China, to the West of my current location, is the Far East. Washington DC, to the East of me, is the capitol of The West.
Is anybody else confused by this?
Anyways, I'd like to take a moment to resolve in my own mind a conversation I had at work the other day that I feel was incomplete. In other words, that I feel I didn't get the last word in. Which is a horrible habit I've been trying to break, by the way. I know how obnoxious it is to always have to have the last word (I've known people that were worse than me), so I've been trying to cut myself short whenever possible. The only problem is now I've got all this pent up stuff I want to say, and can't say it. And now I'm becoming the standard issue blogger. Gah... perish the thought.
Right. So this conversation I was having was about Westerns. It all started when I noticed a copy of one of my favorite movies, Silverado. For those of you that have never seen this movie, do it. Also one of my must see classics. You will never see Kevin Costner in a more entertaining role. Anyways, we started talking about how hilarious it is that most "Westerns" traditionally take place to the East of Utah, and so forth. And then I had the stupidity to bring up my love of the new remake of True Grit.
Yeah, there was a John Wayne purist there.
So immediately I was dragged into a debate over how John Wayne's True Grit was far superior to the Coen Brother's attempt, which was a point stringently argued by my aggressor despite the fact that they'd never even seen it. Anyways, this all turned into a debate over what makes a good western, and before I really had time to say anything, I'd been informed that I was dull, boring, shallow, lazy, tasteless, and stupid to boot.
Let me say this first. I don't have a problem with John Wayne. Not in the slightest. I've seen The Cowboys, I've seen Big Jake, and from what I've been told, those are widely regarded as the two best John Wayne westerns out there. I haven't seen anything else with a big name western star in it, so maybe my opinion is incomplete. But I think I understand the formula for a successful western well enough to say this; Silverado, the Coen Brother's True Grit, and the most recent 310 to Yuma are far and away the best westerns ever made (I've been meaning to get an edited version of Tombstone, however, I hear that one's a classic).
The way I see it is that there's basically three things a good western needs (Don't ask me why all my formulas revolve around threes. It's a thing). A good story, and when I say a good story, I mean a story that involves more than just a horse, some guns, and a few one-liners. There's got to be some emotion. It's also got to have great characters. Characters that aren't perfect, aren't squeaky clean, because lets face it, those people are so uninteresting to watch. They've got to be characters that you can connect to, you can understand their situation. Characters that you either want to kill someone, or get killed. And thirdly, the sounds. Not just the music, though I'd be lying if I said that weren't important to me, but the whole array of standard western sounds (including the Wilhelm Scream. I was really sad that wasn't in the new True Grit).
My problem with the two John Wayne movies I have seen is two fold. The story is rarely original, and the characters are rarely connectible. John's characters are usually pretty good. But even True Grit needed three amazingly written and portrayed characters to really pull me in. the best argument presented against the new True Grit though, was that it didn't have a big name actor in it (No John Wayne, QED, no western). Hmm... that makes sense. Seeing as how Matt Damon and Jeff Bridges (who is rapidly becoming one of my all time favorite actors) aren't big name. No. I mean, who's ever heard of Jason Bourne? And chances are you've never seen a movie with Jeff Bridges in it (that was sarcasm. Go check Wikipedia and you'd probably be surprised how many movies he's in that you've seen). And 310 to Yuma. Clint Eastwood? Nope, not there. But I don't think you could get away saying that Russell Crowe and Christian Bale aren't "big name". And Silverado? Kevin Kline, Scott Glenn, Danny Glover, and Kevin Costner. Oh, and John Cleese, can't forget about him. No big names there. So the casts are more star-studded, the characters are more like-able, the stories are more emotional, and they still have horses, gunfights, bars, and classy one-liners. What more do you want in a western?
So I guess I'm not a purist, but after those three... I don't know that another true western can ever exist (though once again, I'm willing to give Tombstone a chance. It's got Val Kilmer in it. Can't go wrong there). And while it may be heresy to say it, none of them have John Wayne in them, and you know what? I'm GLAD!
Or maybe I just wrote that last sentence to be controversial. Whatever. I'm trying to kick that habit too.
Is anybody else confused by this?
Anyways, I'd like to take a moment to resolve in my own mind a conversation I had at work the other day that I feel was incomplete. In other words, that I feel I didn't get the last word in. Which is a horrible habit I've been trying to break, by the way. I know how obnoxious it is to always have to have the last word (I've known people that were worse than me), so I've been trying to cut myself short whenever possible. The only problem is now I've got all this pent up stuff I want to say, and can't say it. And now I'm becoming the standard issue blogger. Gah... perish the thought.
Right. So this conversation I was having was about Westerns. It all started when I noticed a copy of one of my favorite movies, Silverado. For those of you that have never seen this movie, do it. Also one of my must see classics. You will never see Kevin Costner in a more entertaining role. Anyways, we started talking about how hilarious it is that most "Westerns" traditionally take place to the East of Utah, and so forth. And then I had the stupidity to bring up my love of the new remake of True Grit.
Yeah, there was a John Wayne purist there.
So immediately I was dragged into a debate over how John Wayne's True Grit was far superior to the Coen Brother's attempt, which was a point stringently argued by my aggressor despite the fact that they'd never even seen it. Anyways, this all turned into a debate over what makes a good western, and before I really had time to say anything, I'd been informed that I was dull, boring, shallow, lazy, tasteless, and stupid to boot.
Let me say this first. I don't have a problem with John Wayne. Not in the slightest. I've seen The Cowboys, I've seen Big Jake, and from what I've been told, those are widely regarded as the two best John Wayne westerns out there. I haven't seen anything else with a big name western star in it, so maybe my opinion is incomplete. But I think I understand the formula for a successful western well enough to say this; Silverado, the Coen Brother's True Grit, and the most recent 310 to Yuma are far and away the best westerns ever made (I've been meaning to get an edited version of Tombstone, however, I hear that one's a classic).
The way I see it is that there's basically three things a good western needs (Don't ask me why all my formulas revolve around threes. It's a thing). A good story, and when I say a good story, I mean a story that involves more than just a horse, some guns, and a few one-liners. There's got to be some emotion. It's also got to have great characters. Characters that aren't perfect, aren't squeaky clean, because lets face it, those people are so uninteresting to watch. They've got to be characters that you can connect to, you can understand their situation. Characters that you either want to kill someone, or get killed. And thirdly, the sounds. Not just the music, though I'd be lying if I said that weren't important to me, but the whole array of standard western sounds (including the Wilhelm Scream. I was really sad that wasn't in the new True Grit).
My problem with the two John Wayne movies I have seen is two fold. The story is rarely original, and the characters are rarely connectible. John's characters are usually pretty good. But even True Grit needed three amazingly written and portrayed characters to really pull me in. the best argument presented against the new True Grit though, was that it didn't have a big name actor in it (No John Wayne, QED, no western). Hmm... that makes sense. Seeing as how Matt Damon and Jeff Bridges (who is rapidly becoming one of my all time favorite actors) aren't big name. No. I mean, who's ever heard of Jason Bourne? And chances are you've never seen a movie with Jeff Bridges in it (that was sarcasm. Go check Wikipedia and you'd probably be surprised how many movies he's in that you've seen). And 310 to Yuma. Clint Eastwood? Nope, not there. But I don't think you could get away saying that Russell Crowe and Christian Bale aren't "big name". And Silverado? Kevin Kline, Scott Glenn, Danny Glover, and Kevin Costner. Oh, and John Cleese, can't forget about him. No big names there. So the casts are more star-studded, the characters are more like-able, the stories are more emotional, and they still have horses, gunfights, bars, and classy one-liners. What more do you want in a western?
So I guess I'm not a purist, but after those three... I don't know that another true western can ever exist (though once again, I'm willing to give Tombstone a chance. It's got Val Kilmer in it. Can't go wrong there). And while it may be heresy to say it, none of them have John Wayne in them, and you know what? I'm GLAD!
Or maybe I just wrote that last sentence to be controversial. Whatever. I'm trying to kick that habit too.
Comments
Post a Comment