Elvis was the 1st punkrocker
And CULT STAR Dean Reed was the Red Elvis 
[quote=âLindberg, post:42, topic:540â]And CULT STAR Dean Reed was the Red Elvis 
[/quote]
Tack x 3 Lindberg, well said and to confirm that
DEAN REED CULT GREAT SW STAR Rip was the RED ELVIS :
Stanton ;D you said âelvis was the first punkrockerâ 
PUNK ROCKER DEFINITION :
- Punk Rockers only WASH on LEAP YEARS (every 4 years ;))
- Punk Rockers are always kissed goodnight and tucked into bed by their FAT MOMMAS
- Punk Rockers are blessed with BO (Body Odour) and HALITOSIS
- Punk Rockers Cannot sing properly but can SPIT on their whole audience. (5 people)
Therefore Stanton that Elvis you mentioned is ELVIS COSTELLO the dirty Punk Rocker
THE KING OF ROCK N ROLL / ROMANTIC BALLADS / COUNTRY is ELVIS PRESLEY 
@ Scherpy
That was some analysis, play on words, extraction of meanings . well compiled 
JIM REEVES and JOHN WAYNE are still after you
Also its BALLAD âI had the LAST WALTZ with you, 2 lonely peopleeeeeeeeâ
Not âballedâ you far âtoo cleverâ, analytical , âreactionary philosopherâ SW fan
PUNK ROCKER DEFINITION :
- Punk Rockers only WASH on LEAP YEARS (every 4 years )
- Punk Rockers are always kissed goodnight and tucked into bed by their FAT MOMMAS
- Punk Rockers are blessed with BO (Body odour) and HALITOSIS
- Punk Rockers Cannot sing properly but can SPIT on their whole audience. (5 people)
He was, he was. Itâs a widely known fact.
Some say, he died while he was writing a fan letter to Johnny Rotten.
I canât say much about Jim Reeves or why I like both him and, for instance, Led Zeppelin
They both appeal to me, and thatâs about it
John Wayne on the other hand, is an interesting character, not in the least in regard to this thread
What I mean to say is that he was to many people of my generation (and the generations before and after) the main villain of American cinema, and the western in particular. The Duke stood for all what was wrong in Holywood: a right-wing, republican indian and commies hater. We were nearly all left-wing and hated republicans. At least here on the continent, things might have been a bit different in the UK, I donât know.
Itâs hard to say why we hated the republicans. Some say it had to do with their foreign policy, and then immediately Vietnam is mentioned. Fighting wars on the other side of the world was more a democratic thing, since the republicans were in the first place isolationists, but when facts donât match with the theory ⊠well, you know about that. Apparently we hated them although they were isolationists and we still hate them today because they have become internationalists, so no longer are isolationalists.
Anyway, it was clear that The Duke hated commies, his The green barets was the ultime litmus, if anybody still needed proof. I saw the film years after the Vietnam war was over and it turned out to be a rather silly, but enjoyable action movie.
OK, he hated commies and was right-wing. So what? Iâm not into politics, at least not when Iâm watching action movies. I donât hate Sollima or Corbucci for being left-wing either. Those were the days. And everybody is entitled to have an opinion on everything, politics included (and you know what Dirty Harry said about opinions).
But was he an indian hater, so a racist too?
That would be worse. In the country of Pim Fortuyn, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Theo van Gogh and Geert Wilders you may hate Muslims, left-wing politicians and gastarbeiders (foreign workers, including Poles - sorry Alk0), but you canât like republicans or hate indians.
Iâm not a real fan of the Duke, and by consequence no expert on his work. I liked most of his westerns Iâve seen, but not wholeheartedly. Itâs difficult to really love the man, or the actor. He is not a very nice man, nor is he a really great actor. Even in his best and most offbeat movie, The Searchers, the man behind the character remains visible, tangible. In this movie he is portrayed as an indian fighter who hates the people he fights, but speaks their language at the same time. And whatâs more: heâs a very ambigious character, not an icon. And the films certainly doesnât glorify racial hatred. In Fort Apache, the first and best of the famous trilogy, he is cast as the âgoodâ cavalarist, who understands the indians much better than his stupid superior (Henry Fonda); in Hondo heâs cast as a half-indian and most of his other âimportantâ movies, those he made with Hawks for instance, are no indian movies, and nor are Stagecoach, Liberty Valence or True Grit. Most other films Iâve seen, were rather innocuous action movies, not the most intelligently made or written genre examples, a bit reactionary from time to time, but not racist. Of course, occasionally the indians, or a particular indian was portrayed as mean and ugly, but those portrayals are no more than genre clichĂ©s, comparable to the mad scientist in SF and the cruel Mexican in SW. But, as said, Iâm not an expert on his work so maybe I saw the wrong movies.
They say he hated the Dollar movies and Peckinpahâs approach to the western.
And that he hated losers.
OK, that was his opinion, and he was entitled to have one.
Everyone mentioned were great villains. Eduardo Fajardo also needs to be mentioned. He always played a slick town boss or a slimy Mexican bandit. Always good to see in a film because you just know heâs going to get his just deserts at the end.
1 Like
smacks his forehead
How can I forget him! Eduardo Fajardo may arguably have been the greatest villain of them all.
Eduardo Fajardo has played an oily/nasty villain in many SWs, he is good at it.
@ Scherpy
JIM REEVES , what can I say I have always loved the great smooth melodic voice
and when I hear DISTANT DRUMS 1966 , HEâLL HAVE TO GO 1960 and dozens more
itâs a special experience. His Film KIMBERLEY JIM 1963 made in South Africa I havenât seen but have reports that Jim Reeves was also a splendid natural actor & sang in it.
JOHN WAYNE interesting your thoughts/analysis on this USA Western Icon :).
I have seen most/all of John Wayneâs Films and have enjoyed/liked him, without being a
fan as such. As you know my all time favourite Wayne film is
CHISUM 1970 John Wayne Christopher George Lynda day Geoffrey Deuel
This magnificent epic, outstanding western shows John Wayne at his heroic/robust best
fighting for land, for a cause, defeating the bad land barons and with a magnificent
supporting cast of Christopher/Lynda Day George, Pete Duelâs brother Geoffrey & more.
I never minded John Wayneâs politics as he was an All american, right wing, patriotic,
he never hid his prejuduces/dislikes against Communists/gays/girly men and similar.
I dont agree that John Wayne âhatedâ Indians, as they were fairly portrayed in many
of his films and Indians were savage/scalped/ cruel etc. They were also victims yes.
I dislike this obsession with playing the ârace cardâ. It is not for me âracistâ to hate
someone or a group of people say they massacred your wife/kids, it is only âracistâ if
you believe in RACIAL SUPERIORITY as such. I hate criminals/druggies/muggers but
I am NOT âracistâ against them I hate them for their evil/criminal ACTIONS.
I also loved the GREEN BERETS 1968 as it was well made, had DAVID JANSSEN
a big favourite of mine and it was from the point of view of right wing we knew that.
The title song BALLAD OF THE GREEN BERETS by Sgt Barry Sadler was magnificent 
John Wayne is an USA Icon/institution/hero, he made people feel good, he spoke very
clearly, without diplomacy and he said exactly what he meant. He was a good actor
Well I think hating a whole race on account of several members of that race massacred your family is racist, but I do agree with your reasoning SD. However it is too easy to to âgeneralizeâ a whole people based on the deeds of a small minority. We like to hate people for what they do but too often we hate people for what they are. Although I disagree that Indians were âsavagesâ. It was the indians who were more âadvancedâ as they tought the whites how to survive in the american wilderness and lived in harmony with the land and animals. And if they murdered and raided white manâs property it is because they were put in that position from the initial white manâs treachery. The real savages were the whites who enslaved blacks and massacred indians while taking their land. But yes, youâre right SD they could be cruel just like everyone else.
Also, while John Wayne was a good actor with undeniable screen presence, he is exactly the reason why I like SWâs better than Classic Hollywood westerns. Call me crazy but I choose Steffen, Garko, Van Cleef, Gemma etc⊠over John Wayne any day of the week. Twice on sundays.
Also too many western depict Indians as the bad guy and not enough westerns depict indians as the good guys. It is a slanted view from hollywood.
Yes Col. DM interesting debate this on Big John Wayne and his politics/films/persona 
Your summation of the Indians vs the settlers is more accurate historically than mine.
I was really focusing though on the treatment of Indians in Films. Broken Arrow was OK.
Hollywood likes to have its nasty villains/savages/boogie men and audiences love that.
Of course we need to make it clear that we hate peopleâs EVIL ACTIONS/BEHAVIOUR
not their âraceâ as such. Also important is to expose and punish evil people who use
the ârace cardâ as a cover to avoid justice/punishment for their criminality/evil actions.
John Wayne as I said I am not a fan as such but like very much his CHISUM 1970 and
THE SEARCHERS 1956 plus others but of course I will TAKE THE SWS any day over John.
Having said that of course I prefer SWs over Hollywood/USA Westerns I also love many great USA Westerns HANG EM HIGH 68 , FIRECREEK 68, FIVE CARD STUD 68
Scherp, by the way, you have mentioned Theo van Gogh. What do you think about him?
He was unknown to most here in Germany before he was murdered, but I have seen meanwhile 2 of his films, and I liked them very much.
[quote=âstanton, post:51, topic:540â]Scherp, by the way, you have mentioned Theo van Gogh. What do you think about him?
He was unknown to most here in Germany before he was murdered, but I have seen meanwhile 2 of his films, and I liked them very much.[/quote]
He was an excellent filmmaker. His best film is probably TERUG NAAR OEGSTGEEST, based on a novel by Jan Wolkers (the man who also wrote TURKS FRUIT / Turkish delight, adapted by Paul Verhoeven), but most of his films are worth a look, although often suffering from low production values. Itâs sad that he had to be murdered to become known outside Holland.
I have met him twice personally and I thought he wasânt a bad guy, provided you could take a âhard jokeâ or a blunt provocation
He worked on occasion with immigrants and thought a hard joke or blunt provocation was good for them. If they learned to take those things (and defend themselves with words, not with weapons or threats) they would become good Dutch citizens. (The Dutch can be very blunt and certainly arenât known for their refined discussion techniques)
What he didnât understand was that those immigrants who knew him personally, knew what he meant, while most others had absolutely no idea what he was after. Moreover most muslims (weâre talking about them of course) had never learned to deal with situations in which their religion was ridiculed or criticized severely.
He knew about the existence of fanatics like âthe Hofstad groupâ (a group of young jihadists), and was warned for retaliations from their side, but he often talked about himself as âa town idiotâ, and thought nobody would want to kill a joker like him. For this reason he refused personal protection (a safe house, bodyguards etc., so all Hirsi Ali asked for in his name) when it was proposed.
He payed the highest possible price for it.
And his murder was a very traumatic experience for Dutch society.
I have seen Interview and another one, which I obviously have forgotten to entrol in my database, so that I will now have trouble to find it between all my VHS recordings. Shit!
But it was about a reporter who fotographed accidentally a political murder, which wasnât as it seems to appear. He tries to discover the truth behind the âofficialâ truth.
Van Gogh was good in visually creating complex characters, and the acting is great in both films.
That film is called 06/05, in German: Der Sechste Mai
The novel on which the film is based, by Tomas Ross, is worth reading too
Oh yes, thatâs the title.
My memory, sometimes âŠ
It was already mentioned (and for good reason!), but Iâm going to have to go with Loco/Tigero from The Great Silence. He was completely ruthless. No redeeming qualities whatsoever.
Frank from OUATITW is also great. Unlike Loco/Tigero, Iâd argue that he does have some redeeming qualities. Donât get me wrong, he was a real son of a bitch, too, but he seemed to have some sense of honor, albeit a rather warped and unconventional sense of honor, but still.
Setenza (Angel Eyes) - Van Cleef
Loco - Kinski
Indio- Volonte
John - Jack Palance
Frank - Fonda
To name but a few.
Jose Bodalo and Jose Torres also play good villains.
Bodalo as we all know was Hugo Rodriquez in Django. I also saw him in Red Blood Yellow Gold . So it was interesting to see him as the good guy gringo sheriff in Garringo.
Jose Torres I remember from Death rides a horse and Viva Django. He always carries that menacing scowl on his face.
My three favorite villains are:
- Volonte as El Indio (For a Few Dollars More)
- Kinski as Loco (The Great Silence)
- Van Cleef as Angel Eyes (The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly).
Hands down Gian Maria VolonteâŠel Indio
I also have to give thumbs up to Lee V C as âAngel EyezââŠ