Sergio Leone Web Board

Films of Sergio Leone => Other Films => Topic started by: Guerrilla on June 10, 2006, 03:50:31 AM



Title: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on June 10, 2006, 03:50:31 AM
(http://im.lide.cz/photo/big/33/8461133-2394112.jpg)


(http://pbfiles.t35.com/seraphim/seraphim-set011.jpg)


(http://pbfiles.t35.com/seraphim/seraphim-set016.jpg)

the upcoming western !!!!


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on June 10, 2006, 04:06:19 AM
Do you know anything else about it?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tim on June 10, 2006, 04:03:58 PM
  This movie came up this spring on the board at some point.  Brosnan and Neeson play soldiers from the Union and Confederacy following the Civil War.  If I remember right, one is hunting the other one down so he can kill him.

  It sounds interesting, and the two leads should be pretty good.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on June 10, 2006, 04:47:34 PM
 Brosnan and Neeson play soldiers from the Union and Confederacy following the Civil War.  If I remember right, one is hunting the other one down so he can kill him.

 

so its like "the undefeated" with John Wayne?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tim on June 15, 2006, 11:40:17 AM
  I don't know about The Undefeated cause in that one Duke and Rock were fairly friendly after the initial awkwardness of Billy Yank and Johnny Reb.

  It sounds like Serafim Falls is more of a revenge movie, where Undefeated had the Duke and Rock Hudson teaming up against the Juaristas and the French.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on June 19, 2006, 11:00:13 AM
(http://im.lide.cz/photo/big/33/8461133-2394112.jpg)

PIERCE BROSNAN and LIAM NEESON star in Seraphim Falls – An epic action thriller set against the backdrop of the American Civil War.

Directed by David Von Ancken (The Shield, CSI) Seraphim Falls is a visceral study of revenge and a bloody account of the aftermath of war. Combining the raw brutality of FIRST BLOOD with the mesmerizing savage beauty of COLD MOUNTAIN, this is a film that will leave audiences gasping, and on the edge of their seats.

It’s been five years since the end of the American Civil War. Somewhere deep within the snowy mountains of the American West a lone figure - Gideon (PIERCE BROSNAN) sits in front of a fire, lost in thought. Abruptly, he is pulled out of his reverie by the echo of a Henry rifle and a bullet puffing into the snow inches from his head.

With no time to react another shot rings out.  It connects with Gideon’s shoulder and whips him to the ground.  Instantly Gideon calculates his one chance of survival.  To leave everything he owns and run for the cover of the nearby fir trees – his blood leaving a crimson trail in the snow…

So begins the thrilling first act of SERAPHIM FALLS, and the final stage of Colonel Morsman Carver’s (LIAM NEESON) terrible revenge - to hunt down and kill Gideon, no matter what it takes.  There will be many men dead before these two meet face to face, and only then will Carver fully comprehend the full cost of his undertaking.

Launched by a gunshot and propelled by rage, the relentless pursuit will take them both far from the comforts and codes of civilization and into the unforgiving wilderness.  The emotional conclusion to this odyssey comes after a bloody climax in which both men are forced to confront their past and travel deep within the recesses of their souls.

SERAPHIM FALLS - a taut action film, an epic chase and primal battle set in the mythic landscape of the West.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on June 19, 2006, 12:38:09 PM
so when is this due?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Amaze on June 19, 2006, 01:01:00 PM
rumors about october


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on October 02, 2006, 06:05:12 AM
(http://www.variety.com/graphics/photos/reviews/rseraphimfalls02.jpg)

Pierce Brosnan in Seraphim Falls.

"a Civil War-era adversary is played out across a magnificent backdrop ranging from snow-packed mountains to the lifeless desert floor"


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tim on October 02, 2006, 09:09:58 AM
  I've been looking forward to this one since I first heard about it last winter.  The official website says it is in post-production, so why is there no trailer available?  With no publicity whatsoever, feels like this is one I'm going to have to discover once it hits dvd.

  Great shot though, Guerilla.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on October 04, 2006, 02:21:22 PM
Yeah,im lookin for a trailer too,but... :(( still nothink.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on October 07, 2006, 12:17:44 PM
I finad a new shit. this snapshot  i take...looks hell good  ;D

(http://c.foto.radikal.ru/0610/bb64ead2fa43.jpg)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on December 14, 2006, 02:39:54 PM
 ;)

http://outnow.ch/Media/Img/2006/SeraphimFalls/

(http://media.outnow.ch/Movies/Images/2006/SeraphimFalls/movie.fs/03.jpg)


RELISE DATE :  JANUARY 26TH 2007


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Amaze on December 14, 2006, 04:57:10 PM
they dont allow hotlinking it seems. download the photo and put it somewhere else.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Guerrilla on December 21, 2006, 11:40:22 AM
 :o :o :o :o

http://www.hollywood.com/content/trailer_detail_step1.aspx?id=3599118&FromPlayerPage=clicked

Looks f****n  great !!! Watch it !


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on December 21, 2006, 12:38:57 PM
Yeah saw it in the previews for "Apocalypto". It looked pretty good. It's gonna be released in the first month of 2007 right?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Leone Admirer on December 21, 2006, 01:34:02 PM
This was at the LFF, recieved mixed reviews, mainly to the negative both in the UK papers and in Variety


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Amaze on December 22, 2006, 04:42:39 AM
thanks for the link.

I've seen two reviews so far, none positive. but we can always hope.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on December 22, 2006, 04:59:59 AM
looks good, but I guess we'll see,  ;)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: grandpa_chum on December 23, 2006, 06:00:43 AM
looks amazing... reading through the forums somebody mentioned it reminded them of the outlaw josey wales... i have to agree.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Cusser on February 11, 2007, 07:40:44 PM
I saw this film last night, was pretty good.  Lots better than last year's "Proposition".


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on February 11, 2007, 07:42:34 PM
I saw this film last night, was pretty good.  Lots better than last year's "Proposition".


I would love to see this. Maybe I'll pop by the theatres tomorrow.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on February 11, 2007, 11:24:53 PM
I wanna see this movie also, but it's not playing anywhere near here.  >:(


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on June 03, 2007, 09:26:55 AM
Got this on Netflix, and watched it last night.

Its ok and it has great cinematography of beautiful scenery, but it was definitely lacking in a few areas, that I'll comment on as I think about the film over the next few days.  It had some symbolic elements but they lacked emphasis and the score though passable didn't help. Another quick thought no Western town to balance the wilderness aspect though it did have a wagon train camp and a railroad hell on wheels end of track sort of set that was wasted.

later with more.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 03, 2007, 01:29:56 PM
There was so much I loved about this movie, but it definitely lacked in some areas. As you mentioned cigar, the cinematograhy and scenery were beautiful. They really succeded in this area. The first half hour of this film was riveting. Some of the best chase sequences I've seen in a long time.

My biggest gripe about the film is the way they handled the flash back sequences. I do not like how they revealed what happened in Seraphim Falls. It just seemed rushed to me. The whole movie you're thinking about what possibly could of happened there to piss off Carver (Liam Neeson). They have you thinking what Gideon (Pierce Brosnan) did was horrific. Yes, what happened was bad, but not as bad as how Carver was acting. This sequence took away from this otherwise powerful, and revengeful tale.

Overall, I loved the movie though, but it's not the classic it could have been. So many missed opportunities.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on June 03, 2007, 05:58:42 PM
I agree, it even had some surrealistic elements to boot, but the whole just didn't add up.

More later.....


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 03, 2007, 06:08:03 PM
I agree, it even had some surrealistic elements to boot, but the whole just didn't add up.

More later.....

I can't wait buddy.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 03, 2007, 08:41:41 PM
Is this flick even worth 1 viewing? I passed on this the other night, to rent Hannibal Rising(I know, don't laugh, I had to see how bad it was for myself). I've become gunshy with new movies, they're getting so bad.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on June 03, 2007, 09:45:41 PM
Its worth a viewing, it helps to be able to analize what is the missing ingredient and what could have been done better. Last years "The Proposition" almost got there I think just the fact that it was Aussie based (and the score wasn't all that strong in my opinion, sorry Nick Cave fans) kinda makes it its own sub catagory.

Liam Neeson is somewhat believable in character, Brosnan a bit less so, it needed more "Western" color more Western sidekick type of supporting cast nobody stood out not even the mains, the cast as a whole just blends into the scenery, a good Western town set with at least a saloon and piano is almost a required touchstone for a Western. But it was very strong on Western landscape the other touchstone I'll give it that. The score combined with the actors lines just didn't reach that "Iconic" level we wish it would reach.

You are spot on about the use of the flashback sequence and I'll add that the Angelica Huston scene was flat also.

Maybe all I/we want are good well made modern Leone clones. lol


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 03, 2007, 10:33:54 PM


Maybe all I/we want are good well made modern Leone clones. lol
   We have become spoiled! Hold our heads down in shame. Not bloody likely! :D


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 04, 2007, 12:02:47 AM
   We have become spoiled! Hold our heads down in shame. Not bloody likely! :D

Yeah, we've definitely been spoiled. Seraphim Falls none the less is a pretty good flick so check it out.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 04, 2007, 04:59:48 PM
Yeah, we've definitely been spoiled. Seraphim Falls none the less is a pretty good flick so check it out.
  Will do, Good Buddy! O0


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 04, 2007, 05:08:46 PM
  Will do, Good Buddy! O0

Let me know what you think.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on June 04, 2007, 05:23:15 PM
Also check out "Renegade/Blueberry" and "The Proposition" all worthy efforts.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 04, 2007, 05:26:41 PM
Also check out "Renegade/Blueberry" and "The Proposition" all worthy efforts.
  Saw Proposition. Too slow paced, didn't care for it. :'(


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 04, 2007, 06:15:10 PM
  Saw Proposition. Too slow paced, didn't care for it. :'(

The Proposition was a beauty to look at boy. I'm surprised you guy's don't like it as much as I did. It kind of reminded me of something Terrence Malick would of directed.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 04, 2007, 06:22:12 PM
The Proposition was a beauty to look at boy. I'm surprised you guy's don't like it as much as I did. It kind of reminded me of something Terrence Malick would of directed.
  It was propped up to much by critics as a return of the SW. Not even close IMO!


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 04, 2007, 07:58:11 PM
  It was propped up to much by critics as a return of the SW. Not even close IMO!

Well I agree with you there. It didn't have that spaghetti western feel. It was more Peckinpah than Leone in my opinion.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Man with no dame on June 04, 2007, 08:10:16 PM
Well I agree with you there. It didn't have that spaghetti western feel. It was more Peckinpah than Leone in my opinion.
And not good Peckinpah either!


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 04, 2007, 08:28:29 PM
And not good Peckinpah either!

I just mentioned Peckinpah because of the extreme violence. Peckinpah built upon Leone and took violence to the next level as you know.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: moviesceleton on June 06, 2007, 08:27:18 AM
F***! There is no region 2 DVD :'(.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on June 06, 2007, 11:11:47 AM
Quote
F***! There is no region 2 DVD

I watched it again last night, its not worth a buy, nothing really memorable, I can see why it got a limited release.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: moviesceleton on June 06, 2007, 11:20:57 AM
I watched it again last night, its not worth a buy, nothing really memorable, I can see why it got a limited release.
That's kinda good news... I guess ::)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 06, 2007, 11:31:37 AM
I watched it again last night, its not worth a buy, nothing really memorable, I can see why it got a limited release.

See, I disagree. I think it's a worthy buy, especially if you're a western fan. The first half hour are worth the price alone.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: moviesceleton on June 06, 2007, 11:34:53 AM
I'll just hope it will be on TV in the future.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: KevinJCBJK on July 11, 2007, 11:50:10 PM
Another film I rented from the library. I thought it was good, I never thought Kevin O'Connel would be in a western after portraying Bennie in The Mummy. He talked so damn slow!

I thought the ending was rather bizzare, not fond of it. I am pretty sure both of those guys must have died soon after that. Still nice seeing Liam and Pierce do a film together!


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on July 12, 2007, 02:52:34 PM
Another film I rented from the library. I thought it was good, I never thought Kevin O'Connel would be in a western after portraying Bennie in The Mummy. He talked so damn slow!

I thought the ending was rather bizzare, not fond of it. I am pretty sure both of those guys must have died soon after that. Still nice seeing Liam and Pierce do a film together!

Both Liam and Pierce were great in this, particularly Pierce. I thought he was brilliant. I'm not even a fan of Pierce so what does that tell you. He really surprised me here.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: lovelyrita on July 21, 2007, 10:08:36 PM
See, I disagree. I think it's a worthy buy, especially if you're a western fan. The first half hour are worth the price alone.

I too thought it was a good film. I am a Liam Neeson fan and I am rarely disappointed by any of his performances and this was no exception, who surprised me was Pierce Brosdan. I haven't seen many of his films. But I dare say I haven't seen him in something of this caliber and he was very good. My only complaint was it dragged abit. But all in all I enjoyed it.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: KevinJCBJK on July 25, 2007, 11:32:00 PM
yeah, after James Bond you wonder if Pierce is good in any other films. I liked him in this film, and also in this one film called Evleyn.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Noodles_SlowStir on August 10, 2007, 09:33:18 AM
I was able to obtain a copy of this one a couple of weeks ago.  Also The Proposition.  I found I liked Seraphim Falls better of the two.  Guess that puts me in the minority.  I understand some of the reaction towards SF.  I don't think it tries to be an iconic Western by any means.  I think I understand why the director excluded some of the typical fare like depiction of old western towns and so forth.  I think what he was attempting to do was create a psychological character study of the two main characters by defining them against  the landscapes in the film.  Although there were segments with larger groups of people, like the railroad camp and the missionaries, he was intentionally isolating his characters against the backdrop of the varying landscapes.  So it was a great decision to select John Toll as the cinematographer. SF is visually a beautiful film.  The film begins in the snowy cold mountain country where immediately from the start Carver pursues his relentless, obsessive quest for revenge.  The film progresses down the mountains into the valleys, fields and ultimately to the fiery heat of the desert.  As far as the surreal elements of the plot, I didn't object as much to them per se than some.  I think that if the boundaries of reality and hallucination had been blurred a bit more, they would of been a little more effective.  I agree that the flashbacks were lacking.  The central flashback of what happened in autumn at Seraphim Falls could of been shot differently to be more dramatic.  Also given that the director was intentionally isolating his characters throughout the film, really well done flashbacks could of been used to show short bursts of a western town or even a glimpse of a battle scene at Antietam.  I think a portion of the pursuit scenes in the lower country could of been cut and replaced with these kind of flashback scenes and that would of strengthened the narrative and maybe provided more character development.   I would still recommend the film though.  It was actually not bad for a directorial debut by someone known for his television work.

With The Proposition, it was okay.  Most of the acting was very good.  Particularly Ray Winstone and Emily Watson.  I thought Guy Pearce was kind of wasted in his role.  Hurt was good as the bounty hunter but it was such a small underdeveloped role.  Very nice to see David Gumpilil some 35 years after Walkabout.  I guess my main problem with the film has to do with it being an Australian outback story.  The story is rather weak in that it does very little to better my understanding of the conflicts in the Australian frontier between the aboriginal culture, the outlaws who may be criminals or descendants of criminals (Australia really was a penal colony), the settlers, and the colonials and military that had the task to hammer "civilization" there.  The cinematography was beautiful .  It did a good job in its realistic depiction of the violence and dirty harsh conditions of the setting.  Some of the new ageism (moon, stars, wind) in the soundtrack, script by Nick Cave underscored by the photography was lost by me.  Maybe would have to watch again on that.  I thought the comparisons to Leone films by critics were really off base.     


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Ben Tyreen on November 21, 2007, 12:12:01 AM
Seraphim Falls (2006)  3/5   A decent western that I really wanted to like, but it was only average.  It could have been a lot better.  But it is a western and it does have its good points.  Pierce Brosnan is great in another role that proves he can play more than just 007.  The New Mexico cinematography is gorgeous too.  Worth a watch, but maybe not a buy.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Ben Tyreen on November 21, 2007, 12:19:59 AM
  I posted about the movie in "Rate the Last Movie You Saw" post, but I thought I'd revive the original Seraphim Falls thread in case anyone else has seen it recently.  I won't repeat what I wrote in the other post, but I'd say it's an average western, not great but I liked it.

  Pierce Brosnan was great as Gideon, with this and his performance as a struggling hit man in The Matador he's really showing off his post-Bond acting chops.  Liam Neeson is good too, but I just didn't buy him.  And as has been pointed out, the flashback needs some work because it did feel too rushed.  If they really wanted to push the limits and show Gideon doing something horrible, he would have shot the wife and kid to try and get information out of Carver.  But as is, it wasn't his fault what happened.  The wind picked up and the fire jumped from the barn to the house.

  As for the ending, it couldn't have been great.  We've spent an hour and forty minutes watching these guys duke it out, and then.....nothing.  I really thought Gideon was going to stab Carver when he pulls out his Bowie knife.  That could've elevated this movie to another level if it ended with him stabbing his follower.

  Decent movie, I agree with cigar joe, worth a rent but not a buy.  Anyone else seen it since the thread dried up? :)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Noodles_SlowStir on November 21, 2007, 11:49:57 AM
I liked Seraphim Falls.  The cinematography by John Toll was stunning.  I would agree it's not a great film.  Based on my one viewing, I'd still say that it was entertaining enough on one level, and with that exceptional cinematography, I could understand why someone would want a personal copy.  There are also some interesting ideas about how the characters and their struggles are identified, perhaps how they embody the conflict of the war, that it's a film that could be watched again.

I don't know that I would change too much about the surreal ending.  I think that a film viewer will either like it, or not like it.  Maybe the director should be given some credit for taking such a risk and trying to make it work.  I suppose I would still say it could of been cut where the boundaries of reality and hallucination could of been blurred more.  I have no problem with neither of the characters winning out over the other.  I think the characterizations of both characters were to show they were both flawed with terrible inner conflict but one was not evil, or more evil than the other.  In a way, I thought the film was almost like a funnel.  It starts up way in the mountains and high country the characters are shown in relation to the land and then it comes down to the desert with a more narrow focus on the actual characters together in that desolate desert country.  I think it's a western with a strong anti war theme.  So to have both characters walk away with each other like that, it was a comment about the struggles of the Civil War and putting the war experience, the pain and feelings, the conflict behind to try and start anew.   

After watching the film, I wondered how it would of been if this first time director had made a few more films and this was his third or fourth film.  I also wonder, how much of the design of the film, was the result of being a first time feature length film with particular budget restraints.  It was his story.  He cowrote the screenplay.  Perhaps he made it more of a character study film for that reason.  There are not many scenes with numerous actors.  The railroad camp and missionary camp being two more populated segments. There are no big scenes of town life or battle scenes during the war.  Yet in a lot of ways I thought it was an ambitious first film.  He picked an exceptional cinematographer (much needed to execute his idea of defining characters to landscape) and picked some good supporting actors like Ed Lauter and Michael Wincott.

I'd like to watch the film again sometime.  I'd like to watch The Proposition again at some point as well.  Not together like I did.  When I watched these films, I had no or little expectations of Seraphim Falls and I think I expected more of The Proposition


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on November 21, 2007, 12:33:35 PM
Seraphim Falls (2006)  3/5   A decent western that I really wanted to like, but it was only average.  It could have been a lot better.  But it is a western and it does have its good points.  Pierce Brosnan is great in another role that proves he can play more than just 007.  The New Mexico cinematography is gorgeous too.  Worth a watch, but maybe not a buy.

The first half hour watching this, I really thought this was on it's way to MASTERPIECE status. Sadly, it loses it's punch down the stretch. I still enjoyed it though.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: cigar joe on November 21, 2007, 02:15:00 PM
The Proposition gets better with each subsequent viewing, at least thats been my experience.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Franks Harmonica on November 26, 2007, 01:44:27 PM
Seraphim Falls tried, but failed as a film. The symbology at the end was so heavy handed that I laughed out loud in the theater!!
The supporting cast just didnt add much to the film either and the lack of Western town was sorely missed!


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: dave jenkins on June 25, 2008, 12:13:58 PM
I finally saw this with friends and, Yikes, it really blows. The first 30 minutes or so is compelling, then everything settles into a more conventional (i.e. dull) Western with visits to the usual cliches: the pioneer family, the wagon train, the religious group, the bank robbers, the rail gang (how did they manage to forget the saloon and the dancehall girls?). Meanwhile, the hackneyed chase plot runs its course down the usual rails, the group of pursuers ever dwindling as they go (nice to see Ed Lauter again, though). Still, this ho-hum part of the film was vastly superior to the allegorical final minutes. Wes Studi as "Charon"! Angelica Huston as Madame Louise/Lucifer!! Salt flats as a circle of Hell!!! I have with me a special finger salute for the producers/writers/director and the horses they rode in on.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: dave jenkins on June 25, 2008, 12:48:28 PM
Seraphim Falls- Starts out as a "9", settles down into a "6," ends in minus numbers. As descents-into-hell go, this is exasperatingly dull.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 25, 2008, 07:47:39 PM
I finally saw this with friends and, Yikes, it really blows. The first 30 minutes or so is compelling, then everything settles into a more conventional (i.e. dull) Western with visits to the usual cliches: the pioneer family, the wagon train, the religious group, the bank robbers, the rail gang (how did they manage to forget the saloon and the dancehall girls?). Meanwhile, the hackneyed chase plot runs its course down the usual rails, the group of pursuers ever dwindling as they go (nice to see Ed Lauter again, though). Still, this ho-hum part of the film was vastly superior to the allegorical final minutes. Wes Studi as "Charon"! Angelica Huston as Madame Louise/Lucifer!! Salt flats as a circle of Hell!!! I have with me a special finger salute for the producers/writers/director and the horses they rode in on.

Well, the film has it's compelling moments, so I cannot say that it "blows." There's a lot of good in the film so I'll revist it again.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: dave jenkins on June 26, 2008, 11:37:32 AM
As I said above, the film starts strong. I really liked the survival-in-the-snow sequence, with Brosnon trying to stay ahead of his pursuers, keep warm, and get a bullet dug out of his arm. But once he runs into the pioneer family everything good in the picture evaporates. And from there things keep going steadily downhill (literally, figuartively, and in terms of story logic). For me, a good intro alone isn't enough.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 27, 2008, 01:49:59 PM
As I said above, the film starts strong. I really liked the survival-in-the-snow sequence, with Brosnon trying to stay ahead of his pursuers, keep warm, and get a bullet dug out of his arm. But once he runs into the pioneer family everything good in the picture evaporates. And from there things keep going steadily downhill (literally, figuartively, and in terms of story logic). For me, a good intro alone isn't enough.

The film does start off strong and does lose some momentum down the strech. I will admit to that. I just love the first half hour of the film so I guess I can put up with the rest of the movie. I personally hated the flashback sequence towards the end. It didn't really warrant Carver's action's in my eyes. The whole film you think Gideon did something so horrific to this man but when you find out what he did, I don't think he deserved this treatment. It would have been better to leave us with a hint of something instead of the whole backstory. It would have made for a far better conclusion.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: dave jenkins on June 27, 2008, 03:02:31 PM
I personally hated the flashback sequence towards the end. It didn't really warrant Carver's action's in my eyes. The whole film you think Gideon did something so horrific to this man but when you find out what he did, I don't think he deserved this treatment. It would have been better to leave us with a hint of something instead of the whole backstory. It would have made for a far better conclusion.
You're right. At first I was gratified that a flashback device was being used in what seemed like an homage to Leone (there's even one point where both men simultaneously share the flashback, even though they're miles apart). But finally what the flashback reveals is so tepid when contrasted with, say, the one in OUATITW, that it would have been better to show nothing at all. Who can enjoy a vendetta against a guy who didn't mean what he did?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Tucumcari Bound on June 28, 2008, 04:41:54 PM
You're right. At first I was gratified that a flashback device was being used in what seemed like an homage to Leone (there's even one point where both men simultaneously share the flashback, even though they're miles apart). But finally what the flashback reveals is so tepid when contrasted with, say, the one in OUATITW, that it would have been better to show nothing at all. Who can enjoy a vendetta against a guy who didn't mean what he did?

That is right. I guess I don't hate the film as much as you do but I do agree with why you don't like it.


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: uncknown on February 02, 2011, 09:00:40 PM
FINALLY got to see this after numerous bouts of Cowboy interruptus.
The opening section is sensational-I could actually feel myself shivering along with Brosnan who did a remakable job of conveying the terrible pain he was suffering.
The film is gripping throughout and only in the last act did it drag a bit. What is it with modern day westerns OPEN RANGE, APPALOOSA also suffered from a needlessly drawn out climax!
The Christian allegory imbedded in the script was an intiguing element twist (although not surprising as Mel Gibson produced it) I am not sue if I might have preferred a more "down to earth" resoultion instead of the metaphorical. mystical one we got.
All in all, this might be the best oater since UNFORGIVEN,

check it out
bruce :)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: uncknown on February 02, 2011, 09:03:50 PM
so its like "the undefeated" with John Wayne?

more like RIDE IN THE WHIRLWIND & THE SHOOTING with Jack Nicholson & HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER & JOSEY WALES with Clint......


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Dust Devil on February 02, 2011, 11:03:35 PM
Rating?


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: uncknown on February 02, 2011, 11:53:10 PM
8 out of ten (4 outta five)


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 10, 2011, 04:16:43 AM
Just saw Seraphim Falls and I must say, I was pleasantly surprised. I agree with lots of you that the beginning was amazing and the later parts not as much, but I think it really picked up again toward the end. I really like this film, and would definitely recommend it to any Western fan


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: Dust Devil on April 10, 2011, 05:38:17 AM
I got the DVD meanwhile: saw bits of it and it definitely looks entertaining. :-X


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: The Firecracker on April 10, 2011, 08:41:30 PM
Good chase picture that loses me when it becomes a Mystic Western in the final 15 minutes.

7/10


Title: Re: Seraphim Falls (2006)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on April 10, 2011, 08:49:45 PM
I think that the entire first part (until Pierce reaches the cabin) could have easily been shot without any dialogue whatsoever, like the beginning of Rio Bravo and OUATITW. I think that would have made the great opening even better  :)