be proud of who and what she is. Others hate Todd for being an "injun lover" but later see the error of their ways. Todd himself is lost in in a fog of bitterness & revenge but a new potential family is thrown in his lap. Can he get over his disillusionment to see the blessing in his current situation? This is just a taste of the character arcs addressed in the story.

Stop the presses! Christianity and Christians are actually portrayed in a positive light -- amazing! Yet so are the beliefs/practices of the Natives. The film does an outstanding job of taking the middle road with the settlers and the natives. Not to mention, the Indians are portrayed realistically, unlike many 50's Westerns where you just roll your eyes at their silly depiction.

It has a cartoony plot and delivery, but the all-star cast, great locations, memorable score & theme song ("Old Turkey Buzzard") and the suspense created around the "canyon of gold" win the day.

Omar Sharif as the head Mexican bandit "Colorado" is quite effective. It's sort of an atypical role for him, but he performs so well that it seems he was born to play the part. Ted Cassidy, well-known as "Lurch" on TV's "The Addam's Family," plays the intimidating, laconic Native warrior Hachita. He superbly fits the character (regardless of whether or not he has Indian blood running through his veins). And Julie Newmar is great as a crazy -- and I mean CRAZY -- squaw. Red-blooded males will be interested to know that she has a nude swimming scene, while fans of "Brokeback Mountain" will likely appreciate Omar Sharif during the same sequence.

John Wayne stars as an aging rancher who is forced to hire pubescent drovers for a 400-mile cattle drive from Bozeman, Montana, to Belle Fourche, South Dakota, after his ranch hands abandon him for a gold rush.

This is a realistic, almost epic Wayne Western focusing on the long cattle drive and the amateur boys learning to be men. It lacks the fun brawling and unrealistic elements of John's contemporary Westerns of the 60s-70s (e.g. the quick-draw nonsense in "El Dorado"). A Martinez stands out as the outcast Hispanic amongst the kids while Bruce Dern is notable as a menacing ne'er-do-well. The almost shocking confrontation that opens the final act is a highlight and the boys' just strategy is great: KILL 'EM ALL.

The movie's loosely based on the real-life Col. Grierson and his 1863 Cavalry raid behind Confederate lines, which includes the Battle of Newton's Station. The Duke stars as a Col. Marlowe, who leads a cavalry force deep into rebel territory to cut off supply lines to Vicksburg, Mississippi, which was being attacked by Gen. Grant.

Although the film has some expected dated aspects, like the dreadful opening song (almost on a par with "North to Alaska"), "The Horse Soldiers" holds up well, highlighted by authentic Southern locations -- filmed in Mississippi, Louisianna and Texas.

What works best is the story and characters. The conflict between Marlowe (Wayne) and the doctor (Holden) adds tension and is entertaining, but you just know they'll likely come out of this venture highly respecting one another. Needless to say, Wayne and Holden have great chemistry. Some complain about the Southern belle but she's a good touch and, really, there are no romantic dallyings to speak of (until the very end, that is). The sequence in the last act featuring the involvement of military school cadets was based on the Battle of New Market, which was fought on May 15, 1864, in Virginia.

Walter Hill's "The Long Riders" chronicles the escapades of the James/Younger Gang, former Confederate bushwhackers in Missouri during the Civil War who kept on fighting after the conflict, although they didn't officially become the notorious gang until 1868, at the earliest. The movie details the events over the next dozen or so years during which the gang robbed banks, trains, and stagecoaches in Missouri, Kentucky, Iowa, Texas, Arkansas, Kansas, West Virginia and, lastly, Minnesota. Speaking of which, to all intents and purposes the James-Younger Gang was destroyed with the ill-fated Northfield, Minnesota, bank robbery on the first day of hunting season on September 7, 1876, with only the James brothers escaping. Yet they resurfaced in Nashville, Tennessee, with restless Jesse recruiting a new gang by 1879.

The gimmick with this film is that they used real-life brothers to portray the outlaw brothers: James and Stacy Keach as Jesse and Frank; David, Keith and Robert Carradine as Cole, Jim and Bob Younger; Randy and Dennis Quaid as Clell and Ed Miller; and Christopher and Nicholas Guest as Charlie and Bob Ford. Pamela Reed and James Remar are also on hand as Belle and Sam Starr.

The bar knife fight between Cole Younger and Sam Starr is a highlight. Although this particular fight never happened, fights LIKE IT did. Heck, when I was a teen a friend of mine got stabbed in the gut in a bar knife fight in a small town in Ohio; so I personally KNOW it happens. Recently, in a larger Ohio town (where I currently live) there was a gunfight in the parking lot of a saloon, I mean bar, between two rival bike gangs -- Brothers Regime vs. The Outlaws -- and several died or were seriously injured.

One striking aspect of this film is that it's more-so an Eastern than a Western; the events of the film take place in the technically Eastern states noted above; not to mention that it was filmed largely in Georgia of all places (Parrott and Westville) and also in Rusk, Texas, which is in EAST Texas. These Eastern locations are nothing short of magnificent. It's just nice to see the East utilized in a Western storyline.

David Carradine is notable as Cole Younger. Remember him as humble Caine in "Kung Fu"? Well, his character here is the express opposite of that noble character. James Keach is also potent as Jesse James; James portrays Jesse as a grim, hard man. You can easily see him leading this tough band of outlaws. In addition, Stacy Keach is likable as always.

Although Pamela Reed plays her role of Belle Starr very well, Belle comes across as lifeless and sleazy (which is to be expected if you're a prostitute); I wouldn't touch her with a ten-foot pole. Lastly, James Remar is perfect and memorable as the half-Indian Sam Starr.

Both this version and the classic Wayne film from 1969 are great, but this one has more, well, grit.

Hailee Steinfeld is outstanding as the educated and headstrong 14 year-old Mattie Ross. Jeff Bridges is excellent as Rooster Cogburn, the one-eyed, overweight, hard-drinkin' Marshal with true grit. The former hires the latter to apprehend the scumbag (Josh Brolin) who murdered her father. Teaming up with a young Texas ranger (Matt Damon) who's also tracking down the owlhoot, the three go into the wilderness of the Choctaw Nation of Eastern Oklahoma to apprehend him, where they're also forced to contend with the outlaws with whom he's riding. Barry Pepper plays the leader.

It's interesting -- but fitting -- how Mattie's disposition remains intact as she grows older. You could say she's unlikable but Cogburn won her respect and you have to admire her life-long loyalty, especially since he's not the most savory individual.

The locations are less spectacular than Wayne's version (which was shot in Colorado and California) but they're closer to the actual locations of the book and therefore more realistic. Besides, they're awesome in their own mundane way.

I encourage potential viewers to watch both versions as each has its highlights.

Better than that comic booky Western with the same name. It may have a hackneyed plot, but it has great characters and mature (insightful) themes.

Highlights include the breathtaking cinematography, a believable and mature tone, Kate Capshaw's beauty, a banal plot redeemed by quality characters (like Tom Conti as the settler husband/father), insightful drama & plot surprises and, of course, Sam Elliott as the quintessential Westerner. Really, Elliott is as good or – more likely – better than any Western icon you care to name (Wayne, Eastwood, Cooper, Scott, Stewart, Costner, etc.).

There are mature and insightful themes, like the undeniable connection of Vallian (Sam) and Susanna (Kate). Most of us can relate: You stumble across someone of the opposite sex and instinctively sense a palpable connection, some kind of profound mutual fascination, yet—for whatever reason—pursuing an intimate relationship is not an option. In an entire lifetime you will only experience a handful such 'connections,' or less. These exchanges are permanent because they are so potent they are forever burned into one's psyche.

This is the unofficial sequel to the 1969 Western hit "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid." It took 42 years, but it was worth it. Almost 20 years after Butch Cassidy was supposedly shot-down in Bolivia he is shown alive and well, living in a ranch house in the mountains under the name James Blackthorn (Sam Shepherd). He has a "nephew" (or, more likely, a son) in the USA and decides to take his stolen loot, retire there, and live happily ever after. Unfortunately for him, a young outlaw (Eduardo Noriega) puts the kibosh on his plans, but they eventually team-up, perhaps because the dude reminds him of his younger days or of his deceased best friend, the Sundance Kid.

Another reviewer pointed out that Butch Cassidy is essentially regarded as a real-life Western Robin Hood. Yes, he was an outlaw, but he stole from the rich (the banks, trains and such) and gave to… well, himself. Okay, so he wasn't exactly Robin Hood, but people give him a pass because he fought the system and won, at least until his reported death at the age of 42 in 1908. But there are theories and support for the idea that he didn't die and this movie explores this possibility.

The reason I bring up the whole Robin Hood ethic -- i.e. steal from the rich, etc. -- is that the movie illustrates that, outlaw though he may have been, even Butch Cassidy had an intrinsic moral code that he followed. Those who broke that code were not worthy of his time, respect or compassion. Period.

Another reviewer seemed to read too much into this element and interpreted the movie as a Socialist vehicle with didactic politics: The idea that being singularly rich is intrinsically evil and therefore those less fortunate are morally justified in demanding (i.e. stealing) their wealth. But I don't think the filmmakers necessarily support this view any more than the makers of the original movie did in 1969. It's basically just Butch's personal justification for his lifestyle. He's a thug who unsurprisingly made excuses for his foolish way of life and he keeps payin' the price: Everyone around him dies prematurely, he's left alone & weary, and his stolen loot seems to keep falling through his fingers, one way or another. Yeah, Karma's a real biyatch.

In addition to those intriguing ideas, this is just a solid modern Western with many of the requisite staples that mark the genre, such as excellent landscape cinematography (in this case Bolivia, shot on location), a quality modern Western score, shoot-outs, brooding outlaws, saloons, booze, posses, mines, escapes, beautiful women, Pinkertons, Natives, cowboys, horses and locomotives. Speaking of posses, the posse-pursuit in this film is at least twice as long as the elongated posse sequence in the original movie, and probably longer.

Not just a great Western, but a great movie, period, detailing a tragic true story -- the long covered-up massacre at Mountain Meadows, Utah, on September 11, 1857, where a group of Mormons murdered well over a hundred settlers traveling from Arkansas to California. The settlers stopped in Utah to rest and resupply and the Mormons graciously allowed it. Unfortunately, in the ensuing days the decision was made to slaughter the settlers, likely due to paranoia over the brief "Utah War" that was going on at the time (between the Feds and the Mormon settlers in Utah) and also because of the Mormons' severe persecutions back East in the 1830s-40s, which provoked them to seek sanctuary in Utah in 1847.

Although it's sometimes a hard film to watch for obvious reasons, "September Dawn" is a worthy modern Western that dares to sneer at political correctness and tell the truth, at least as far as can be done by the documented facts. Sure there's some fictionalization, but all movies based on historical events do this to some extent and these fictionalizations are based on likely possibilities. I guarantee you that "September Dawn" is far more historically accurate than heralded films like "Braveheart."

Since the film is so well done I can only chalk up the ridiculous criticism to intolerant (fascist) libertine ideology. After all, the film dares to show Christians in a positive light being led to the slaughter, literally, by wacko non-Christian religious fanatics. Not that all Mormons back then or today are wacko religious kooks, not at all, but that group that murdered the innocent settlers definitely were, and those who authorized it as well.

"American Outlaws" is yet another rendition of Jesse James, Cole Younger and their Gang. This one focuses on the end of the Civil War and the first few years of the gang's activities, which lasted a whole decade in reality, from 1866-76, with Jesse starting a new gang in 1879 before his assassination by Robert Ford in 1882.

The film plays it fairly serious accented by a fun, joie de vivre spirit, sorta like Indiana Jones in the wild West. The cast has great chemistry and you can tell they had a blast during filming. This kinetic, sometimes amusing, tone is the exact opposite of the grim "The Long Riders" from 1980, which is arguably the best and most accurate film about the James-Younger Gang.

Even though "American Outlaws" loses points for inaccuracies and implausibilities, it scores high in overall entertainment value. It's a turn-off-your-brain-and-have-a-blast kind of Western.

The movie performed poorly at the box office in 2001 and Roger Ebert gave it a scathing review. Ebert compared it to 1972's "The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid," which he praised. This was strange because that film wasn't exactly realistic either; in fact, it's a veritable parody or black comedy. These movies shouldn't be compared in the first place since "American Outlaws" details the gang's first year or two in action and "The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid" the gang's final bank robbery, a whole decade later. Furthermore, the two films are expressly opposite in tone: "American Outlaws" makes the wild West larger-than-life and ALMOST fun while the other film de-glamorizes it, making it profane, ugly and idiotic.

In any event, "American Outlaws" is seriously rollicking Western lore worthy of one's video library.

Like "Dances With Wolves," "Jeremiah Johnson" is about a white man choosing to live in the wilderness and his inevitable interactions with natives. Like "Dances," it features realistic natives and was a hit at the box office. Unlike "Dances," the story takes place in the mountains, rather than the prairie, and it's less compelling.

The film was based on the true story of Liver-Eating Johnson who notoriously ate the liver of the braves he killed because the Crow believed the liver was vital for the afterlife. He was also known as Crow Killer and killed braves for 25 years, attaining legendary status, but finally made peace with the tribe.

Although the stomping grounds of the real Johnson was Montana and northern Wyoming, the film was shot in Utah, which sometimes has too much of a Southwest flair to be a good substitute. Regardless, the locations are spectacular. Some even point out that the movie is worth owning just for the location photography.

"Jeremiah Johnson" may not be great like "Dances" but it's quite good, as long as you're in the mood for an atypical Western that's kind of low key and doesn't spell everything out. If you're looking for cowboys, saloon gunfights and cavalry, forget it.

This was Sam Peckinpah’s second feature film and arguably his best Western; yes, better than the overrated "Wild Bunch" (1969). While it lacks that movie's slow-motion ultra-violence, it has a superior story and more interesting characters.

BASIC PLOT: Too aging ex-lawmen and old friends take a job transporting a gold shipment from a mountain mining settlement to the bank in the town below. One is a man of integrity (Joel McCrea) while the other has compromised his (Randolph Scott). Can he be redeemed? And at what cost? What about his young mentee?

The conflict between puritanical religion and purity of purpose is spotlighted with Elsa's curmudgeonly father representing the former and Judd (McCrea) the latter.

Yet there's so much more, like the five redneck brothers from hell at the wild mining camp, not to mention Mariette Hartley (Elsa) in her debut. The movie's short at 94 minutes, but seems longer (in a good way) because it's so dense with gems to mine, like Elsa's brief discussion with Judd:

ELSA: "My father says there's only right and wrong, good and evil; nothing in between. It isn't that simple, is it?"

JUDD: "No, it isn't. It should be, but it isn't."

Elsa flees the stifling clutches of her legalistic father to marry some young buck at the hedonistic frontier camp. She’s swings on the pendulum from legalism to libertinism, which is the opposite extreme, but they’re actually two sides of the same bad coin. Judd represents the sound middle path of wisdom. Everyone near him recognizes this and is positively influenced by him, one way or another, even his old wayward friend.

A number of characters travel on a stagecoach through an area where Geronimo & his clan are on the warpath. The people include a somewhat goofy driver and his shotgun, a marshal; inside are an outcast prostitute, an escaped prisoner named the Ringo Kid (John Wayne), a pregnant woman traveling to meet up with her husband, a suave Southern gambler who knew the lady's father during the Civil War, an alcoholic doctor, a crooked banker and a meek whiskey salesman.

The first 2/3 of the film is mostly character development as the group travels on the stagecoach and spends the night here and there. The last third involves an action-packed Indian attack and the Ringo Kid settling scores. The attack is quite thrilling and there are a couple of outstanding stunts.

Films like this are like going back in time to the period in which it was made. Although times have changed dramatically there's not a lot of difference in some ways. People are people whatever the time period and certain behaviors or lifestyles will never be respected by society at large no matter how "progressive" we become, like being a prostitute or drunkard. It's just the moral facts of life.

The film works because it establishes the characters well and effectively builds suspense concerning the Natives. The outcasts all prove their worth one way or another because they all want redemption or to make things right. The doctor may be a drunk but no one else on the stage can do what he can; the saloon girl is repeatedly overlooked or disrespected until the Ringo Kid stands up for her honor, an outlaw, no less. The marshal must perform his duty, but how do you take an "outlaw" in when you've been through a life or death situation together and he was instrumental in their survival?

Something else occurred to me while watching. People often think that the "antihero" originated in the mid-to-late 60s with the Spaghetti Western and the like, but we see the whole "good badman" concept here way back in 1939. Or consider Quinn's character in "The Ride Back" in 1957 or Brando's character in "One-Eyed Jacks" in 1961. In other words, the antihero was nothing new by the mid-60s.

It's also great seeing John Wayne back when he was lean and mean, or pretty kind actually.