Yes I agree that James Coburn and the music were good in Pat Garrett and Billy the kid
but I was not alluding to either of those in my opinion of the film.
Anyhow I think it is better and fairer NOT to condemn/disparage too much any film as
that film is bound to be somebody’s favourite and there is good in all films if YOU SEE IT :
I may not like Bob Dylan as a singer or “actor” but somebody else might find him OK :o
Right, and that is what we both will Do!
CHISUM 1970 John Wayne Christopher George Lynda Day Geoffrey Duel
Directed by : Andrew V. McLaglen Written By : Andrew J. Fenady Batjac Productions
Epic, energetic, all star Western finds Big John Wayne at his best playing cattle baron
John Chisum as he makes an alliance with Billy the Kid (Geoffrey Duel) and Pat Garrett
(Glenn Corbett). Among Big John’s enemies is the ever talented Christopher George as
Dan Nodeen and Forrest Tucker as Lawrence Murphy.
Beautiful female support comes from the delicious Lynda Day (Christopher Georges wife)
as Sue McSween. Excellent support from John Agar, Richard Jaeckel and Patrick Knowles.
John Wayne has never been better or greater that he is in CHISUM.
My Vote for CHISUM is 17.2 out of 20 
This film CHISUM 1970 is my preference as JOHN WAYNE’s BEST FILM and it has the
Pat Garrett and Billy The Kid characters beautifully cast. Geoffrey Duel is wonderful.
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:1738, topic:141”]I do agree that it looks beautiful, Stanton, and it does contain some of the best scenes Peckinpah has ever shot, still to me it’s no more than a film by a once brilliant filmmaker who is now clearly over his peak.
Sparks of brilliance : Pickens death at the riverside, watched by Durado (‘mama’), Billy’s escape from prison, killing Bell and Ollinger, a few scattered scenes along the way involving Elam and (especially) John Beck (since his part was largely removed from the Special DVD version I still prefer the Turner version). But there are far too many dull scenes, too many thrown-in blood-spattered scenes, and most of the time the film just doesn’t work. When it’s inspired, it’s marvellous, but the problem is that it hardly ever is inspired. Most actors - including Coburn - are mumbling and moving slowly, as if they were having little idea of what was going on. I like Dylan’s soundtrack, but his part is completely superfluous and his thespian talents non-existing.
The film somehow manages to transmit the feeling of getting old, of having outlived your own time, but better films have been made on that subject (even by Peckinpah himself). And I’m pretty sure the film would’ve been much better had Peckinpah made it some seven or eight years earlier.
But of course I invite you to disagree wholeheartedly …[/quote]
Well, I think PG was always a film which divided the audience, at least to a greater extent as The Wild Bunch (which luckily also is not a completely undisputed picture).
But meanwhile most (not all) of Peckinpah’s admireres consider PG as one of his greatest efforts.
The overall fatalistic mood of the film (in contrast to the powerful, screenbursting images of TWB) manages even to incorporate the scenes which seem to many viewers as “underdirected” or “underdeveloped” (I also see this in a different way). Imo even Dylan’s (often criticized) non-acting is not out of place in the context of the style of this movie, and I also think that his role has an thematically importance for the film.
Otherwise I wouldn’t think that high of PG, of course!
I also think that the new cut works much better than the Turner version, but there were of course some criticizeable decisions made, which only the actual cutter Paul Seydor would have made. Imo 1 or 2 min of the Turner version should be added, but here again everybody would have his own ideas how the “perfect” version should look. I think e.g. that some of the shoot-outs are not cut/intercut in the best possible way.
Hmm, yep, … some of the scenes belong to the most beautiful, magical I have ever seen in cinema.
Most Peckinpah fans will agree with you, few with me, but I can live with that.
Maybe you’ve read this article, maybe not. It was written by an unconditional admirer of the movie, who prefers (just like me) the Turner version to the 2005 version:
How many different versions are there now to Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid ?
At least three (the 70s cinema version, the Turner version and the 2005 DVD version - see the dvdtimes article); apart from all this, the BBC showed a long version in the 90s; I remember there was an introduction, but not by Alan Sharp. I must still have a VHS recording of it. I don’t know if that version is the same as the Turner version; I guess not, but I have no idea what the differences are.
Since quite a few people aren’t satisfied with this ‘definite’ 2005 version, I guess yet new versions will pop up in the future, maybe on Blu-ray.
I am just watching NFL on CBS via sopcast. And i am seeing adverdisement for a western series special called comanche moon. It looks really good. Anybody from the US here and knows if its good? Seems to be part of a miniseries or even a complete series? It stars Val Kilmer if that helps.
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:1745, topic:141”]Most Peckinpah fans will agree with you, few with me, but I can live with that.
Maybe you’ve read this article, maybe not. It was written by an unconditional admirer of the movie, who prefers (just like me) the Turner version to the 2005 version:
http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=60755[/quote]
Oh, thank you very much, a quite interesting and detailed article.
I think the problem is, that it depends on which version you have grown up with. I had seen for 12 long years only the chopped 106 min version, which has by the way some unintentional qualities, which get lost in the longer versions by adding episodes which don’t result in a bloodbath.
It was always a masterpiece for me, the short version loses several complexities, but because of it’s episodic structure it works nevertheless, whereas Major Dundee or shorter versions of The Wild Bunch are partly destroyed films.
When I first saw the Turner version I was a bit disappointed because the film wasn’t improving as much as I thought it should. I think that the Turner version has several rhythmic problems which the short theatrical version hadn’t. E.g. the shifting of the raft scene towards the end is an emotional and thematical disaster.
If I had to chose between the cinema release and the Turner version I would choose the first one!
Even for all it’s losses (and the sadest loss would be the brillant original opening montage).
So for me the new version is easily the best of the three.
So several of the criticised decisions of Seydor are very understandable for me, but not all.
I wish I could prepare my “own” version.
(I also wish I could make my own cut of My Name Is Nobody.)
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:1747, topic:141”]At least three (the 70s cinema version, the Turner version and the 2005 DVD version - see the dvdtimes article); apart from all this, the BBC showed a long version in the 90s; I remember there was an introduction, but not by Alan Sharp. I must still have a VHS recording of it. I don’t know if that version is the same as the Turner version; I guess not, but I have no idea what the differences are.
Since quite a few people aren’t satisfied with this ‘definite’ 2005 version, I guess yet new versions will pop up in the future, maybe on Blu-ray.[/quote]
More versions than the average film perhaps then ?
More versions to come perhaps and people wanting their own personal cut etc, and cannot help but feel it will put some people off from viewing/buying the film.
I watched American Outlaws on the dutch television yesterday. This, trying to be cool, action-western succeeds at some points(Colin Farrell is ok, the action sometimes ís cool) but fails at many others. Several parts are badly act, though the action sometimes is cool it also sucks a lot during some scenes and the score is ridiculous. 5/10
The Dirty Outlaws. Nothing special. But OK.
[quote=“Pacificador, post:1732, topic:141”]Just watched it myself last night. Good flick, and I agree with your thoughts about the comedy fighting.
The more I see of Anthony Ghidra the more I like him![/quote]
Yes i was pretty impressed with him. This was the first film i had seen him in though. There may be something featuring him in the ever growing pile i have to watch. If not, any recommendations?
The Last Killer is Ghidra’s best. A Hole in the Forehead is another good one.
Both are directed by the always reliable Giuseppe Vari.
[quote=“stanton, post:1754, topic:141”]The Last Killer is Ghidra’s best. A Hole in the Forehead is another good one.
Both are directed by the always reliable Giuseppe Vari.[/quote]
Thanks 
Good news for me then, as Last Killer is in my “to watch” pile. Will keep an eye out for Hole In The Forehead though 
Great music in Pistoleros btw! 8)
Thought I’d mention this! ;D
[quote=“Lindberg, post:1756, topic:141”]Great music in Pistoleros btw! 8)
Thought I’d mention this! ;D[/quote]
Yes indeed One of the things i love about SW’s in general. So often, even a lot of the lower budget, not so good films still have great music.
Garrone: Vendetta at Dawn[url]http://www.spaghetti-western.net/index.php/Quel_maledetto_giorno_della_resa_dei_conti[/url] (dvd)
-Good cast: Ty Hardin, George Eastman, Bruno Corazzari, Nello Pazzafini etc, otherwise uninteresting film. Simpel’s dvd looks good but english audio has some distracting noices at times.
This is so true…
“A Time For Killing” (1967)
-Glenn Ford, George Hamilton
During the Civil War Confederate soldiers escape from a Union prison and head for the Mexican border. Along the way they kill a Union courier who has a message that the war is over. Keeping the message a secret, the Captain has his men go on and they soon find themselves in a battle with the Union search party who also is unaware of the war’s end.
A decent movie with some good action scenes. I think the film makers were trying for a spaghetti western atmosphere, complete with extreme violence, crazy characters and desolate desert scenes. One fun thing about this movie is seeing lots of familiar actors in supporting parts. Max Baer jr (from "The Beverly Hillbillies) Dick Miller (from many low budget horror movies) and a very young Harrison Ford (billed as Harrison J. Ford) in a blink and you’ll miss him role as a union soldier.