Sergio Leone Web Board

Films of Sergio Leone => Other Films => Topic started by: moviesceleton on August 08, 2007, 03:25:25 PM



Title: The Missing (2003)
Post by: moviesceleton on August 08, 2007, 03:25:25 PM
I just thought this movie needed a thread of it's own :D. I really liked it, I'd even say more than Open Range. I'll give this 8/10.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: Poggle on August 08, 2007, 04:02:30 PM
An entertaining experience but easily forgotten after viewing.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on August 08, 2007, 06:13:38 PM
It's a pretty good film, but doesn't hold a candle to Open Range in my view. The Missing is an entertaining film but it's just a Searchers ripoff, nothing more.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: moviesceleton on August 09, 2007, 08:16:53 AM
It's a pretty good film, but doesn't hold a candle to Open Range in my view. The Missing is an entertaining film but it's just a Searchers ripoff, nothing more.
I can't say anything about that, because I haven't seen The Searchers yet. :P


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on August 09, 2007, 09:27:33 AM
I can't say anything about that, because I haven't seen The Searchers yet. :P

See The Searchers when you can moviesceleton! It's arguably the greatest American Western ever. One of the greatest films ever made, in my opinion.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on September 05, 2007, 01:09:26 PM
I recently started a thread about "The Missing" and forgot moviesceleton already started one. I erased mine buddy! I'm sorry about that.

Anyway, I come across some very positive reviews and then extremely negative reviews of this film. Interesting opinion's if you ask me. I personally think it's one of the most beautifully shot westerns ever. I love the filming locations and the beautiful scenery. The cinematography is brilliant.

Has anybody seen both The Theatrical Version and Director's Cut? I want to know what the differences are and if the 20 extra minutes are worth viewing? Please do tell.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on September 05, 2007, 02:51:55 PM
I saw it on DVD & just couldn't get into it, I think I even fell asleep a couple of times, felt more like horror flick than a Western.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on September 06, 2007, 09:29:41 AM
The Missing (2003) 8/10

I'm beginning to think this is one of the misunderstood films of all time. I think the big problem is that the film suffers an identity crisis. It's a Western, Adventure, Thriller, Drama film all rolled into one. I think many western film lovers were caught off guard by this and didn't give the film a chance to see it for what it was. You will find that the plot so closely resembles that of "The Searchers." In 1885 New Mexico, a frontier medicine woman forms an uneasy alliance with her estranged father when her daughter is kidnapped by an Apache.

While watching, I can't stop to think what I would have done differently if I was directing this film. There are bit's I don't quite like, but other's I find absolutely brilliant and down right compelling. If a film grabs your attention from frame one then doesn't let up then something is being done right. For one, I think this has a lot to do with the cinematography and photography of the film. It's one of the most beautifully and gorgeously shot films I have ever seen, period. You have to give director Ron Howard credit for this. It's pure eye candy. I'm a stickler for beautiful cinematography so he won me over here.

The cast also blew me away. Tommy Lee Jones and Cate Blanchett give riveting, oscar worthy performances here. There are a handful of memorable scenes to back up this up. They had amazing father, daughter chemistry. One moment stands out the most is when Samuel Jones (Tommy Lee Jones) and Magdalena (Cate Blanchett) reunite for the first time in years . The emotion on their faces says it all. Brilliant acting and a scene I'll never forget. Powerfully acted and directed. The performances by the two young ladies who play Blanchett's daughters are played by Evan Rachel Wood and Jenna Boyd. Casting here could not have been more perfect. These girls were put through a number of scenes which required a lot of emotion, especially from young Jenna Boyd as Dot. This was one of the greatest childhood performances I have ever seen.

The big problem here is how Ron Howard directs action. He's never been to good at this. The action in "The Missing" is quite dull and doesn't excite you or thrill you as it should. It's not that the action is down right bad and boring, it's just not as exciting as it should be. The film could have benefited even more with shocking, and a bit more thrilling action sequences.

In short, overall I'm enjoying this film more and more everytime I revisit it. As a whole, the production is a beautiful one at that, and I think people would respect it even more if they take it for what it is.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on September 06, 2007, 12:17:27 PM
I didn't much care for The Missing, even snoozed through some of it.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on September 06, 2007, 12:44:26 PM
I didn't much care for The Missing, even snoozed through some of it.

haha, you really hate it that much huh cigar? I think you should watch it again.  ;)


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: tucumcari bound on September 07, 2007, 04:31:16 PM
I want to discuss this film with all of you. We should watch it for a movie night. Anyone agree?


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 18, 2015, 01:57:31 AM
I always thought that Ron Howard western was going to be garbage. I finally saw it the other day thanks to Netflix and it was a good surprise. I'm not crazy about the supernatural stuff, but the movie is well shot (I never thought I'd say that about a Ron Howard flick), the dusty production design is great and the casting is almost perfect. Has anyone seen it?


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on November 18, 2015, 03:54:19 AM
Not yet I'll check it out, I recently saw The Salvation. and was surprised also.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 18, 2015, 04:43:10 AM
Not yet I'll check it out, I recently saw The Salvation. and was surprised also.

I think you'll really dislike the supernatural stuff. It takes more and more importance as the plot progresses, and it's a shame. They should have gone for a regular bad guy instead of a sorcerer. They could also have left us make our own mind about the effectiveness (or lack of) instead of making it so obviously magic. Apart from that it really feels like a western.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: stanton on November 18, 2015, 05:42:13 AM
I always thought that Ron Howard western was going to be garbage. I finally saw it the other day thanks to Netflix and it was a good surprise. I'm not crazy about the supernatural stuff, but the movie is well shot (I never thought I'd say that about a Ron Howard flick), the dusty production design is great and the casting is almost perfect. Has anyone seen it?

Same for me, surprisingly good for Howard, and shot with much feeling for the genre. Only the ending was a bit weak. 7/10

The supernatural stuff wasn't that important, probably, cause at least it is nothing I remember anything specific from.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on November 18, 2015, 03:44:30 PM
I might not mind the supernatural stuff if it's done right, I actually liked Renegade (Blueberry) but I'd never read the complete comic only random frames so I never knew how much of it they screwed up.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: stanton on November 19, 2015, 02:15:33 AM
I might not mind the supernatural stuff if it's done right, I actually liked Renegade (Blueberry) but I'd never read the complete comic only random frames so I never knew how much of it they screwed up.

The Blueberry film has nothing to do with the comic, apart from using some names and a few unimportant plot motives. The film is much closer to 2001 than to the comic.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 19, 2015, 04:38:24 AM
The Blueberry film has nothing to do with the comic, apart from using some names and a few unimportant plot motives. The film is much closer to 2001 than to the comic.

... which is a shame since the comic is a true masterpiece.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 20, 2015, 09:13:44 AM
I always thought that Ron Howard western was going to be garbage. I finally saw it the other day thanks to Netflix and it was a good surprise. I'm not crazy about the supernatural stuff, but the movie is well shot (I never thought I'd say that about a Ron Howard flick), the dusty production design is great and the casting is almost perfect. Has anyone seen it?
All this chat about the film got me curious, so I gave it a try. I agree, for a Ron Howard film it was surprisingly good. At least, until the final sequences. Plot logic goes out the window (wait, the plan is to get robbed and beat up?), and I really hated the ending ("Grandpa is going to live with us and we'll be a family again"--er, not so fast . . . ). I'm shocked that you liked the lighting; the climax, which occurs entirely at night, consists of 100% BS lighting. It could be happening at high noon.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on November 20, 2015, 09:37:11 AM
Watch The Salvation next and see what you think, I was surprised.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 20, 2015, 10:38:23 AM
Watch The Salvation next and see what you think, I was surprised.
OK, ordered. The blu is only 8.99 at amazon (a dollar cheaper than the DVD).


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 20, 2015, 12:27:15 PM
All this chat about the film got me curious, so I gave it a try. I agree, for a Ron Howard film it was surprisingly good. At least, until the final sequences. Plot logic goes out the window (wait, the plan is to get robbed and beat up?), and I really hated the ending ("Grandpa is going to live with us and we'll be a family again"--er, not so fast . . . ). I'm shocked that you liked the lighting; the climax, which occurs entirely at night, consists of 100% BS lighting. It could be happening at high noon.

I think everyone here agrees: the climax is the weakest part of the film. I was actually doing the dishes with my iPad playing the film above the sink during that part so I was a bit distracted. This is why it didn't bothered as much as if I had watched it in the same conditions as the rest of the movie.

I especially liked the way they portray the cavalry, its bureaucracy and the way they treat the ranch/farm. That Val Kilmer scene is what I think first when I talking about the movie. Once again, that's a sentence I never thought I'd write; this movie is full of surprises.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: stanton on November 22, 2015, 03:22:22 AM
... which is a shame since the comic is a true masterpiece.

Really?
It is pretty good, and Giraud was probably never better in the Giraud part of his oeuvre, and in no other Blueberry comic Giraud got that much away from a typical Charlier comic with all the typical Charlier faults, but I do not think that it is strong enough to call it a masterpiece.
Actually while Blueberry was the favourite comic of my childhood (apart from the Gosciny stuff, but that's a different kettle of fish), I prefer meanwhile Comanche to Blueberry. The best Comanche albums are better constructed than any Blueberry story, and the drawings are equally good.

And the masterpiece of Giraud is from the Moebius universe, and that is the incredible The Airtight Garage of Jerry Cornelius. One of the greatest comics ever.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: cigar joe on November 22, 2015, 05:34:42 AM
The Airtight Garage of Jerry Cornelius. One of the greatest comics ever.

Agree, I've only read parts of it. I should get a complete English translation, I'm sure they are out there, anybody know what would be the best edition to look for?


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 22, 2015, 06:17:23 AM
Really?

Really. it just doesn't get better than that. Not on Earth anyway.


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: stanton on November 22, 2015, 07:45:20 AM
Really. it just doesn't get better than that. Not on Earth anyway.

But it as a western not on the level of The Wild Bunch or OUTW.

And as a comic not on the level of e.g. Hugo Pratt's The Salt Sea Ballad or some other comic masterpieces.

Do you know the Comanche albums from Greg and Hermann?

And what do you think about the other Blueberry stories?


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: noodles_leone on November 22, 2015, 10:14:15 AM
But it as a western not on the level of The Wild Bunch or OUTW.

I wouldn't compare it to these kind of films, it's lighter. It's not trying to capture human soul: it's a western on the level of GBU, the perfect adventure-western crossover.

And as a comic not on the level of e.g. Hugo Pratt's The Salt Sea Ballad or some other comic masterpieces.
It's exactly on the same level to me: even if Pratt's poetry is nowhere to be found in Charlier's work, the entertaining value of a good Blueberry is what makes it special.

Do you know the Comanche albums from Greg and Hermann?

I only read very few of them years ago. I thought it was pretty good but not overwelming. I need to try more seriously now, you may very well be right about them. But Blueberry's graphics are so much better...

And what do you think about the other Blueberry stories?

I like the earlier stuff the way I like a good old John Wayne movie. I wouldn't recommend most of them nowadays to someone who doesn't love the genre... I absolutely love Chihuahua Pearl/Balade Pour Un Cercueil/L'Homme Qui Valait 500.000$", it's almost as good as the previous 2. Blueberry went downhill from there, especially since Charlier died. The Mister Blueberry cycle was an interesting take at first but it ended as some weird garbage with a couple good stuff per comic. Giraud as an artist struggled a lot from the moment Moebius took over anyway.

For the record:
- I like Moebius a lot, but I've personally known at least one unknown artist that was much better than him (at drawing SciFi; not talking about the scripts there). This is why I'll never consider Moebius as a master. He was just one of the very good ones. By the way, I never liked Jodorowski that much.
- I saw the Moebius exhibition at Fondation Quartier in Paris a few years ago, great stuff.
- His death is the "famous people" death that touched me the most, it was a part of my childhood and from who I am who died with him
- My parents adapted La Mine de l'Allemand Perdu and Le Spectre Aux Balles D'Or as a video game back in 1987: http://www.atarimania.com/game-atari-st-blueberry_24142.html


Title: Re: The Missing (2003)
Post by: Spikeopath on June 19, 2017, 12:34:20 PM
Adding my review.

There's always the next something, Maggie. And that will take a man away.

The Missing is directed by Ron Howard and adapted by Ken Kaufman from the novel The Last Ride written by Thomas Eidson. It stars Tommy Lee Jones, Cate Blanchet, Eric Schweig, Evan Rachel Wood, Jenna Boyd, Ray McKinnon, Val Kilmer & Aaron Eckhart. James Horner scores the music and Salvatore Totino is the cinematographer.

New Mexico 1885 and frontier doctor Maggie Gilkeson (Blanchet) has to seek help from her estranged father Samuel Jones/Chaa-duu-ba-its-iidan (Lee Jones), when her eldest daughter is kidnapped by Pesh-Chidin/El Brujo (Schweig) an Apache Warlock who sells girls into prostitution.

An obvious variation on John Ford's The Searchers, The Missing slipped under the radar some what of Western fans who were greatly served by Kevin Costner's Open Range released the same year. It was a box office flop; which in a genre that has rarely hit great heights in modern times is hardly surprising, but to dismiss Howard's film as a fop is just wrong. True enough it's hardly original on the page, but it manages to not sacrifice character depth as it crams in the Western staples. While there is plenty enough here for none Western fans to enjoy; from the many colourful characters on show (including a great horror movie like villain in Schweig), to the panoramic scenery, and the number of action sequences that flit in and out of the narrative. There's a little something for most movie loving fans.

The cast, too, are value for money. Blanchet gives it guts and layers as Maggie, emotionally cold, is forced to put family dissension to one side and take up arms as a Western heroine, and Wood equally holds court with her transference from irksome waif to bold babe. Tommy Jones enjoys himself as he finds a cowboy role to suit his craggy features, features that impressively dovetail with Salvatore's stark photography of the landscapes. Along with the plucky and endearing young Jenna Boyd's performance it obviously only really mounts up to a broken family coming together under duress. But as a quartet, and with Schweig's vile turn as the "monster" of the piece in amongst them, they function so well, thus all character arcs are acted skilfully and please the senses. Also to be applauded is the use of genuine Apache language from some of the actors, a nice touch that shows a director taking his material seriously.

There's a few endings available to view via DVD etc, but the one that Howard chose for its general release is the right one. It perhaps doesn't hold any great surprise, given the directors reputation and output thus far, but it works well in the context of the story and the period tone set throughout. A safe film, then, one that is very well made and tells its story efficiently in structure and verse. If only the script had dared to take a few more risks then this surely wouldn't have been the monetary flop it was. Still, give it a go and you may find as much to like as I did. 7/10