Sergio Leone Web Board

Films of Sergio Leone => Other Films => Topic started by: The Firecracker on March 20, 2011, 10:56:18 PM



Title: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: The Firecracker on March 20, 2011, 10:56:18 PM
Arguably The Duke's best role and certainly the best of his output in the 70's.
The villains (Boone, O'Brian and Mckinney) should have been fleshed out more but whatever.
Discuss.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on March 21, 2011, 03:49:14 AM
Definitely, the villains were pretty sparse character wise, and those studio sets looked great!


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: The Firecracker on March 21, 2011, 02:57:11 PM
Definitely, the villains were pretty sparse character wise

Yeah they're all nothing more than extended cameos.
The whole cast was due to favor pullings mostly on Wayne's part.
O'brien admitted to not even being payed and Boone was given a car.

and those studio sets looked great!

That's good though, right?


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on March 21, 2011, 03:28:46 PM
Quote
That's good though, right?

Oh yea, you know to be honest, the El Paso set for FAFDM, should have looked more like the city in The Shootist a bit more modern and turn of the century, but it was probably the best that could Leone could do with the budget he had.  O0


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: T.H. on March 22, 2011, 11:22:26 AM
I have to disagree about the sets - I thought they looked too modern, tame and wholesome.

I love the Spanish and/or Mexican look of the sets in the Dollars trilogy, the style perfectly complements Leone's style.

I really don't care for The Shootist because of its scenery - landscapes, sets, etc. It's a bland looking movie imo.



Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on March 22, 2011, 12:40:01 PM
I have to disagree about the sets - I thought they looked too modern, tame and wholesome.

I love the Spanish and/or Mexican look of the sets in the Dollars trilogy, the style perfectly complements Leone's style.


I'm just talking strictly about the El Paso set the rest are great, if the time frame of the film is 1899-1901 El Paso should look more modern, Leone should have used Gaudix, Spain as the stand in.

El Paso 1900

(http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/9421/mtsinai1small.jpg)

El Paso 1900 +

(http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/191/58020921.png)


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: T.H. on March 22, 2011, 01:15:58 PM
I'm in no way an advocate for historical accuracy, so I loved the sparse look of Leone's El Paso. I don't think such a developed town would have meshed with the overall set design of the movie. It reminds me of the town from something like The Wild One or Violent Saturday.

I just think the underdeveloped, desert look perfectly suits the western - the more open space, the better. But that's just me.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 10, 2011, 04:53:18 AM
If I recall correctly, the only reason to say FAFDM takes place around 1901 is because that is when Tucumcari became a town. But if you arw willing to accept it as an anachronism, can't we very well say that FAFDM can take place shortly after the date in the El Paso newspaper (what was it, 1873)? I think the El Paso set in FAFDM was absolutely wonderful, as important as anything in the film (even if it indeed was historically inaccurate) Perhaps my favorite Western production design  :)

And I absolutely loved The Shootist  :)


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on April 10, 2011, 04:38:49 PM
No not the only reason, Tucumcari incorporated as a town, that is just one of them, the other is the railroad, there was no Railroad to El Paso until after 1885, and the railroad through Tucumcari didn't connect through to El Paso until 1901. Mortimer is wearing a tie tied in a knot that became popular after 1880. Groggy tosses El Indio a Colt SAA revolver with gutta percha grips available from Colt post 1885.

And again, Mortimer is looking for evidence of Manco, he flipping through a binder In the El Paso Newspaper Office of all the past  newspapers published by the paper, its about a 1 1/2 thick binder, he FINDS an article about Manco dated 1873 in about the MIDDLE of it that means there is about 3/4 of the binder yet to go to get to the PRESENT  day issue, ergo you'll have a good 20-25 years of newspaper issues to get to the present.

The El Paso set is fine, I like it too.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: Groggy on April 10, 2011, 04:47:10 PM
I don't think you ought to assume a literal interpretation of anything in FAFDM Joe. Going by Eastwood's age and your timeline, Manco would have been a gunslinger at age 7 for your idea to be feasible.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on April 10, 2011, 05:57:46 PM
I don't think you ought to assume a literal interpretation of anything in FAFDM Joe. Going by Eastwood's age and your timeline, Manco would have been a gunslinger at age 7 for your idea to be feasible.

Well, lets push it say he's 45 at the oldest that would put him at 17 in 1873, I guess ol' Uncle Blondie taught him pretty good, no. ;)


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: Groggy on April 10, 2011, 06:32:39 PM
Well, lets push it say he's 45 at the oldest that would put him at 17 in 1873, I guess ol' Uncle Blondie taught him pretty good, no. ;)

 ;D Fair enough.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 10, 2011, 06:47:36 PM
I don't think you ought to assume a literal interpretation of anything in FAFDM Joe. Going by Eastwood's age and your timeline, Manco would have been a gunslinger at age 7 for your idea to be feasible.

 O0

I know Leone loved historical accuracy when it came to the sets and costumes, but if I had to bet, (not basing this on any fact whatsoever), I'd guess that he wasn't particularly concerned about what year a particular railroad passed through a particular town, etc.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 10, 2011, 06:49:15 PM
No not the only reason, Tucumcari incorporated as a town, that is just one of them, the other is the railroad, there was no Railroad to El Paso until after 1885, and the railroad through Tucumcari didn't connect through to El Paso until 1901. Mortimer is wearing a tie tied in a knot that became popular after 1880. Groggy tosses El Indio a Colt SAA revolver with gutta percha grips available from Colt post 1885.

And again, Mortimer is looking for evidence of Manco, he flipping through a binder In the El Paso Newspaper Office of all the past  newspapers published by the paper, its about a 1 1/2 thick binder, he FINDS an article about Manco dated 1873 in about the MIDDLE of it that means there is about 3/4 of the binder yet to go to get to the PRESENT  day issue, ergo you'll have a good 20-25 years of newspaper issues to get to the present.

The El Paso set is fine, I like it too.

also, how do you know how often the newspaper was printed? is it possible that it was a daily paper? if so, the entire book may be from just one year's issues...?


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: Groggy on April 10, 2011, 07:08:34 PM
O0

I know Leone loved historical accuracy when it came to the sets and costumes, but if I had to bet, (not basing this on any fact whatsoever), I'd guess that he wasn't particularly concerned about what year a particular railroad passed through a particular town, etc.

Yep. I think it was Frayling who commented that Leone prefers to go for the appearance of authenticity rather than strict realism. But then that's a debate for our resident semantics experts, Jenkins and Titoli.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: stanton on April 11, 2011, 02:30:37 AM
Imo there is no reason not to think that FoF and FaFDM were set in a the typical fantasy west. In the mythical west most of the usual westerns were set. After the civil war and before the "closing" of the frontier in the early 80s.



Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on April 11, 2011, 08:01:13 AM
You can think whatever you want, its just that if you know something about when this happened or when that happened or when that style was used or when the tracks were built you can kind of nail them down to a time frame.

Quote
also, how do you know how often the newspaper was printed? is it possible that it was a daily paper? if so, the entire book may be from just one year's issues...?

If its just a year then 1873 would have no railroads, nada, in El Paso. I don't think there would be enough content for a daily paper, maybe a bi-weekly at best.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: cigar joe on April 11, 2011, 08:28:12 AM
Imo there is no reason not to think that FoF and FaFDM were set in a the typical fantasy west. In the mythical west most of the usual westerns were set. After the civil war and before the "closing" of the frontier in the early 80s.



The problem with this approach is that the trend would be to completely fantasize the West, compare the two 3:10 to Yuma films, one is pretty straight forward psychological battle, the remake uses way to many implausible things, sharpshooters at the beginning that can't hit a thing in the end, a guy gets shot point blank in the guts (in reality the bullet should have passed right through him) has that bullet removed (as if it was a mere splinter) and he's up and riding around a few hours later. A decoy locked in a stage with no key or weapons, a guy with a wooden foot sprinting  basically a sky-lighted target on roof rafters, come on.....

Mythologizing the West is good, fantasy is bad.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: Groggy on April 11, 2011, 09:11:26 AM
Nice to see we've got you back to what really matters, eg. mocking 3:10 to Yuma.

The problem is pretty self-evident. Look at the bridge battle in GBU - Leone has Napoleonic War-era mortars alongside Gatling guns and artillery dating from the 1870s. Using props to identify when a film takes place would be no help in this instance.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: Groggy on April 11, 2011, 09:21:50 AM
Anyway - this thread's about The Shootist not FAFDM.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on May 10, 2014, 11:31:37 PM
I just saw The Shootist for the second time, I give it a 7.5/10. I love the idea, seems so perfect for John Wayne to end his career with this, although I learned (courtesy of Scott Eyman's discussion prior to the movie with Robert Osborne on TCM) that this wasn't supposed to be for Wayne all along, they were originally thinking of George C. Scott; and it wasn't supposed to be Wayne's last movie, he was thinking of doing more later on but his health deteriorated and he couldn't do any more before dying 3 years later. But in a way, it's so perfect that this was Wayne's last film, this character he's been playing his whole life - his life and character have basically become one and now he has to end in a blaze of glory, just as the West is ending, he is becoming an anachronism. The Shootist basically finished off the Western genre. Whatever you wanna consider as the "golden age of the western" -  perhaps you wanna start it in 1939 with Stagecoach, or even earlier in the silent era, and maybe you wanna say it ends in late 60's or early 70's - IMO the absolute latest date you can possibly put it at is 1976 with The Shootist, say what you want, Wayne was the face of the Western more than any other single person, his death here, I think it's just a great way for him to have gone out.

I mentioned in the discussion of Gran Torino (which was supposedly gonna be the last movie Eastwood acted in, though he later did Trouble with the Curve) that the ending here reminded me of The Shootist, the legendary movie actor/character goes out in style, but really, Eastwood's character in GT was not the tough-guy character he had played all his life, whether in Westerns or Dirty Harry or other movies; but Wayne's character in TS really was an appropriate way to say goodbye. It was nice that they brought back all those other Western actors that he had co-starred with through the years.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on June 26, 2014, 02:23:44 AM
not sure if this has ever been posted before; here is a nice 2-minute clip of Eastwood talking about what happened on the set of The Shootist when Don Seigel instructed John Wayne to shoot a man in the back http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_ncnL0iejo


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: titoli on February 13, 2015, 07:36:34 PM
I saw again this one after decades.  The movie is good, but not extraordinary. Lots you've seen before. But Wayne here demonstrates again what underappreciated actor he was. There's not a single expression of his face which is not less than perfect, and so his delivery. Much was made of Cooper's acting ability, but Wayne is on the same level, actually I think he's even more natural (Cooper to me looks always a bit contrived, at least compare to wayne). This is s Oscar worthy performance, but of course only us western buffs will acknowledge it. About the Eastwood interview, he gives the impression that it was Siegel's idea to try to have him shoot in the back an opponent. But in the featurette O'Brien does explain that it was already in the novel: so Wayne must have known already before shooting began waht was expected of his character. But O'Brien confirms the Wayne's reaction as described by Eastwood. Also, in the novel it is Rick Cunnngham who kills Wayne: but the producers were appalled by the idea and changed the finale. I'll have to read the novel. 


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: stanton on February 14, 2015, 02:39:31 AM
I never assumed that Gary Cooper can act.


Title: Re: The Shootist (1976)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on February 14, 2015, 05:10:00 PM
I really don't have that much use for Gary Cooper. He was alright, nothing special. I've never watched a movie because Gary Cooper is in it.