Jonathan of the Bears / Jonathan degli orsi (Enzo G. Castellari, 1993)

Your last sentence sums my opinions up beautifully. THe film I believe was overly ambitious in trying to send the the big “message”. To me, filmmakers should just try and make a good film, without the unnesssary preachy bullshit.

Although I would agree with you 99% of the time, what about Sollima and his movies? Or any other Solinas script.

They are preachy, of course.

Yes, not a fan of preachy bullshit as like to make up my own mind.

There is no need to believe any preacher

One thing I don’t like about this one: I definetly lacks techniscope. Therefore it looks like a cheap tv-production. Too sad…

I can forgive Sollima for preachyness because his films were actually good!

The Preachy Thing doesn’t disturb me in the Sollima Movies. His Stories and his characters are better.

I didn’t like this movie at all as it was both a pain, and a chore to sit through. If I hadn’t given the DVD away, the only reason I would have to ever revisit it would be for the striking cinematography. It’s great that both Castellari and Nero got the chance to work together again on another western project, but this one was a terrible misfire and a waste of talent, IMO.

i wasn’t expecting much from this, so i was pleasantly surprised when i saw it. beautifully shot and some beautiful scenery. the action scenes were good. has plenty of homages and references to other SW’s. yes i’d agree the singing telling you what you can see grates on your nerves a bit, but some of the music is beautiful.Franco Nero is too old for the role really but is still good as usual and John Saxon is good as well. Melody Robertson as the indian chief’s daughter is beautiful. liked the ending, all in all a good film i thought.

Really?

I think the film is terrible. A man is brought up by Indians, and whose best friend is a bear. Horny story. Since I got hair loss. :o

There are some good scenes, but overall kitschy trash. The last two films by Castellari could not be more different. Keoma is a first-class film, Jonathan of the Bears is a very insubstantial work.
My opinion. :wink:

[quote=“The Stranger, post:31, topic:1253”]Really?
Horny story.[/quote]

Really?

I think The Stranger means Corny

I think that too, but who knows? :wink:

No !!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
OK. That was my mistake.

Horny Story. That was nonsense. ;D ;D :o ??? ::slight_smile:

Scherp is right: Corny Story or Stupid Story !!! :wink:

It got me thinking whether the bear had a horny moment or something :smiley: .

Could imagine a song going like this: I’m Yogy, the horny bear fom Yellowstone (clap clap)

I do like this one a lot and the comparisons to Dances with Wolves and Keoma are certainly there. Is the best no but considering when this was released and that no one cared about it over here (US) at that time it certainly is better and not the preachy nonsense that Costner produced. Plus having Hess, Saxon, and Bobby Rhodes (those who have seen Bava’s Demoni and Dèmoni 2: L’incubo ritorna know what I am talking about) are added bonuses.

For me the other way round. Costner’s film is better in every department.

yes " Dances With Wolves" is the much better film but " Jonathan Of The Bears" is enjoyable in my opinion.