Sergio Leone Web Board

General Information => General Discussion => Topic started by: bal162 on February 15, 2005, 05:30:58 PM



Title: John Wayne
Post by: bal162 on February 15, 2005, 05:30:58 PM
 ??? Can someone please help me?

In a 1971 interview, John Wayne referred to this movie as "distasteful.  It would have been a good picture without the gore.  Pictures go too far when they use that kind of realism." 

Does anyone know what film he was referring to?  In the same interview, he referred to "High Noon" as "un-American". 

I'm wondering if it was a Leone film - most likely not, but I'm not sure.  Thanks!


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: cigar joe on February 15, 2005, 08:04:28 PM
You know this is the third mention of this that I've seen in the last week fron three different sources, what gives?

Its The Wild Bunch, by the way?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: bal162 on February 16, 2005, 06:57:11 AM
It's a question in a movie trivia contest open to all New Jersey residents. 

Are you guessing it's "The Wild Bunch"?  It seems like that's what he would be referring to, but I can't find the interview anywhere.  Thanks for the help.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: cigar joe on February 16, 2005, 02:10:33 PM
Not guessing, somebody found it in the interview.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: KERMIT on February 16, 2005, 11:44:47 PM
when jamie sanchez finally gets his throat cut by the general after being dragged around town by a horse
in the wild bunch i wasn't differential. leone never resulted to these tactics.  his
earlier work with the rifleman american tv series was genus.
i can see how the duke would have a beef. and a camel.
i don't need to see hamberger coming out a man's back in slow motion.  i'd rather see a happy ending. like GB&U did. good for the digestion.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Alias on May 05, 2005, 11:24:20 AM
It would have been fascinating to see John Wayne in a Leone film - the logical extension of Leone's use of Ford's Monument Valley.

If it was a shock to audiences to witness Henry Fonda gunning down a young boy in OUATITW, then just think how they would have reacted to seeing Duke Wayne (or even Jimmy Stewart) as Frank?

Of course, it's almost impossible to believe that Wayne would have taken the role if he'd been offered it, or agreed to play it as written, but it's still fun to imagine...


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Poggle on May 05, 2005, 02:49:24 PM
I kind of think of John Wayne being to American actors what Leone was to Italian directors.

With all the stories of Leone, like him taking the guy's trenchcoat after he commited suicide, put Eli and Clint in danger, etc. and John Wayne with his arrogant attitude and his alchohol, they'd probably have killed eachother :(


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Marco Leone on May 07, 2005, 02:02:01 PM
I personally just find the John Wayne films unwatchable.

Give me westerns spaghetti style anytime!


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: HEX on September 20, 2005, 04:51:46 PM
THANK U MARCO LEONE!!!!!!!


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Leone Admirer on September 21, 2005, 05:53:25 AM
I've been watching alot of Wayne's Westerns at the moment and I do very much enjoy them. I must admit, apart from the Searchers, he really does just play himself (helped by the fact that almost every Western role tends to be the same type) but I must admit I do prefer Spag's. I wont say Hollywood westerns are better then the spags and vice versa because each owed a huge debt to the other (the spaghetti's towards Hollywood perhaps even more so). I love all Westerns and I do think Wayne is an apropriate American idol for the American Western, just as much as Ford, Hawks, Peckinpah, Fonda, Ladd and many more who will live on in cinematic mythology.

"When faced with truth and legend, Always print the legend"


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on September 26, 2008, 06:32:23 AM
Interesting piece on Wayne as an icon vs. Wayne as an actor:
http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/la-et-wayne26-2008sep26,0,2126871.story


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: tucumcari bound on September 26, 2008, 11:46:27 AM
Interesting piece on Wayne as an icon vs. Wayne as an actor:
http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/la-et-wayne26-2008sep26,0,2126871.story

Thank you for this link jenkins.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Jill on October 04, 2008, 03:29:44 AM
Can't stand Wayne. Boring and a man who hated our Master. Plus hated Peckinpah. Plus he was a racist...


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Cusser on October 04, 2008, 07:49:37 AM
I feel Wayne was best in Red River.  OK in a few others.  By the time Big Jake arrived, there was incorporation of some spaghetti references (gun in shower, "continuing "who are you?"  "I thought you was dead").


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Jill on October 04, 2008, 07:57:33 AM
Yes, Red River was good. Although it would be even better with a darker ending...  O0

How could he say bad about High Noon?  :(


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: tucumcari bound on October 04, 2008, 11:16:27 AM
Yes, Red River was good. Although it would be even better with a darker ending...  O0

How could he say bad about High Noon?  :(

The ending of RED RIVER never bothered me much but I do agree that a darker ending would have been great. In terms of HIGH NOON, John Wayne didn't like it's political message. Well, in his mind there was a message while others would disagree.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on October 04, 2008, 01:19:46 PM
Wayne is sometimes good, sometimes bad. It just depends on the film.

High Noon sucks. First, it is annoyingly didactic. Second, its message is patently untrue: American communities don't cave when threatened; if anything, the danger brings everyone together against the common threat. Third, as Howard Hawks rightly observed, having a law enforcement professional running around begging for help is ludicrous: such people don't want civilians getting in the way and mucking things up. Fourth, setting up a character to be a practicing Quaker and then having her repudiate her beliefs in a very crass way at the end is an insult to Quakers and thus the very height of bad taste. Fifth, we have to wait a very long time to see what little action the film contains. Sixth, having to listen to that gawdawful song all the way through the picture while waiting for what little action the film contains is reason enough to absolve anyone from ever having to watch the damned thing again. Seventh, who let Grandpa Coop out of the home?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Silenzio on October 04, 2008, 05:24:59 PM
Woah, I was about to post a response to Dave's post, and I turned on the TV, and High Noon was on.  Crazy, man.


Anyway, Grace Kelly is hot, and so is whoever plays that Ramirez chick.


Anyway, I see where DJ is coming from (except I like the song!).  I don't remember the the thing about the Quaker, I guess I'll see here now that it's on tv, but if it's like DJ says that is pretty tasteless.


Anyhow, I think that the plusses of High Noon outweigh its minuses.  I like a lot of things about the film, like Cooper's character, the way it unfolds in real time, the bleak black and white cinematography, Grace Kelly, and I also think that the action at the end is satisfactory.  Even if it's not a lot of action, it's the way it builds up that makes the action great. 

I'm luckily at a point in my life where I can overlook lack of realism or logic in favor of the so-called "artistic value."  Maybe when I'm an ol' fart at play like DJ, I'll hate the Searchers and High Noon just as much as he does, but for now I'm happy saying their great films, and even fairly radical for their time.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on October 04, 2008, 05:42:52 PM
Woah, I was about to post a response to Dave's post, and I turned on the TV, and High Noon was on.  Crazy, man.
Anyway, Grace Kelly is hot, and so is whoever plays that Ramirez chick.
Katy Jurado.

Btw, just because I think it's an awful film (awful because of its dishonesty), that doesn't blind me to its many good points. Yeah, I'm a Grace Kelly fan myself. HN has excellent cinematography and  mise-en-scene; it's use of montage to build suspense is all Hitchcock or anyone else could demand of it. At a formal level, HN is a very well-crafted work.

But craftsmanship is never enough; the vision underpinning a work has to be worthy of its decorative overlays. A field of sequins may look very nice, but if all it does is surround a gilded turd, all that artistry goes for nothing.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Jill on October 05, 2008, 03:18:28 AM
I like High Noon, but the duel at the end is lame. And I'd like Gary Cooper dying, too, but I'm evil. I like when the good guy dies.  ;)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Silenzio on October 05, 2008, 10:42:34 AM
Katy Jurado.

Btw, just because I think it's an awful film (awful because of its dishonesty), that doesn't blind me to its many good points. Yeah, I'm a Grace Kelly fan myself. HN has excellent cinematography and  mise-en-scene; it's use of montage to build suspense is all Hitchcock or anyone else could demand of it. At a formal level, HN is a very well-crafted work.

But craftsmanship is never enough; the vision underpinning a work has to be worthy of its decorative overlays. A field of sequins may look very nice, but if all it does is surround a gilded turd, all that artistry goes for nothing.

Good point, and I'm sure you'll be happy to know that I looked up the word "didactic" to understand your argument better.

But I think i'll once again have to disagree with you on what is being "gilded."  You may think it's a turd, but I still think it's something great.  The cornerstone of the film is not the cowardice of the townspeople, but the bravery of the Sheriff.  I don't think the film is criticizing American society, but rather emphasizing the good aspects of Kane, willing to do what's right when the odds are against him.  I mean, it's commendable that this film builds up so much suspense and tension, even though everyone knows who is going to live and who is going to die in the end.  Same goes for the comparable and beautifully shot western 3:10 to Yuma. 

But still, I understand why you don't like this film.  I can see why you think it's preachy and the like, but I'll just have to disagree, I think it's a good message and even though you know from the beginning how it's going to end, it's exhilarating when you see the good guy pull through (and this is the reason that the remake of 3:10 to Yuma had an absolutely shit ending).


And finally, I have to ask, what did you think of Rio Bravo?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on October 05, 2008, 12:01:13 PM
I think we covered that in another thread. It's very hit-and-miss. I like the scene where Dean-o chases the wounded man into the saloon and is tipped to his location by the blood that has dripped on the bartop--great, great moviemaking. But Ricky Nelson singing his song? No thanks. Walter Brennan? In every scene he's in, I wish someone would wail on him with a tire iron. Brennan can be great--he's an amazing Prince of Darkness in My Darling Clementine--but I really hate his folksy side-kick routine. Angie Dickinson? I love her in other movies--Don Siegel's The Killers, Boorman's Point Blank--but here she's all wrong. The Duke himself? A creditable performance, but not one of his most memorable. When it shows up on TV I always watch a scene or two, but rarely sit through the whole thing.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on October 19, 2010, 11:38:43 AM
Worth reading: http://blog.moviefone.com/2010/10/15/john-wayne-actors-we-miss/


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on October 20, 2010, 09:24:07 AM
Thanks Jenkins. O0


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on December 09, 2010, 01:45:27 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!  O0

http://www.cinemaretro.com/index.php?/archives/5218-JOHN-WAYNE-MONOPOLY-GAME-IS-HERE!.html


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Dust Devil on December 09, 2010, 01:54:17 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!  O0

http://www.cinemaretro.com/index.php?/archives/5218-JOHN-WAYNE-MONOPOLY-GAME-IS-HERE!.html

I wonder what's the most costly location on the map?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on December 09, 2010, 04:25:12 PM
Alamo Way perhaps?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Dust Devil on December 10, 2010, 03:05:10 AM
Or Monument Valley?

We just have to wait a couple of days, I bet he bought it already.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on December 10, 2010, 01:35:14 PM
Nah. But I might be giving it as a Christmas gift . . .


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: The Firecracker on December 11, 2010, 01:32:23 AM
I think we covered that in another thread. It's very hit-and-miss. I like the scene where Dean-o chases the wounded man into the saloon and is tipped to his location by the blood that has dripped on the bartop--great, great moviemaking. But Ricky Nelson singing his song? No thanks. Walter Brennan? In every scene he's in, I wish someone would wail on him with a tire iron. Brennan can be great--he's an amazing Prince of Darkness in My Darling Clementine--but I really hate his folksy side-kick routine. Angie Dickinson? I love her in other movies--Don Siegel's The Killers, Boorman's Point Blank--but here she's all wrong. The Duke himself? A creditable performance, but not one of his most memorable. When it shows up on TV I always watch a scene or two, but rarely sit through the whole thing.

All good points but I still like it.
The major dilemma for me is the soundtrack.
It undermines the whole movie.
Take the scene where Wayne and Martin are doing security work while walking on each end of the street.
It's supposed to be a pretty tense scene and I seem to recall the soundtrack being lighthearted and wonky.

Anyway, as far as the "trilogy" goes my favorite is El Dorado because I prefer Mitchum in the Dean Martin role and James Caan in the Ricky Nelson role.
Also, we get outta the town for a little bit so it feels a bit more cinematic.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Dust Devil on December 11, 2010, 01:53:58 AM
Nah. But I might be giving it as a Christmas gift . . .

You want my address right away?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on December 11, 2010, 07:01:01 AM
Depends. This year, have you been naughty or nice?


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on December 11, 2010, 07:03:00 AM
Anyway, as far as the "trilogy" goes my favorite is El Dorado because I prefer Mitchum in the Dean Martin role and James Caan in the Ricky Nelson role.
Also, we get outta the town for a little bit so it feels a bit more cinematic.
Well, we agree on this. My major complaint on all these films is that they are too town-bound.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Dust Devil on December 11, 2010, 10:58:24 AM
Depends. This year, have you been naughty or nice?

Demon to some, angel to others.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: The Firecracker on December 15, 2010, 12:26:49 AM
Well, we agree on this. My major complaint on all these films is that they are too town-bound.

I'd have to watch Rio Lobo again as I don't seem to recall much town action in that but that film has other problems...


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on December 15, 2010, 05:56:53 AM
Rio Lobo has a pretty expansive plot and doesn't revert to the Rio Bravo storyline until the end. Of course, this is rendered moot by the fact that it stinks.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on January 31, 2011, 12:50:31 AM
the opening sequences in Rio Lobo  are fantastic, but overall, it is not a very good movie.

RE: John Wayne: I think he was great. Some people do not like his politics, but I do not focus on that stuff when judging an actor.
 True, he generally plays "himself" in movies, but so what? That's what we want to see! In many of Steve McQueen's big movies, he generally only played "himself" too and that's why we loved him.

I prefer Leone's movies to any Hollywood Western, but Wayne was great, and made some incredible movies. Rio Bravo is my favorite Hollywood Western. Stagecoach was great too, and I really liked Fort Apache and Red River as well.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: tintin on April 14, 2011, 08:32:15 PM
In the Playboy  interview, even Wayne admitted he did about 50 movies, "thirty of them, stinkers". A lot  he also admitted were stereotypical horse operas. He especially  hated having to sing--Gene Autry, that "singing hillbilly" as Wayne called him, was dubbed in. He was doing some P/R for the movie and was outfitted with a guitar. He was highly embarrassed by  being asked by kids to "sing". Also in the interview, he resented "The Wild Bunch" 's violence-the "chicken livers thrown by special effects men", etc. Yet, in "Big Jake", written by the Fink Brothers, who also wrote "Dirty Harry", we see an awful lot of gore for a Wayne movie. Perhaps the most.  He also made a racist remark in the interview he could never live down even though he later apologized.

  I  usually agree--I like an actor/actress for their Work;  I try not to let their personal life/politics color my judgment. Like, who Cares if George Takei is flaming gay?-  At   least, he doesn't act that way on screen, like Robert Vaughn in "The Magnificent Seven" (I Hate Him!)

  I loved a  lot  of  Wayne's  movies, but he acted  so childish in some, like "Liberty Vallance". Poor baby can't get the girl, so he gets drunk and burns his hacienda.  Jimmy Stewart was the true hero of that one.  Wayne could almost have been written out--except for the immortal line: "Pil-grim!".   I often wondered if he had a small mental problem, being the character he was made to act as.  I enjoyed him better when he was later portrayed as more human--like in "Big Jake"; when he  actually admits to being scared, and his eyes get big when his gun clicks empty. He also  grudgingly admits to the advantages of 20th-century technology-- after all,  Chris Mitchum's scope  rifle and automatic pistol saved his life.  My biggest beef is, as always, is his Historical  in-accuracy (not really Wayne's fault) .Accuracy was started by Leone. I resent seeing the Duke carrying an 1892 Winchester around in every movie--even when it's supposed to be 1862 Mexico...   Leone's influence colors modern Westerns to this day: "Silverado", "Tombstone", etc. The weapons and clothes are vintage; 1873 Winchesters and tall, Montana peak hats. I see in old photos where about half the cow hands seem to be wearing four-fluted, sombrero-like,  flat-brim hats that look Exactly like the later Army Campaign hat. Anyone who lives in the South West prefers a big, flat brim--the sun is brutal. NOT a small curled-brim--these are a much more modern style, preferred in the North to let rain run off quickly. Impractical in the SW.

He had to play a drunk in "True Grit"  to get his only Oscar--he probably would have gotten a lifetime achievement anyway. Come to think of it,  Lee Marvin had to play a drunk in "Cat Ballou" to get his--but, He could Sing... ::)

I think I enjoy  Wayne's work better when it is based on a book than a screenplay written especially for him.

One advantage Wayne had over Leone--Location. Even Leone couldn't import a vintage American 4-4-0 Steamer...he was forced to use European trains in Spanish locale.  I personally try to ignore the obvious chain-and-buffer locomotives and concentrate on the rest of the movie.  At least Leone got a vintage Harley in "Duck, You Sucker" , rather than  try to pass an obvious  Yamaha 400 as in Wayne's "Big Jake". Ring-ding-ding... ::)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Richard--W on November 26, 2011, 08:17:17 PM
I miss John Wayne at the movies. His films, and especially his westerns, were entertaining and reassuring. I respect him personally and I admire his talent as an actor. I think he was a brilliant actor, so brilliant we hardly notice how hard he's working. I don't agree with his strictly conservative politics, and I shake my head at some serious errors of judgment he made in the 1950s. But I also know there was a change in his politics as he got older, and that his politics were tempered with a tolerance and forgiveness for others that the other side did not reciprocate. I wish he had taken risks in his choices. I wish he had accepted both Dirty Harry and Lonesome Dove. His inner decency and moral presence would have invested the former character with a dimension and conflict that is sorely missing from the film. The film has no heart, and John Wayne would have given it one.  I particularly like his performance in McQ (1974), an average cop film that nobody looks at very closely, or they'd notice that it's distinguished by a performance that is meticulous, layered and busy, and yet so small in the size of expression. It is a subtle performance but deeply felt. The character of Lon McQ is betrayed by his friends and colleagues, and even by his ex-wife. The institutions he has always put his faith in are exposed as corrupt. That scene where he has to go to his ex-wife and her rich husband to borrow money is interesting because of what Wayne conveys. He's not asking for himself, but it costs him to ask, and he tries not to show his surprise when they agree.  But perhaps the weariness and sadness in Wayne's Lon McQ, and the restraint, isn't just acting.

Wayne is sometimes good, sometimes bad. It just depends on the film.

High Noon sucks. First, it is annoyingly didactic. Second, its message is patently untrue: American communities don't cave when threatened; if anything, the danger brings everyone together against the common threat. Third, as Howard Hawks rightly observed, having a law enforcement professional running around begging for help is ludicrous: such people don't want civilians getting in the way and mucking things up. Fourth, setting up a character to be a practicing Quaker and then having her repudiate her beliefs in a very crass way at the end is an insult to Quakers and thus the very height of bad taste. Fifth, we have to wait a very long time to see what little action the film contains. Sixth, having to listen to that gawdawful song all the way through the picture while waiting for what little action the film contains is reason enough to absolve anyone from ever having to watch the damned thing again. Seventh, who let Grandpa Coop out of the home?

Woah, I was about to post a response to Dave's post, and I turned on the TV, and High Noon was on.  Crazy, man.

...Anyway, I see where DJ is coming from (except I like the song!).  I don't remember the the thing about the Quaker, I guess I'll see here now that it's on tv, but if it's like DJ says that is pretty tasteless.


Anyhow, I think that the plusses of High Noon outweigh its minuses.  I like a lot of things about the film, like Cooper's character, the way it unfolds in real time, the bleak black and white cinematography, Grace Kelly, and I also think that the action at the end is satisfactory.  Even if it's not a lot of action, it's the way it builds up that makes the action great.  ...


...But I think i'll once again have to disagree with you on what is being "gilded."  You may think it's a turd, but I still think it's something great.  The cornerstone of the film is not the cowardice of the townspeople, but the bravery of the Sheriff.  I don't think the film is criticizing American society, but rather emphasizing the good aspects of Kane, willing to do what's right when the odds are against him.  I mean, it's commendable that this film builds up so much suspense and tension, even though everyone knows who is going to live and who is going to die in the end.  Same goes for the comparable and beautifully shot western 3:10 to Yuma.  

But still, I understand why you don't like this film.  I can see why you think it's preachy and the like, but I'll just have to disagree, I think it's a good message and even though you know from the beginning how it's going to end, it's exhilarating when you see the good guy pull through (and this is the reason that the remake of 3:10 to Yuma had an absolutely shit ending).

There have been many instances when the public in a group turned its back on a crime being committed. It happens all the time, in fact. There have been actual events in the American west that parallel the situation in High Noon. But even if that were not the case, I dig the song, I love watching Grace Kelly and Katy Jurado, I think Lon Chaney Jr should have been nominated for his supporting role which he plays with great feeling, Gary Cooper is a hero I want to be like when I grow up, and the film is a masterpiece of structure and editing. So far as I'm concerned it's an outstanding western flaws and all.

Richard


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on November 26, 2011, 08:35:05 PM


There have been many instances when the public in a group turned its back on a crime being committed. It happens all the time, in fact. There have been actual events in the American west that parallel the situation in High Noon. But even if that were not the case, I dig the song, I love watching Grace Kelly and Katy Jurado, I think Lon Chaney Jr should have been nominated for his supporting role which he plays with great feeling, Gary Cooper is a hero I want to be like when I grow up, and the film is masterpiece of structure and editing. So far as I'm concerned it's an outstanding western flaws and all.

Richard

RE: High NOon: You may like the performances and the song, but IMO the story is dumb and I did not like the movie. It's basically just the marshal walking around and around and around for the whole movie till the end. It drags on and is boring. After watching Leone movies and reading about his influences, I decided to watch High Noon cuz of how much I'd heard about it as a Leone influence. (At this point, I had seen many of Leone's films but no AW's yet; I believe this was the first AW I saw after having seen Leone's movies and read all about his influences in Frayling's). So my point is that I was just watching it from a simplistic point of view of whether this was a movie I could enjoy, I was not in any way focusing (or even aware of) any deeper message RE: American civilization or the Hollywood blacklist or whatever. And I did not enjoy the movie, plain and simple.

Similarly, a while later I watched Rio Bravo, not being aware of any "deeper meanings" of it being a response to High Noon or whatever. Again, just watching from a very simplistic point of view: do I enjoy this movie? And I absolutely loved it. Without being in any way aware of any deeper meanings behind them, I was, separately, very disappointed by High Noon and I loved Rio Bravo.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on November 26, 2011, 08:37:15 PM
High Noon is a Stanley Kramer production so you can expect a rigged drama with an obnoxious message. Trouble is, the movie can't figure out what that message is. Sure it's well-made, but craftsmanship only counts for so much.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Richard--W on November 26, 2011, 09:15:29 PM
High Noon is 100% successful as a suspense film and as a western.
The script is strong and smart and the direction is perfect.
It's a story well told.
I enjoy the hell out of the film, and I think highly of it no matter what anyone says.


Richard


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on November 26, 2011, 09:23:32 PM
High Noon is 100% successful as a suspense film and as a western.
The script is strong and smart and the direction is perfect.
It's a story well told.
I enjoy the hell out of the film, and I think highly of it no matter what anyone says.


Richard

your opinion should certainly not be affected by what anyone else says  :)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on November 26, 2011, 09:30:04 PM
Interestingly the local FYE had the John Wayne-John Ford box set on sale for $19.99 (vs. a list price of $59.99). :o Something to keep an eye out for.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Richard--W on November 26, 2011, 09:31:50 PM
Let me put it to you this way:

I've read on this board that Sergio Leone liked High Noon and that the film influenced him.

If it's good enough for Sergio Leone, it's good enough for me.

Further, if Sergio Leone had met with John Wayne and talked about doing a film together, I'll bet their minds would have met, because they were both astute men and artists, and that's a film I would drive through red lights to see.


Richard


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on November 26, 2011, 09:39:34 PM
Let me put it to you this way:

I've read on this board that Sergio Leone liked High Noon and that the film influenced him.

If it's good enough for Sergio Leone, it's good enough for me.

Further, if Sergio Leone had met with John Wayne and talked about doing a film together, I'll bet their minds would have met, because they were both astute men and artists, and that's a film I would drive through red lights to see.


Richard


yeah, High Noon was definitely a big influence on Leone, and I think Leone was the greatest filmmaker ever and nobody else is even close. but that doesn't mean I have to like High Noon  :)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on November 26, 2011, 09:40:19 PM
Interestingly the local FYE had the John Wayne-John Ford box set on sale for $19.99 (vs. a list price of $59.99). :o Something to keep an eye out for.

too bad your birthday just passed  :P


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Richard--W on November 26, 2011, 10:09:06 PM
Nobody says you have to like High Noon.
Go ahead and dislike it if you want to.
I just won't be told it's a bad film or a bad western when I know better.


Richard


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: stanton on November 27, 2011, 03:26:08 AM
I don't care for the content in High Noon, which surely is there. For me it is basically a typical western story done with a lot of style and bravura. What I don't like that much is that some of the dialogues and confrontations between Coper and his former friends are a bit artificial. Here the message takes over, and these are the scenes Zinneman could have learned from Hawks. But Rio Bravo is also not without flaws.


Well, I like both films very much.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on November 27, 2011, 08:12:52 AM
Nobody's saying anything you ought to be defensive about Dick. Apparently you just have a hard time accepting that other people have different opinions from you.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: stanton on November 27, 2011, 09:08:05 AM
Ouch


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 17, 2014, 06:17:22 AM
At 8:00 PM EST on Monday, April 21, 2014, TCM will begin showing John Wayne movies.... and it will continue showing nothing but John Wayne movies until 10:15 AM Saturday morning.... 110 hours and 15 minutes of the Duke; schedule here http://www.tcm.com/schedule/index.html?tz=CST&sdate=2014-04-21


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Cusser on April 22, 2014, 08:48:25 PM
I saw the short about Gouldings Lodge and the Monument Valley area shown between Stagecoach and Liberty Valance (which I didn't watch, but have seen numerous times, including Liberty Valance as first run).  As I've been to that part of Monument Valley (near the arch from Once-West) and to Moab, I have stopped at Gouldings; they have a souvenir shop, none of the books even mention the Leone film in their lists of MV locations in films.

While the scenery there is classic, and nice, it would be extremely tough to eke out a living there: very barren, like it looks. 


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 23, 2014, 02:59:39 PM
I saw the short about Gouldings Lodge and the Monument Valley area shown between Stagecoach and Liberty Valance (which I didn't watch, but have seen numerous times, including Liberty Valance as first run).  As I've been to that part of Monument Valley (near the arch from Once-West) and to Moab, I have stopped at Gouldings; they have a souvenir shop, none of the books even mention the Leone film in their lists of MV locations in films.

While the scenery there is classic, and nice, it would be extremely tough to eke out a living there: very barren, like it looks. 

I didn't know about that piece, it's a shame, I would have recorded it and watched it. If you can find it on YouTube, I'd be obliged  O0


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 23, 2014, 03:07:16 PM
The TCM John Wayne marathon is now showing How the West Was Won. At 8 PM tonite, it will turn away from the Westerns for 24 hours, and show nothing but Wayne's war movies until 8 PM tomorrow. I've never seen any of Wayne's war movies yet other than The Green Berets - but I can't record everything, so I have my DVR set to to record They Were Expendable and Flying Leathernecks cuz I know those are famous ones.
 If anyone can recommend any other good ones from the following list, I'd appreciate it:
Back to Bataan
Operation Pacific
Fighting Seabees
Reunion in France
Flying Tigers
The Sea Chase
Cast a Giant Shadow
Blood Alley


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: cigar joe on April 23, 2014, 04:10:04 PM
I saw Flying Tigers & Back to Bataan ages ago, they were OK.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Groggy on April 23, 2014, 05:27:34 PM
The TCM John Wayne marathon is now showing How the West Was Won. At 8 PM tonite, it will turn away from the Westerns for 24 hours, and show nothing but Wayne's war movies until 8 PM tomorrow. I've never seen any of Wayne's war movies yet other than The Green Berets - but I can't record everything, so I have my DVR set to to record They Were Expendable and Flying Leathernecks cuz I know those are famous ones.
 If anyone can recommend any other good ones from the following list, I'd appreciate it:
Back to Bataan
Operation Pacific
Fighting Seabees
Reunion in France
Flying Tigers
The Sea Chase
Cast a Giant Shadow
Blood Alley

Well, Operation Pacific is mediocre. Back to Bataan is watchable. Cast a Giant Shadow is boring. The Sea Chase is terrible. Haven't seen the rest.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 23, 2014, 08:28:12 PM
Well, Operation Pacific is mediocre. Back to Bataan is watchable. Cast a Giant Shadow is boring. The Sea Chase is terrible. Haven't seen the rest.

Thanks. In other words, you're saying it was a good idea that I only set my DVR to record Flying Leathernecks and They Were Expendable  ;)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: dave jenkins on June 29, 2014, 11:21:13 AM
Even with the turkeys in this set, this is a great deal: http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=14358


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: Cusser on June 29, 2014, 08:47:40 PM
The TCM John Wayne marathon is now showing How the West Was Won.


I think Eli Wallach and Lee Van Cleef both have bigger parts in this than does Wayne.

I saw this on first release in Cinerama in downtown Pittsburgh.  We may have bought the little souvenir book, but that was gone decades ago.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: titoli on June 30, 2014, 03:06:05 AM


I saw this on first release in Cinerama in downtown Pittsburgh.  We may have bought the little souvenir book, but that was gone decades ago.

The souvenir book was square and not so little, about as big as a PC screen. But I was very young then so I may be wrong about size.


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: rexlic on June 30, 2014, 12:15:58 PM
The souvenir book was square and not so little, about as big as a PC screen. But I was very young then so I may be wrong about size.

Standard 8.5 x 11 magazine size.
(http://dukefanclub.weebly.com/uploads/1/0/9/9/10994017/4767381_orig.jpg?130)


Title: Re: John Wayne
Post by: titoli on July 01, 2014, 01:24:51 AM
No, probably we're referring to different items. The one distributed over here (a pressbook?) was square, not rectangular.