Sergio Leone Web Board

Films of Sergio Leone => Other Films => Topic started by: titoli on November 08, 2009, 09:47:57 AM



Title: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 08, 2009, 09:47:57 AM
A mystery to me why this is considered by some one of the best ever westerns. I didn't like particularly High Sierra (of which this is a kinda of western remake) and maybe that's the only claim to fame I can detect. It is obviously miscast in the leads (Mayo is all made up to look like a half-blood indian, figure that! And in some shoots she also has a bloated face: not the beuriful lady of, say Walter Mitty), the horses of the pursuers seem to be running ten times faster than those of the prey. It only has a good train heist sequence and some landscapes (about which I couldn't care less) and that's the only reason  I give it 6\10. And the tile doesn't help things: the italian one was much better: Buried Town's Lovers.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 08, 2009, 09:52:39 AM
The italian release seems at the moment the only available one on dvd:

(http://www.deastore.com/covers/803/282/566/batch3/8032825669843.jpg?1254816098)


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 08, 2009, 10:29:18 AM
Who considers this one of the best Westerns ever? I'd never even heard of it.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 08, 2009, 04:48:06 PM
Who considers this one of the best Westerns ever? I'd never even heard of it.

You're not a western fan.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 08, 2009, 06:08:10 PM
Do you see anyone besides you and me posting in this thread?


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 08, 2009, 06:44:56 PM
Okay, I'll throw in. The WB Archives is offering it in R1 (on a high-priced DVD-R) and I was considering getting a copy, but titoli has somewhat dampened my ardor. Come to think of it, I don't really like High Sierra all that much either, the sub-plot with Joan Leslie really bites.

But titoli is correct: if you read around, you see lots of positive comments on the film. I think Scorsese, for one, is a booster. I'm guessing this is one of those Westerns for people who don't like Westerns . . .


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 08, 2009, 08:06:29 PM
It's quite possible it has fans, but all that proves is that it has a following. Perhaps it's a cult film, I don't see it showing up on pretty much any critic's list of great Westerns. The fact that I haven't heard of it period should say something.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 09, 2009, 05:25:02 AM
Okay, I'll throw in. The WB Archives is offering it in R1 (on a high-priced DVD-R) and I was considering getting a copy, but titoli has somewhat dampened my ardor. Come to think of it, I don't really like High Sierra all that much either, the sub-plot with Joan Leslie really bites.

But titoli is correct: if you read around, you see lots of positive comments on the film. I think Scorsese, for one, is a booster. I'm guessing this is one of those Westerns for people who don't like Westerns . . .


Well, you rate my opinion higher than Scorsese's...that's something.  :D


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 09, 2009, 06:17:11 AM
It's quite possible it has fans, but all that proves is that it has a following. Perhaps it's a cult film, I don't see it showing up on pretty much any critic's list of great Westerns. The fact that I haven't heard of it period should say something.
It means you're totally clueless, like the critics. They don't have an opinion on anything that hasn't had a regular DVD release. If you know only the films that are available on video, you don't know cinema.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 09, 2009, 06:18:09 AM
Well, you rate my opinion higher than Scorsese's...that's something.  :D
I always have.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 09, 2009, 10:11:47 AM
It means you're totally clueless, like the critics. They don't have an opinion on anything that hasn't had a regular DVD release. If you know only the films that are available on video, you don't know cinema.

I don't have an infinite capacity to research obscure movies that are never shown on TV and are not available on video. I leave that to you and Titoli.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 09, 2009, 02:31:27 PM
I don't have an infinite capacity to research obscure movies that are never shown on TV and are not available on video. I leave that to you and Titoli.

Evidently you passed over my second contribution to this thread.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 09, 2009, 03:46:33 PM
Split hairs if you like, that hardly negates my point.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 10, 2009, 06:46:05 AM
Your point hinges on the word "obscure" which is a term I'd dispute.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 10, 2009, 08:48:43 AM
You have noticed that only three of us are posting on this thread, yes?

Not to mention that in seven years on IMDB I have never seen a single thread on the Westerns board even mentioning this film.

No, that's not in and of itself proof of anything, except that I've seen threads for a huge variety of films, including pretty much every major Western there is.

I also note that it has all of 678 votes on IMDB as well.

Nor has it turned up in any of the many books related to Westerns that I've read.

Nor has it been mentioned in ANY of the top Westerns lists by critics that I've seen.

Nor does it have an entry in the Video Hound, an extremely comprehensive movie guide that includes films only available on ancient out-of-print VHS.

But because Scorsese apparently praised it, and you and Titoli have seen it, it's a well-known film.

Good logic Jinkies.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 10, 2009, 09:14:37 AM
You have noticed that only three of us are posting on this thread, yes?

Not to mention that in seven years on IMDB I have never seen a single thread on the Westerns board even mentioning this film.

No, that's not in and of itself proof of anything, except that I've seen threads for a huge variety of films, including pretty much every major Western there is.

I also note that it has all of 678 votes on IMDB as well.

Nor has it turned up in any of the many books related to Westerns that I've read.

Nor has it been mentioned in ANY of the top Westerns lists by critics that I've seen.

Nor does it have an entry in the Video Hound, an extremely comprehensive movie guide that includes films only available on ancient out-of-print VHS.
I'm not sure it was ever available on VHS.

Your faith in IMDB votes is touching, Grogs, as is your devotion to "lists by critics." Yes, that's certainly how *I* judge a film's standing, by how many lists its on.

BTW, titoli's original comment only suggested that this film was highly regarded "by some." I'm sure that's true, and that the film's reputation is the impetus for it's recent DVD-R release in R1. Whether that group of "some" should be listened to or not is another matter; as Scorsese is a member, however, it is unambiguously a group with influence.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 10, 2009, 10:47:25 AM
"A very superior western" (B. Garfield Western Movies)

"This is the best version of W.R. Burnett's High Sierra...The ending is ...one of the finest moments in Walsh's work"(The BFI Companion to the Western)

"A classic Western...bleak reworking of Walsh's own superb...HS...The bravura treatment of landscape is particularly impressive....The final shot is magnificent". (Phil Hardy, The Western)

I could go on but you'll have to pay me.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 10, 2009, 10:54:24 AM
If you will go back and read the thread, Jinkies, in my initial post I was simply questioning who holds the film in high regard, not claiming that no one did. This led to an insult by Titoli (as most such conversations do) and the conversation has since escalated. Now that there are 15 posts of flames Titoli finally condescends to answer my original question.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 10, 2009, 10:59:11 AM
"A very superior western" (B. Garfield Western Movies)

"This is the best version of W.R. Burnett's High Sierra...The ending is ...one of the finest moments in Walsh's work"(The BFI Companion to the Western)

"A classic Western...bleak reworking of Walsh's own superb...HS...The bravura treatment of landscape is particularly impressive....The final shot is magnificent". (Phil Hardy, The Western)

I could go on but you'll have to pay me.

So until just now you felt it was more productive to insult me than to actually answer the question?


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 10, 2009, 11:14:00 AM
If you were a western fan you wouldn't have made that question, that's all I meant: at the very least you'd have some of the books I quoted from handy. And not to be a western fan I can't see it as an insult in any way (and I wouldn't insult you anyway because I never do insult anybody). Just like you were to say to me "You're not a E.T. fan"or "You're not a Pirates of the Caribbean" fan if I were to intrude in a discussion on  those movies. 
And, let me also add, you have no idea what a really rare or seldom seen (oh, Kansas City)  movie is. Which is not an insult but just wanting to make plain that the movie we're talking about it's not rare or seldom seen. In Rome I think is on local tv's regularly. And some copy in english may be found on internet. 


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: Groggy on November 10, 2009, 11:26:42 AM
If you were a western fan you wouldn't have made that question, that's all I meant: at the very least you'd have some of the books I quoted from handy.

It's nice to know there's a required code of conduct for Western fans, which apparently includes an encyclopedic knowledge of all Westerns ever made. Also, apparently you can't be a Western fan if you ask questions about films you've never heard of. I'll keep this in mind for future reference.

Quote
at the very least you'd have some of the books I quoted from handy.

I only own one book on David Lean, would you deny that I'm a David Lean fan?

Quote
And not to be a western fan I can't see it as an insult in any way

It would depend on how you wish to qualify or define "Western fan". I do have interest in other genres and I do not (due to my age and fairly limited resources) have an encyclopedic knowledge of the genre, but I've never claimed to. I do however enjoy watching as many Westerns as I can, just not to the exclusion of other films or other hobbies/interests. My definition of that sort of person would be an obsessive.

Quote
(and I wouldn't insult you anyway because I never do insult anybody).

Yeah, sure.

Quote
Just like you were to say to me "You're not a E.T. fan"or "You're not a Pirates of the Caribbean" fan if I were to intrude in a discussion on  those movies.

If you offered an opinion on the film itself I would, but otherwise I'd probably ignore your post unless it was something I could answer.

Quote
And, let me also add, you have no idea what a really rare or seldom seen (oh, Kansas City)  movie is.

Possibly, but again it's missing the point. If a film is not rare or seldom seen I would like some evidence of this. However "widely seen" it may or may not be (and I'm doubting this due to its limited availability) it is hardly an obvious title like, say, The Searchers or Stagecoach or GBU that everyone would know, or Buchanan Rides Alone and Vera Cruz for Western fans. Have you seen The Nebraskan or Paradise Canyon? Would you count those as "widely seen" titles?

Quote
Which is not an insult but just wanting to make plain that the movie we're talking about it's not rare or seldom seen.

You could have made your last post on the thread a reply to my initial post, and made this clear. Instead you insulted me. And I do see it as an insult, or at the very least a put down.

Quote
In Rome I think is on local tv's regularly.

Good to know next time I'm in Italy.

Quote
And some copy in english may be found on internet.
 

Useless speculation.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: stanton on November 10, 2009, 12:11:37 PM
I've read somewhere that the film is or was highly popular in Japan because of its Love/Death ending.

Here in Germany it was shown on TV  the last 15 years with a certain regularity. I would say every western buff has seen it, but the on occasion western watcher will not necessarily know it.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: cigar joe on November 30, 2009, 05:37:29 PM
Caught it today on Fox Movie Channel,  it is better than High Sierra, Virginia May is a little ridiculous as a half breed, but it does have a great train robbery sequence (and I do like trains) its worth owning it for that 7.5/10  O0


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 30, 2009, 05:47:14 PM
Caught it today on Fox Movie Channel,  it is better than High Sierra, Virginia May is a little ridiculous as a half breed, but it does have a great train robbery sequence (and I do like trains) its worth owning it for that 7.5/10  O0

Yeah, but if it is just for that sequence, your rating seems to be a high one. Weren't you annoyed by the way the pursuers seem to get to the fugitives in no time?


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: cigar joe on November 30, 2009, 05:49:19 PM
Yeah, but if it is just for that sequence, your rating seems to be a high one. Weren't you annoyed by the way the pursuers seem to get to the fugitives in no time?

yea but the train, the train..... O0


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: titoli on November 30, 2009, 05:51:13 PM
yea but the train, the train..... O0

By your rating system one should give 9\10 to Five Men Army...


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: cigar joe on November 30, 2009, 06:03:06 PM
By your rating system one should give 9\10 to Five Men Army...

No, there is no way to disguise a switch in a track to an engineer, it is too stupid, or I guess I know too much about trains to suspend belief for that.


Title: Re: Colorado Territory (1949)
Post by: T.H. on January 13, 2016, 01:12:21 AM
I finally got around to watching this and I'm with 2009 CJ on this. The train heist was about as good as a late 40s heist could possibly be, and everything else is all around pretty solid. The hideout was such a great location, a real nice surprise.

My only issues with the movie is that the love triangle should have played out longer between McCrea, Mayo and Malone. They should have been forced to spend more time together and let Malone's plan to get the reward play out more slowly and dramatically. I also agree with titoli about the manhunt being too rushed, but I don't view it as a fatal flaw like he did.

7.5/10