random reviews, recollections & reminiscings

Showing posts with label western. Show all posts
Showing posts with label western. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

DVD REVIEW: Open Range (2003) ****

open_range






R for violence.
2 hrs. 18 min.


written by: Craig Storper (screenplay) & Laruan Paine (novel, The Open Range Men)
produced by: Kevin Costner, Jake Eberts & David Valdes
directed by: Kevin Costner




I like it when I find myself sitting in a movie theater watching a film and actually realize that I'm really enjoying the experience. That was the case on a one hot summer day in August back in 2003, when I watched this movie. I remember sitting there thinking how I'd love to get away and live off the vast open plains as I maintained and defended what was mine. I also remember thinking about how this film would be received. I knew that most people already loathed Costner for movies like "Waterworld" and "The Postman" yet I remained optimistic about his work. There are, after all, worse actors out there. He's worked on enough movies that have succeeded to warrant my attention and this film was no different.

Turns out, Costner's return to the western genre wearing both acting and directing hats once again was actually a success. Many were surprised. Most critics really enjoyed his expansive tale of nomadic cattlemen making a living on the open range who take a stand against a corrupt landowner. Some say that it was an "older audience" that made the film into an unlikely hit, as audiences saddled up and headed to the cinema to the tune of $58 mil, doubling the picture's minimal budget of $26 mil. I saw many factors that contributed to this western being a modern-day masterpiece but I'll get into all of that later. There, I said the "m" word for a Kevin Costner movie. Go ahead and hang me



Kevin Costner and Robert Duvall in Touchstone's Open Range


Charley Waite (Kevin Costner) is a quiet and somewhat mysterious cattleman who has ridden with Boss Spearman (Robert Duvall) as his right-hand man for many years. Boss is a straightforward, kind man who serves as an unspoken mentor to Charley, who we come to find out is haunted by his time as a gunslinger and before that, a Civil War soldier. The two mind their own business, making their living as free-range cattlemen, moving their herd across the open range. They've recently taken on some hired hands to manage their load, the gentle giant Mose (Abraham Benrubi) and the orphan Button (Diego Luna) and together with their dog Tig, they make their way cross-country.

With supplies a lil low, they send Mose to the local town of Baxter on an errand, but are worried when he doesn't return. The town is controlled by a greedy and corrupt land baron, Denton Baxter (Michael Gambon), who hates free-rangers. Charley and Boss arrive in town only to find Mose severely beaten by Baxter's men and jailed by Sheriff Poole, whom Baxter "owns." It is soon revealed that many townspeople look past Baxter's greedy dealings and accept the situation, while others secretly harbor animosity and anger towards him.


Mose needs a doctor right away, so they find one after receiving a stern warning from Baxter regarding their free-ranging. The two of them find Doc Barlow (Dean McDermott), while Charley finds a love interest in the doc's sister, Sue Barlow (Annette Bening). Although at first he mistakens her for the doc's wife which results in some humorous interplay between Bening and Costner. Baxter allowed the group to leave once, he doesn't intend on leaving the matter settled - joined with marshal Poole (James Russo), the two round up a group to finish off Boss and his men. After all, what he really wants is their herd. Boss and Charley are able to subdue some of the men but things don't go as planned after a death and a severe injury. The two face a difficult decision and eventually decide to go back into the town to seek medical help for Button and try to plan their next move.



Annette Bening in Touchstone's Open Range


Knowing that the inevitable showdown with Baxter and his men is looming, Charley and Boss gather themselves for the violent encounter. Leaving Button in the doctor's care, they enter town where during a flash flood consumes them and everyone around. Charley saves a townsperson's dog and the owner buys him and Boss some coffee. They learn more about the mixed feelings of the inhabitants of the town and who might possibly be able to help them. One of those fellas is a bearded old, hobble-legged coot named Percy (played by the late, great Michael Jeter) who runs a stable in town. He's an actor I've enjoyed since "The Fisher King" and I really liked him channeling the classic supporting actor role often seen in older westerns.


Before the final shootout, Boss and Charley go to a drugstore to spend their money on cigars and chocolate, reasoning that they might be unable to spend it later. Charley leaves money with a sympathetic townsperson to buy Sue a new tea set if he is killed. The showdown itself is an amazing cacophony of jarring gunfire with realistic ramifications. There's no crazy stunts or special effects here. With every shot fired you feel the pull-back and the smell of gunsmoke. It's a violent ballet of revenge and justice. most of the townspeople flee but the rest eventually chip in and help out Charley and Boss seeing it as their opportunity to finally stand up for what's right. After all the bloodshed, there's no rousing celebration just the dead and survivors left with decisions to either move on or rebuild.


This realism is not uncommon for modern-day westerns such as Eastwood's "Unforgiven" and the recent "Seraphim Falls", that have a morality tale to tell but spends little time romanticizing that tale. So, for those who relegate westerns to sprawling yarns where everyone looks nice, has poor aim and Indians are always the enemy....there have been and still are westerns with realism and purpose. The violence in this film is a depiction of how violent the west was. In the Old West, it wouldn't be an uncommon sight for someone to be walking down main street and BLAM! he's shot in the back or in the head and slumped to the dirt. The film doesn't just show violence for violence sake, it just shows how it would all go down in those adrenalized moments.


Costner and Duvall not only provide great work here, they were great together. Right away, I was interested in these characters and their interaction. Earlier when I hinted at the many factors that contribute to this being a masterpiece....Robert Duvall, so no more. The guy is just amazing. Anything he's in, I'll see it (even when he's Will Ferrell's soccer coach dad) and enjoy it, just cuz it's him. Here, he gives a decency and vulnerability to a character that has learned much from life. He wants to mind his own business and handle his herd but he will fight for what is his. I'll never know why he didn't get nominated for this. Probably cuz people saw Costner was attached and rolled their eyes and that's too bad cuz this is not a Costner film. Duvall owns this film in his most humble manner.


The story was adapted from a novel and doesn't really bring anything terribly new to the table in terms of the genre, although I've read reviews that it's actually better than the novel. As rare as that is, it's not too hard to imagine seeing as how much love Costner has for the genre. The writers provided subtle layers to characters and wind up turning a basic revenge tale into an intense and compelling picture. Many complained about the length of the film, something I initially did not notice. It's a minor issue to me, I've spent the same amount of time watching movies that were much worse. Because of James Muro's stunning cinematography, excellent production and costume design, the film is an example of a picture that appears to have cost twice as much as it did. The late Michael Kamen's score is also very enjoyable. The cast is fantastic together and the movie somehow takes a great deal of the old cliches from the genre and make it all wonderfully entertaining.




open_range_ver6





Special Features:



Commentary by director/star Kevin Costner provides an intelligent, enjoyable commentary for the entire film. Costner is enthusiastic and insightful with his discussion, really going through many aspects of the production process, from the difficulty of financing to trying to maintain accuracy down to small details that are not called attention to otherwise in the film. Difficult enough working on a small budget, Costner also filmed in remote locations in Alberta, Canada that were difficult to get to. He also talks about casting, themes in the film and technical issues such as production design, location shooting and cinematography.

Beyond Open Range: This is a great documentary, a lil over an hour narrated by Costner that focuses on the struggles of making this film. Costner is exceptionally honest about problems with the financing and working with people whose money may not be secure. There's no distributor in place when things begin and Costner talks frankly about the weight he feels of the kind of gamble he's taken. The first struggle is finding locations, which required going up in a helicopter over rugged landscape that was snow-covered and not supposed to be. Costner takes the viewer through the visualization process, as he shows a rather puzzled-looking Annette Bening around a miniature version of the film's town.

The documentary allows the viewer access to many of the behind-the-scenes events and discussions, such as location scouting, production meetings and building. We learn exactly what things cost and who on the crew is responsible for what aspect of the production. There are also some interesting views of some of the main scenes, such as how the crew managed to build the flood - with 32,000 gallons of water per minute flooding through the scene through an amazing system. Watching the documentary gave me a new level of respect for Costner, who displays an extraordinary degree of passion in both the documentary and his discussion in the narration. We see him trying to rally the crew, acting out scenes and in the midst of the cold, rough conditions with the rest of the crew....even working through what became severe appendix problems.


Occasional interviews are edited in during this documentary but largely, this is simply a beautifully filmed, very well-edited piece that is one of the better DVD "making of" documentaries out there.


There's also a get a documentary on the storyboarding process, complete with storyboard-to-scene comparisons and some discussions about visual effects work, as well as 30 minutes worth of deleted scenes, with on-screen intros from Costner optionally edited into the reel of footage (just the footage runs about 24 minutes. Concluding the features is a 12-minute documentary about the history of the Open Range, narrated by Costner and music video.







open_range_ver4
open_range_ver2
open_range_ver3






The Skinny:



  • The background of the movie concerns the "range wars" that occurred in the American West in the late 1800s. The "wars" pitted those that believed in the "Law of the Open Range" - free access to water and grass for everyone, against the "barbed wire" men - land barons, who used the new fencing to define their empire and block the free-range cattlemen from moving their herds.
  • Producers Costner & Eberts and 'David Valdes' put up almost half of the budget from their own money.
  • Based upon the novel "The Open Range Men" by Lauran Paine
  • Tig was not only the name of the dog in the movie, but also the name of the film's production company. Tig was also the name of Kevin Costner’s Grandmother.
  • Kevin Costner turned down Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003) to do this movie
  • When we first see Denton Baxter in the sheriff's office, there is a wanted poster over his left shoulder with the name of Lloyd Buckley. Gae S. Buckley is the production designer for this film.
  • Costner spent most of time filming this movie with a burst appendix.
  • Late composer Michael Kamen replaced a score by Basil Poledouris.
  • The rifle that Charley uses in the shootout is an 1873 Winchester sporting rifle.
  • Originally the studio had Costner top-billed over Duvall, but Costner asked the studio to top-bill Duvall instead.



Interview from comingsoon.net with Costner



Wednesday, September 12, 2007

REEL REVIEWS: 3:10 to Yuma ****

310toyuma_bigfinalposter


R for violence and some language.
1 hr. 57 min.
written by: Michael Brandt, Derek Haas & Halsted Welles (screenplay) and Elmore Leonard (short story)
produced by: Kathy Conrad & James Mangold
directed by: James Mangold
This review comes with my own bias seeing as how I grew up watching westerns on TV. I'd watch reruns of The Lone Ranger, The Cisco Kid, Bonanza & The Big Valley. Then I became quite fond of Eastwood feature film westerns and many of the more realistic and gritty takes on the genre. It was probably back then when I fell in love with the Wild West and all it's expansive open country and living-off-the-land lifestyle. Sure, it was a dangerous time to live with seldom a cure for common illnesses and all the six-gun shooting goin' on but I just loved the idea that a man could get his hands dirty, work his land for a living and provide for his family. It seems simple yet hard but certainly not complicated. Maybe that's what I like about most great western genre movies, there's nothing complicated about them. There's usually a journey the protagonist has to take and the obstacles he has to overcome to get where he needs to be.
Director James Mangold's new film is indeed an uncomplicated remake of the same-titled 1957 that starred Glenn Ford. Both of which are based on a short story by Elmore Leonard that was first published in Dime Western Magazine in 1953. It's a typical morality tale similar to what you might find in a old Twilight Zone or Alfred Hitchcock Presents with all the familiar western genre conventions. But there's more going on with the two main characters here and that's what I really appreciated. Sure, there's a taut stagecoach robbery, some dastardly bad guys and sweaty railroad building but seeing these characters develop was a real treat. After all, many westerns have fallen flat in the past due to their heavy lean on convention instead of character.
Logan Lerman and Christian Bale in Lionsgate Films' 3:10 to Yuma
The story follows Dan Evans (Christian Bale), a troubled farmer and Civil War veteran who has found that the quiet life he wanted for his family is harder to come by than the restitution the government owes him for his war-damaged leg. Dan's got debt and if he doesn't pay up in seven days, Hollander (Lennie Loftin) the local land owner of Bisbee, Arizona will take his land and sell it to the railroad. He needs cash and he needs it fast. Not only does he need the money to save his land but also for medicine for his sick youngest son Mark (Benjamin Petry) Through not so subtle turns, we see that Dan fears he has lost the confidence of both his wife Alice (Gretchen Mol) and teenage son Will (Logan Lerman), who doubt he can make the ranch work. Will, who has practically memorized dime novels about nefarious outlaw Ben Wade, doesn't see in Dan the father he would like to look up to.
After witnessing a stagecoach robbery with his boys while trying to find his missing cattle, Dan finds himself in an unlikely situation that just might pay off all his needs....literally. Turns out Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) and his gang were the cause of that robbery (and his missing cattle) and Wade has now found himself captured and cuffed by bounty hunter Byron McElroy (a great, grizzly Peter Fonda). Wade and his gang have been behind over 20 major robberies on the Southern Pacific Railroad in 19th-century Arizona. Local bank suit Mr. Butterfield (Dallas Roberts) offers Dan two hundred dollars to join a posse that will take captured Wade to the town of Contention and put him on the 3:10 train to Yuma Prison. Dan takes the offer ands takes it seriously, seeing it as a way to not only make ends meet and also finally see something through.


Christian Bale and
 Russell Crowe in Lionsgate Films' 3:10 to Yuma
On the hazardous way to the train all sorts of complications happen in requisite western fashion. Pistols are fired, blood is shed, and the traditional thematic elements are all present and well-filmed with a modern, realistic tone. Without Wade, his gang is led by obsessed, right-hand man Charlie Prince (Ben Foster, in a standout performance), are tracking their trail, set on freeing their leader. But Wade doesn't seem to concerned about a rescue as he sits antagonizing his captors or contently drawing on a sketch pad whatever he sees around him. These scenes are well-acted and written with a combination of intense edginess and wry humor. Still, underneath it all, you just know that a guy like Wade, a take whatever he wants kinda guy, is just biding his time, waiting for any opening to break free.
The psychological duel between Dan and Wade on the way to the 3:10 is the most interesting and entertaining thing about this film. Not to discredit the action sequences or other characters like Doc Potter (Alan Tudyk) but it's just kinda rare to see two great actors in a western given such great material to work with. The two start out as rivals and in the end pretty much remain that way yet with mutual respect. There's no blatant team-up (a good thing) but there is an unspoken admiration between the two that it interesting to see develop. The action sequences are good, particularly the frenzied climactic gun battle, but it's nothing original and I was fine with that. The feel of the film was refreshing in that I felt like I was watching a modern classic telling of the Old West.
Mangold is coming off his success of the award-winning "Walk the Line" where he showed a good sense of storytelling and an ability to bring out the best in actors, which is evident here for sure. He must be a fan of westerns to film with such zeal but credit should also be served to the writing team. I haven't seen the original but I'm betting it couldn't compare to this one, at least for my tastes. The two lead actors get to convey their moral tussle through just the right dialogue but mostly through their behavior which tells me that the writers knew when to reign it in and let the actors do their thing. In the end, these men both believe in something, even if the morality of their personal code may be questionable from the other's point of view. They believe in the individual and the rights of a man to take action, whereas everyone else just seems to be worrying about making money and they'll remove whomever is in their way to do that.
Ben Foster in Lionsgate Films' 3:10 to
 Yuma
Bale is becoming an actor that pretty much always has a film out and ordinarily I'd grow tired of that. not with him though, I continue to be impressed by his range and variety of choices. He manages to keep finding fresh angles to approach conflicted characters. Bale conveys Dan's core in such great subtle ways, he's a man trying to stand up and do what is right, but there shouldn't be so much standing in the way of making an honest living. All of this can often be seen in just an expression and that is great acting. One of his disagreements with Wade manifest as a battle for young William who is fascinated by the dark figure. In the boy's eyes, his father is meek and slow to act, whereas the criminal takes what is his, reacting with the speed of his shooting arm. For his part, Crowe has the more fun albeit harder role. He sheds any outlaw stereotype and exudes a philosophical intelligence and sympathy that runs well with his ruthlessness. Sure, there are those who dislike Crowe but is that really for his acting....really? Crowe makes the smart choice of steering clear of being showy. He has his moments of verbal dexterity, playing mind games on his captors to try to get them to drop their guard, and less careful actors would have gone "maniacal villain"with the role. But Crowe makes Wade subtly charming, he seems to barely lift a finger for the duration of the story, and yet he owns his screen time.
There are quite a few people out there who have aversions to westerns (my wife included) but a good story should be able to translate to any genre and this one does. Am I proven wrong in thinking this seeing as how the movie was number one at the box office in the U.S.opening weekend? I dunno. There aren't that many westerns made anymore, so when one is released it's scrutinized and everyone says how it's a dying genre. Well, I'd rather have a few good or great ones released sparsely then have a slew of hack jobs spewed out on a regular basis like the horror genre. Filmmakers don't need to reinvent the genre, just do a great job and use a great script. As much as it was smart casting to sign Crowe and Bale, it was just as smart of them to agree to do it and you can tell they had fun with it. Excellent work by both of them make this film a worthy entry into an excellent genre.
Director James Mangold on the set of Lionsgate Films' 3:10 to Yuma
The Skinny:
  • Crowe was director Mangold's very first choice for the role of Ben Wade. After Tom Cruise dropped out of talks for the film, putting it into turnaround, it was the casting of Crowe that got the production back up and running.
  • Crowe, Mangold, and producer Cathy Konrad unanimously preferred Bale as the co-lead.
  • Eric Bana was in initial negotiations to play Dan Evans, opposite Cruise in this film.
  • For the film, Crowe and Bale studied the art of gunslinging from renowned armorer Thell Reed.
  • On the first day of filming, a rider and his horse were seriously injured in a scene when the horse ran directly into a camera-carrying vehicle instead of veering off as planned. The rider was hospitalized, and the horse had to be euthanized on the set. The animal's death prompted an investigation from the American Humane Association. By November, the AHA concluded its investigation, finding that the horse did not respond accordingly due to having received a dual training approach and the rider not being familiar with the mount. The organization recommended no charges against the producers.
  • The weekend before shooting was scheduled to wrap, a freak storm dumped nearly 2 feet of snow on the supposedly drought plagued town. Labourers shoveled the snow from the buildings' balconies and roofs and distributed 89 dump trucks worth of dry soil on the ground. Backhoes created an 8 foot tall rampart of snow just beyond camera sight lines for the remaining 6 days of shooting. You can see the snow on the other side of the Yuma train tracks.
  • The movie was funded in conjunction with New Mexico's Film Investment Program.
  • Filming began on October 23, 2006 in New Mexico and concluded on January 20, 2007.
  • After filming concluded, the owners of the Cerro Pelon Ranch petitioned to keep a $2 million expansion to the movie set on their property, which was supposed to be dismantled within 90 days. The set for the film made up 75% of the overall sets on the ranch. In April 2007, the request was met by the county's development review committee to keep the expansion, which would potentially generate revenue in the future
  • The filming took place in a veriety of beautiful locales:
    Bonanza Creek Ranch - 15 Bonanza Creek Lane,Sante Fe, Mexico, which represented the film's town of Bisbee as a "kinder, gentler frontier town" while Galisteo was set up to be Contention (now a ghost town), a "much rougher, bawdier, kind of sin city". After filming concluded, the owners of the Cerro Pelon Ranch petitioned to keep a $2 million expansion to the movie set on their property, which was supposed to be dismantled within 90 days.The set of 3:10 to Yuma made up 75% of the overall sets on the ranch.

Click to view
 full size image

Bale and Crowe on 3:10 to Yuma

Fonda & Foster interview

Director James Mangold on 3:10 to Yuma

Mangold & Konrad interview

The writers of 3:10 to Yuma

3:10 to Yuma Poster

About Me

My photo
Believer. Brother. Son. Nephew. Cousin. Friend. Husband. Father. Colleague. Student. Teacher. Illustrator. Actor. Director. Singer. Improviser. Listener. Observer. Passenger. Driver. Tourist. Traveller. Imaginative. Resilient.