Review // My Darling Clementine (1946)

“John Ford… takes on the legend of the O.K. Corral shoot-out in this multilayered, exceptionally well-constructed western, one of the director's very best films. Henry Fonda… cuts an iconic figure as Wyatt Earp, the sturdy lawman who sets about the task of shaping up the disorderly Arizona town of Tombstone, and Victor Mature… gives the performance of his career as the boozy, tubercular gambler and gunman Doc Holliday. Though initially at cross-purposes, the pair ultimately team up to confront the violent Clanton gang. Affecting and stunningly photographed, My Darling Clementine is a story of the triumph of civilization over the Wild West from American cinema's consummate mythmaker.” (from Amazon) And “While My Darling Clementine never loses its dynamism as a hard-hitting western, it is also a tender love story.” (from the dvd case)

The West is so unique in that -- figuring from, say, after the Civil War to 1900 (I know there’re elements both before and after that) -- the wild west we tend to think of was such a short period of time, and so unique in that it was being mythologized as it happened. This whole film just made me think of all that again as it was filmed just seventeen years after Wyatt Earp’s death and Earp himself was a technical advisor to John Ford in the silent film days (apparently also drawing a sketch for him of the layout and sequence of events for the famous gunfight at the O.K. Corral). The overlap is so fascinating.

(Note: that said, great liberties were taken with this film. Its historical inaccuracies are well documented elsewhere, but if, like me, you’re a fan of other renditions of, as a major for instance, the friendship between Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday, I just have to mention that this is a trifle jarring. Having experienced a rollercoaster of opinions the first time I saw it, I have to say I was able to analyze its merits much more clearly once I separated the two things in my brain. Just mentioning all that as a preparatory fyi as knowing all of it going in really helps.)

All that aside, this is a tremendous, archetypal classic.

I’ve never seen such dry, understated humor in an early western. Little flashes here and there that are so unexpected and spot on. I end up smiling all over repeatedly.

A lot of time and space is given to developing the complexities of Doc Holliday’s character. This Doc is mercurial, reckless, embittered -- a tortured soul with nothing to lose. 

He’s such a brilliant foil for Wyatt Earp. And the development of the relationship + the character contrast between the two men is fascinating.

Henry Fonda has become one of my favorite western leads and this may very well be my favorite of his that I’ve seen. He handles the part so well. Throughout the story we have vengeance, justice… and the everyday. So much of the drama revolves around the main character with the other characters swirling round him like a tempestuous rising flood around a rock. It made me think so much about how you can’t control everyone around you. You can’t manage all their big feelings and mess and prior attachments / back story. But you can be an anchor. From a storytelling perspective, I found it so ingenious. To have a character surrounded by that turmoil... actively involved, but outside the maelstrom, radiating steadfastness... I really liked it.

The gunfight is purposefully almost incidental to the story. It’s like the point of it all is the little everyday-ish moments. The mythic distilling right down into the everyday. And that’s right up my alley. I love it so much.

The way the film was shot is also stunning. Some moments are absolutely epic.

The plot is so measured throughout, but, specifically at the end with Pa Clanton, there’s definitely some food for thought re the relationship between careful justice and vengeance.

Speaking of the legendary gunfight itself... there’s no background music, which I found very impactful. The whole thing is so rooted, grounded.

After all that -- after the shoot-out and the death -- the ending is so sweet! Simple, charmingly awkward, and so sweet. 

I know I’ve said this before about specific westerns… But there’s this superb quality that great westerns do so well… that of later growing to colossal size in the mind and heart and soul. And this has that. It’s humble, sturdy, magnificent… And I absolutely love it.

Review // Rio Bravo (1959)

“John Wayne and Dean Martin star as a Western sheriff and his recovering alcoholic deputy who, along with a small ragtag group of men and women, refuse to release a suspected murderer from jail, even though they are surrounded and greatly outnumbered by gunmen.” (from imdb)

When I tell you that that was the best official summary I could find… Talk about underselling. Well, plot point wise, I guess it works. But take my word for it, that’s not the half of it.

A quintessential, down-to-earth western, Rio Bravo is just delightful.

John Wayne is his usual larger-than-life self -- very calm, levelheaded, and masterful.

It’s my favorite role of Walter Brennan’s to date.

Dean Martin does a fantastic job.

And I think it’s the first time I’d seen Ricky Nelson.

The crooning bit in the jail is one of my favorite parts.

The manly, good-humored camaraderie, the everyday banter among the sheriff and his deputies is so fun. I love how well they all know each other and absolutely have each other’s backs. I also like how they’re not fighting over the same woman, but genuinely happy for and/or concerned about each other.

I loved how Angie Dickinsen handled her part... sparkling and witty, with a soft, captivating archness.

On my last viewing, I realized how much I really love their love story -- how she backs him up and has that sweetness, but she’s not naïve. 

And she most certainly has a backbone -- there's no sidelining her -- but she’s also fully on board with the team. I love how she integrates with the group of friends as a whole, building her own rapport / not pulling him away to create their own little bubble. Such a healthy foundation for a relationship.

John Wayne and Howard Hawks did make Rio Bravo as a direct response to High Noon, but what they created was a classic in its own right. John T. Chance is the lawman who won’t back down – who doesn’t let the idea of failure even be a talking point. That is, he realistically knows that they could end up dead, but giving up just isn’t on the table. He and his deputies experience nerves, but not fear. And once the shooting actually starts, his easy confidence + the high spirits of all three of his deputies just tells us from the get-go that everything will be ok. 

And Chance makes do with what he’s got. He’s not against help, but he doesn’t ask for it, and (however willing they might be) he doesn’t want help from anyone with other ties and responsibilities that they would be endangering. He wears the badge. It's his job to protect the people.

Content wise: There's regular western shooting, etc. but all very bloodless. And in the ending scene, Feathers is wearing a saloon dancing costume (about equivalent to a 50’s bathing suit) from her earlier life (donned with the intent of clearing the air with him about her past) and he tells her why he doesn’t want her wearing it in public, so ultimately it’s clear where this relationship is heading, but nothing’s shown then (or throughout), so the viewer can decide for themselves how things develop. As always, I recommend a parental preview to decide age appropriateness. But you know me ;), I’m over cautious when making recommendations, and it's really not much, so don’t let that deter you from checking it out.

Comfortable... endearing... reassuring, this western is great fun. It warms my heart and has become such a favorite. I’d love to hear if you’ve seen it!

Review // High Noon (1952)

Filmed in real time, from its first frame, High Noon is the definition of epic. The themes are deeply thought-provoking. The visuals are stunning. Every moment of every shot is so carefully, deliberately crafted. The acting across the board is legendary. The theme song is one of the most stirring ever composed. In short, this is justly considered one of the greatest films of all time. It should be mandatory watching for all high school students.

Torn between love and duty, Marshal Will Kane is determined not to desert his post. From the opening scenes, so many people are trying to control him. He even says at one point that he’s “tired of being shoved.” And throughout the betrayals from all his friends and neighbors, with everyone pushing him to run, he responds with a quiet stubbornness, digging in his heels – ultimately determined to stop and turn and face the monster pursuing him.

Before discussing the themes, it’s imperative we delve a little into the controversial backstory of the film itself.

Background

I did quite a bit of reading on this and in the end came round to thinking the google summary did a pretty good job and there’s no real need for me to rehash the general take:

“The 1952 Western High Noon is considered a communist allegory because its screenwriter, Carl Foreman, was a former member of the Communist Party who intentionally wrote the script as a protest against the Hollywood blacklist and... McCarthy-era [politics].

“The film’s plot, in which a marshal is abandoned by his cowardly townspeople while facing a criminal threat, was widely interpreted as a metaphor for suspected communists being ostracized by friends and colleagues who refused to stand up for them during the Red Scare.

“Despite this interpretation, the film’s reception was polarized:

• Critics of the film, such as actor John Wayne and director Howard Hawks, condemned it as "un-American" because they believed it portrayed ordinary Americans as cowardly and encouraged dissent against authority. (Editing to note that apparently John Wayne also disliked the marshal discarding his badge at the end. I have more thoughts on this / hoping to share when I review Rio Bravo, but for right now just trying to stick to High Noon.)
• Supporters and international audiences viewed the film as a story of individualism and moral courage. Ironically, the Soviet Union’s state newspaper, Pravda, also attacked the film, calling it a "glorification of the individual," which contradicted collectivist communist ideology.
• The film remains a complex political parable that allows for multiple interpretations, ranging from a critique of McCarthyism to a conservative fantasy about standing alone against evil.”

And from google again, because I think it’s frightfully interesting: 

“The historical consensus is that the "cowardly town" trope is largely a Hollywood myth derived from Dime Novels rather than reality. Most Old West towns were peaceful, and the few prone to violence, such as mining camps, were not as lawless as movies portrayed.

• High Noon Fiction: The classic scenario of a marshal facing a gang alone because the town is cowed is fictional. In reality, townsfolk were generally experienced with guns post-Civil War, and entire towns would not be intimidated by just a few outlaws.
• Actual Violence Stats: Violence was often lower than expected; for example, major cowtowns like Abilene, Dodge City, and Wichita saw only 45 violent deaths combined between 1870 and 1875.
• Law Enforcement: Marshals often refused offers of help from vigilance committees (as Virgil Earp did in Tombstone) to avoid risking innocent lives, and towns like Dodge City were kept in check by numerous skilled gunmen who were wary of starting trouble with one another.
• Exceptions: Some frontier towns like Fort Griffin (Texas) or Deadwood (South Dakota) did experience breakdowns in law enforcement due to influxes of outlaws, but even these were not universally "cowardly" as residents often fought back or relied on hired guns like Bat Masterson or Wyatt Earp.”

So. One could absolutely say that the conflict / overarching narrative in High Noon is indeed, in a very real sense, un-American. In the ethos of sturdy American culture, these things were unthinkable, and in the Old West… well… most every citizen was armed and civic duty was taken very seriously. It was integral, especially to those building an entire town.

Ok, so we have the backdrop surrounding production and some facts re historical accuracy. Now here’s where I want to take this.

The truth is, all literature, art, etc. is the product of a certain time and place and pressure, and springs from certain joys and fears. Often culture wide. But what makes certain works – certain stories – into great stories, into art, resonating so deeply, is their ability to transcend their own time, to tap into the universal themes with which mankind has wrestled since the fall and will wrestle till Resurrection Day. Great stories that tap into the realm of myth and legend + being evaluations of the state of man’s soul.

Mart (Will Kane’s predecessor and mentor) says, “People got to talk themselves into law and order before they do anything. Maybe because down deep they don't care. They just don't care.” And we have too the running thread of it all being for nothing. Mart again, “You risk your skin catching killers, and the juries turn them loose, so they can come back and shoot at you again. If you're honest, you're poor your whole life. In the end you wind up dying all alone on some dirty street. For what? For nothing. For a tin star.” These are prescient questions. 

Along these lines, Kane discarding his badge into the dust at the end can be seen as a straightforward act of embittered disillusionment. But I would like to submit that – especially in a story this multi-layered – one defeatist character or moment is not the sum total that we’re supposed to walk away with. That would be too simplistic.

As the story has taken pains to remind us over and over and over and over, the problem lies with higher authorities (including juries of the common man) not taking justice seriously. And the major, main, underlying problem to that, is that mankind is often undependable, changeable, cowardly, and disloyal. And I think we should know our Bibles well enough to not be greatly surprised. 

We have, here, brought forward into the stark light of day, the truth that people are fickle and ungrateful and will naturally spiral into degeneracy. It’s not a good state of affairs. But it’s the way it often is.

As to Will Kane throwing down his badge... On the personal level, sometimes you just have to get out. Be done. You can't save people from themselves. As a Christian, you can forgive. You can pray for their souls. You can hope they change. But there are some things from which there’s no coming back. You can never pretend that those things didn’t happen. The relationship can never be the same.

On another level... what else might be going on here? Is it saying that there's nothing even left there to guard? At least one character has already said that the town itself is teetering on the brink of death. And yes, on the one hand, it is the honorable thing to carry on, to fight no matter what (which *spoilers* Will Kane very much already did do -- it must be remembered that he's walking away from this after having seen the show down through).... But Psalm 11:3 springs to mind: "If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?"

In verses 4-5 of Psalm 11 we get the concluding thought: "The Lord is in His holy temple, the Lord’s throne is in heaven; His eyes behold, His eyelids test the sons of men. The Lord tests the righteous, but the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates."

I'm not trying to turn this into a different kind of allegory. It just made me think of the big perspective on these things. On the one hand, sometimes we are called to take a stand, to have courage, to faithfully withstand the testing. At other times, the wise man knows that if the very foundations are destroyed, what indeed can the righteous do? The ultimate answer is that when we turn to our Maker, we are reminded that He, and He alone, is the Supreme Judge of mankind, and that He alone sees clearly. 

At the end of High Noon there’s satisfying completion, but it also resists giving us a nice tidy tie off, complete with bow. It highlights the fact that it’s not supposed to be this way. It wants the viewer to be uncomfortable. It’s throwing the question in our face… forcing you to think through where you stand and what you would do.

This is high story.

The heart of this entire saga could have been told in a fantasy, but, in this particular case, it plays out in a western setting – the perfect setting indeed, if I may say so, for a tale of lofty myth and legend.

So yes, absolutely one of the greatest, not just westerns, but films of all time.

Thank you for reading!

Review || Wanted: Dead or Alive, Season 2 with Steve McQueen

I have to say... Season 2 fully lives up to the high expectations set by Season 1. W:DOA is a firm house favorite around here. (That about covers all the relevant points, right??)

In all seriousness, W:DOA episodes themselves always strike me as so original. (Ok, the one involving a ginormous jungle animal is ever-so-slightly/rather-a-stretch, but I love so many of the others so much that I'm absolutely willing to just roll with it.) 

I have more thoughts on revisionist westerns as a whole (among which W:DOA would generally be classed), but for now I'll just say it definitely has the grit and shadows, the layered complexity of its fellows. 

Besides the creative plot points and premises, there are quite a lot of fence sitting characters + a general assortment of straight up mysterious ones. Things are not always as they seem... We have again the complex characters of the first season. One could say gray, but that wouldn't be quite true. The morality isn't in question. It's more that bad guys can often wear a face of great respectability and good guys can be weak or fail at the point of testing. But it's not done in a fatalistic or nihilistic way. It's about life being real, requiring great strength of character, and sometimes people who have a strong backbone -- enough to have gone through great difficulties already -- still buckle. It takes a steely, robust, dyed-in-the-wool sense of moral duty to see and do what's right when the going gets messy -- when fear lies at the door -- when the wrong way out is very, very easy.

Throughout, our protagonist (Josh Randall), does what he does, not because he's felt a high, mystic call to heroism, or even considers himself the best person for the job, but because he's in a given place at a given point in time and something has to be done. And somebody has to do it. And so he does it. He steps in it every once in a while, but he's not an anti-hero (if an anti-hero is one who sometimes does good things for the wrong reasons). Randall is all about doing the right things. He's not a superhero, but something more relatable... an honest man doing his level best -- absolutely determined -- to see that everyone gets a fair shake.

And all done with the stripped back, understated storytelling which westerns do so well -- forcing you to think, to see, to confront things. There are also flashes of (often wry) humor -- unexpected moments and quips that make me actually laugh. There is sweetness and hope, too. And it all comes together to create stories that are consistently, deeply, satisfying.

Incidentally, this season also has the unique episodes where Randall is riding with a partner and those definitely added an entertaining little twist on everything.

As to the small fry... With parental guidance, for the most part I think these are all absolutely family friendly. Especially with the first two episodes revolving around children, my young sidekick was totally invested. (It's really the first western that's come alive for her, so Mama's absolutely delighted.)

Ninja Turtles is still a big thing around here, so her favorite was the Black Belt episode. We watched it twice (obviously). And there was much giggling, lots of "hiyas!", and full on cheering. Total investment. XD

Other eps have also prompted some deep -- as in deep -- conversations. And I'm so grateful for the conversation starter and just being able to experience the stories together. It's been really, really good.

So yes, highly recommend seasons 1-2 and can't wait to start 3! 💚

Movie Review // Far Haven (2023)

Official summary: "In 1887, Hunter Braddock moves back to Far Haven, Arizona to start over with his two young children, but when his father-in-law is brutally attacked, he must take on the corrupt forces strangling the town in order to protect what he loves most."

(Note, the opening shot in the film actually says 1880.)

~

So for LOWCW, I typically like to do a mix of classics and newer titles. Along those lines, I've had a newer one picked out to watch for weeks. And it looks like it will be really great. I'm sure it'll be really great. But I just wasn't feeling it. 

Then, lo and behold, last night I ran across this one... And it has Branch in it. Or, I mean, the actor who played Branch. And he's alive and well. And you all know I'm not not seeing that. So here we are.

Again, this all happened last night. I don't think I've ever watched and reviewed something so swiftly so I'm rather shaking in my boots at my own rapidity. xD

(Full disclosure: where I found it and initially watched it I wasn't able to see the credits, but I've promptly ordered the DVD and if there's anything objectionable in the little bit I missed, I'll come back and update this review.)

I also had this entire thing almost written out and apparently didn't save my first draft. (Trust me, it's been a rollercoaster of a day.) Anyway! We're persevering, but that's why this review may be in a slightly different format.

The acting etc.

Bailey Chase, A. Martinez, and Chris Mulkey all do a great job and the rest of the supporting cast keep up quite decently. Initially, I wasn't sure about the child actors, but they won me over.

The fashions aren't entirely historically accurate, but in this context we won't bother about that.

The plot

Any quibbles I have are over some possible plot holes, but (thinking it over) some of them were actually resolved / nonexistent, so I'll have to watch a second time to make a final determination.

In short, is it hackneyed in places? Yes. Do people kinda have a miraculously speedy path to recovery from gunshot wounds between one day and the next? Yes. Do they sometimes act irrationally? Yes. (Irrationally as in, why pause to form a lynch mob when there's an active stage robbery going on rather than waiting till later?) But then again, the more I see of the world, the more I'm convinced that people just tend to go off their rockers in moments of stress. So yeah. Maybe I'm going soft on plot continuity writers in my old age. Because in spite of all of that, did I end up heartily enjoying it? Yes. 

Additionally, when it comes to family drama, there doesn't always have to be a big showdown for misunderstandings and rifts to happen. Sometimes it's just because one party refuses to explain themselves and say the darn thing. And that can be enough for confidence and trust to be broken. So I actually don't consider that aspect of the plot too far of a reach.

The ending provides satisfying resolution but is also a bit open-ended. And I rather liked that actually.  It highlights how life goes on. There will be future problems for our protagonist to work through, but his mettle has been shown -- and that's not changing. He's proven himself to be a true man. 

(I also saw a review on Amazon saying it feels like they were setting things up for a sequel, so there's that idea. We shall see!)

Themes

The faith themes (might) be more than a bit on the nose, but honestly, they're kind of what I needed right now. Additionally, the more conversations I have as a parent, the more I've realized how cheesy I sound sometimes, but that doesn't matter. Sometimes life is full of on the nose cheese.

I really really loved the emphasis on fatherhood. Further than that, on family. 

There is a strong matriarchal grandmother figure and also hints of what might be in the future with the local schoolteacher / love interest. I really liked how the women were portrayed. They absolutely come alongside their man, they have his back -- but they're women in their own right and when they're coming alongside, with wit and intelligence, they help their man forward to be a yet better man. 

And all of them are there to love on the children.

Theme #2 (or 3?): as aforementioned, there are some forced plot points and it is a tad rough in places, but -- with our protagonist an ex-soldier of the division dealing with Indian affairs -- I very much liked their take on the Indian Wars. Or at least, the train of thought they open up. They don't give a picture of all good guys and all bad guys either way, but by zoning in on one example of a conscientious objector who then paid a heavy price for his stand, they highlight the true nature of what military power should be all about, i.e. at the very least, protection of the helpless. Along these lines, we see the heart of true honor. 

Surprisingly (though it makes total sense, but still, I was surprised), part way through, I was starkly reminded of To Kill a Mockingbird.

And the analogy isn't exact, but, almost in the tradition of High Noon and other classics, we have our lone hero who, if not quite an outcast, at least sits ill at ease among his fellows, and yet still puts his life on the line for what's right. Fair warning, it's late and I'm going down fascinating rabbit trails xD, but here's the thing. We know the conflicted story surrounding the production and reception of High Noon, which does draw a very stark dividing line (accordingly creating a story of epic proportions), esp. regarding *spoilers* its lonely protagonist who is later saved by his wife *end spoilers*. In here they achieve a similar lone hero effect, but (and I liked this) he does ultimately gain a small band of trusted friends (while still having to win the rest of the town to his side). And the love interest can unexpectedly handle a firearm very well in a pinch. (So much so that I'm wondering if that's an homage to HN... Such things do happen in lots of other films as well, but... just maybe?)

The whole thing was refreshing. And -- I don't care if this is cliche -- it reminded and encouraged me once again that it's always worth standing for the truth. Always. 

And I'm grateful for that.

Final summary

All in all, it's clean and (apart from the shoot out scenes) absolutely family friendly, and I already have plans to happily rewatch it again in the near future! 

I'd love to hear if this is a new one to you too!