[Western Movie Rambles]

Do you remember what part you came in on? There weren't too many hints

about what was coming that I recall specifically. Boone's surmises about why

Brigade was leaving such a "clear trail" for Frank to follow, "almost as if he

wanted them to catch up with us", being the biggest clue.

 

Well good.. ha. I must have been better at reading how HARD he was to read than I thought, ha.

 

And to answer your question, I missed about the first 30 minutes or so, actually. I am not entirely sure exactly when I came in (because after I turned it on..ha. I STILL had "stuff" going on all around me (for a few more minutes)between getting the kidling ready for bathtime.. and the QT wanting cake for dessert..ha.So my full attention was decidedly less than "undivided" ha. I was more than a little distracted for the first few minutes even AFTER I started watching so I can't say for sure where I picked up w/ things. But I think more or less I can REALLY account for everything after they made camp (the night before the pics that the Grey Guy posted) Some of the events that night were a bit foggy becuase I missed a lot of what they were saying.. I think someone had recently died.. or was dying.. but I missed WHO they were and why they died. (so I must have also missed that whole "grave digging" thing you mentioned) And am I right in assuming they "inherited" the girl because something happened to her husband? That is what I was gathering from what I heard them say later on.

 

I really did have a lot of "piecing" together to do to catch the rest of it. (and again.. that is likely why I was suprised when it ended so early.. it is not a very long film. Usually the first thirty minutes still leaves more than an hour or so to be able to catch up on things.But this one.. not quite that much. I will try to keep an eye out for it again and maybe catch the WHOLE thing this time.

 

PS: Grey Guy.. (after saying all that I did above, ha)

 

What I liked most about Ride Lonesome was that Brigade was being chased by a guy we didn't know but his greatest threat may be the guy next to him... So there was this constant feeling of tension and trouble in the air

 

Well said. I liked that element too (though I must confess I really did not know how big a part VanCleef's character played early on in the story) I liked that I did NOT feel comfortable about letting my guard down on Boone pretty much the ENTIRE time I was watching him.

 

I did not mind that things turned out as they did for him AND everyone else, really. Though I do confess the ending was "abrubt" for me.

 

Then we get to the end and that tension and trouble turns out to be an empty threat. I felt let down

 

Well, it must be one of those "perspective" things again.. HA. I thought it was a pretty interesting twist to the character and the story to see him turn out to NOT be such a jerk as he COULD have been in a more "typical" storyline. It was an suprising turn of events but not disappointing. (at least for me)

 

To me.. if I could have maybe changed anything.. it MIGHT have been more of a "dramatic" moment with Scott setting fire to the tree.. instead of us only seeing it burning.. after he had already set it ablaze.

 

But MAYBE also I would have liked more of a chat between Roberts and Scott at the end too.. instead of him just handing over "Roscoe P Coltrane" to them without an apparent second thought.

 

But who am I to say, ha. I guess he HAD been thinking and planning to do that more or less all along.. (oh sure.. I can say that NOW., ha.. But before it all played out..I had no clue) He played everything so close to the vest we really did not get to see too much of what he had going on inside his head so it had a real nice element of surprise that somehow worked for me. Usually I do not like that so much "mystery" in a character as far as their "motives" are concerned.. but for some reason this time I did not mind)

 

And that "close to the vest thing" is something I find often in a lot of "Scott" westerns. It is not just his "stone face" thing either.. (that we talked about a bit in Tall T) It is just that his characters are SO "strong and silent" sometimes that they are almost TOO silent and I have a hard time understanding their real reasons for what they do. And again.. ususally that bothers me.. but this time for some reason it did not.

 

Ha.. and I just saw the exchange between you and Miss G.. glad to know I am not the only one who likes a suprise.

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Oct 20, 2010 11:50 PM

[Western Movie Rambles]

I thought you might appreciate it

 

Ha.. LOVED it.. the ONLY thing missing was a little "frost" on the rope!

 

Boone certainly was a "grey/gray" character if there ever was one. Always promising

to kill Brigade, then saving his hide at least twice. Boetticher keeps us guessing and

so distracted by their conflict that we don't see what's coming in the end

 

I agree.. because I completely did NOT see it coming at all. In fact.. ha.. and maybe again it seemed like this because I missed some of the early parts, but the movie was over and I suddenly looked around and said out loud.. "Already?" ha. But then again.. I think it really WAS over (especially for Scott's character) so why not say "the end" ha.

 

Whit (Coburn) was funny and like you, I was suprised to see JC in such a role. He's

usually a lot wiser. But he was good and funny! His reaction to Boone's offer to bring

him in as a partner in the ranch was hilarious. And I don't think he was vicious, he was

just unthinking and

 

I am used to seeing him much "grittier" or at the very least much more "cunning" and/or "treacherous" ha. So it caught me off guard for sure. I agree.. I don't think he was vicious.. and I think he was even suprised when Billy started telling him how vicious FRANK was.. up to then I don't think he realized what sort of folks he was dealing with.. even indirectly.

 

would blindly do whatever Boone ordered him to

 

Up to a point.. because I don't think he was "ruthless" or as you say.. "viscious". So IF Boone HAD turned out worse than he was.. or if they had hooked up w/ Frank's bunch.. and one of them told him to do something REALLY awful (against Scott.. or even the girl, etc) I think he'd have balked.. and maybe gotten killed.. in fact THAT is what I was expecting.. again not knowing for sure how BAD (or should I say "black hatted" ha) Robert's character was or was not. Whew.. what a relief they were both just "grey" after all. ha.

 

PS: Grey Dude.. yeah.. the "landscape" ha. Tell me another one..

[Western Movie Rambles]

I love her eyes

 

Sure you do.. and I think Adam Cartwright's hair is "spiffy" HA!

[Western Movie Rambles]

While on the subject of appropriate use of branches.....I had this little

trifle in oils painted up for the occasion

 

Ha.. now THAT's a picture after my own Peacemaker heart, little darlin'! ha.

 

I appreciate the reminders from you and the Grey Guy for this film.. I forgot to keep an eye on the times so I ALMOST missed it... but managed to catch most of it.. at least not a TOTAL miss this time.. ha.

 

Mini-spoiler

 

Your gonna be my partner...right down the middle

 

Ha.. I was not sure (until the end of the movie) how genuine that offer was.. Roberts' character was just so "smartmouthed" I could not get a good fix on him

 

But most of that is likely because I missed the very beginning of the story so I was still trying to piece together how GOOD and BAD everyone was. And to be truthful.. ha.. the movie was over before I got it all figured out that way. (Duh.. That is what I get for not paying better attention to the clock)

 

I was also not prepared to see Colburn as the "less than bright one" ha. That really took me by surprise.

 

And I too liked the ending.. I agree it was a nice way to resolve Scott's character's situation.

[Focus on Fritz Lang]

Howdy Mr. Grey...

 

That's a real good tease! I really have no idea what to expect with Moonfleet. That's appealing to me

 

I think (if I recall WAY back NUMEROUS months ago when I watched this) some of the folks who are a bit more familiar w/ Lang said some stuff that led me to believe it might not be a "typical" Lang-type story To me, it really does have a feel more along the lines of say "David Copperfield" or parts of Great Expectations" in terms of how so much of the story focuses on the young boy and his perceptions..

 

Anyway.. I don't know how you will find it.. to your liking or not. (As we have all seen lately.. ha.. I admit I am not so good w/ my "guessing" on you. HA!)

 

But I do think you will at least like the END (and other portions of the story as well) I will be interested in hearing your thoughts on it.

[EARTHQUAKE -- "You've just rammed into Zsa Zsa Gabor's hedges!"]

I agree that Marlene had never looked more beautiful than here. There was such a vulnerability about her, as I remember Jackie pointed out in a Ramples post. But as you say, in that unforgettable lawn scene, Alexandra shows great strength and later on, remarkable resilience.. Before 1917 unfolds, she is shown as performing her royal duties in a sparkling, protected world of incredible privilege, but we do see subtle cracks in her smooth, almost robot-like demeanor, where her "Of course I'm happy" has just the slightest tinge of poignant unreallzed subversive aspiration, even as the viewer is swept up in all the tragic glamour of White Russia.

 

Lovely, Miss B.. well said, little darlin'.

 

"Great strength and remarkable resilience" are exactly right. She had a much different life at the beginning of it all than she did by the end of the story. And yet, early on.. there were those subtle signs of "aspiriation" (as you say) She had an "underlying strength" already inside her that was just waiting to show itself.. as the story goes along.

[Western Movie Rambles]

it's a strong western. If it wasn't for the heavy religious themes...

 

OH good gravy, Grey Guy,

 

Now if ONLY you had described it all like THAT back when we were chatting things up a few days ago... ha. Think of all the typo's I would have spared you all from reading in my longwinded responses. HA. Because I probably would (and sort of did) say the same thing.. (at least in terms of describing what the film is like) It IS a "strong western" with some "heavy religious themes". We just have a different interpretation of what that means as far as the PURPOSE for the film, I guess.

 

The way you were describing it all earlier.. ha... I almost half expected Charlton Heston to jump out at any minute and part the Rio Grande or something... HA! (KIDDING.. .only kidding.. ha. Gee.. I am NORMALLY not so rotten.. I think you must be a bad influence on me latley. HA)

 

PS: Mr. Arkadin.. thanks for stopping by and chiming in. Hope you get a chance to watch HH soon. It truly is a remarkable film.

[Focus on Fritz Lang]

I still need to watch... Moonfleet

 

Oh my golly Grey Dude.. I can't believe I have seen this film and you (Mr. Lang Fan) have not, ha. (I TRULY liked it very much, by the way) It is almost "Dickens-esque" as I recall (ha.. how is THAT for a made up word?? ha) but still has an "edge" to it as well (especially w/ Sanders' character.. oh my golly.. what a PIECE of work HE was) Oh, and PS: I imagine you would like the ending of the story VERY much.

 

Looking at your list.. I realize I have seen a few other Langs too (some I did not even KNOW were his films, ha) but I also notice MANY I have not seen (and several I have never even HEARD of before, but no big surprise there... I am always playing catch up to you folks on here it seems)

 

Gee, Movieman.. you and I both have a lot of reading to do in here, I see.

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Oct 17, 2010 4:23 PM

[A Walk on the Noir Side]

A-ha Rohanaka

 

A-ha indeed, Miss Maven! :-)

 

Yes, step right up and give forty lashes with a wet noodle to the CineMaven who missed another fine classic

 

Oh no... not THAT! ha. If wet noodles lashes are the penalty for such a thing.. I will be leaving a trail of soggy pasta behind me everywhere I GO, the way things have been going for me these days.. ha. Perish the thought.

 

Hope we both get a chance to check out this film someday.. but golly.. I am so "squeamish" sometimes, ha.. I may have to hide behind the couch for the more intense parts for sure. ha.

[RAMBLES Part II]

I am w/ Miss Maven, little gal.. very intriguing post. I have not seen this one (though I had heard of it) It has been on my "someday' list but just not been one that I had sought out all that much.. yet. ha. Now you have really got me very interested. Thanks for the fun read (and the wonderful use of the screencaps as always

[EARTHQUAKE -- "You've just rammed into Zsa Zsa Gabor's hedges!"]

KNIGHT WITHOUT ARMOUR

 

Oh girlie.. I am so glad to have caught this film back when you first recommended it to me. I absolutely love it. WHAT a story.. very powerful.. very moving. (And of course, the romance factor is way off the chart.. though there is JUST so very much more to the story than that)

 

And I THINK I recall saying this way back when we gabbed on it before.. but I think this is just about as lovely as Marlene ever looked in a film... absolutely breathtaking.

 

I started watching again last night.. and alas.. I drifted off to sleep (that is happening WAY to often to me..ha. And it is NO reflection on the movie whatsoever)

 

But at least I DID get to see one of my most fave moments in the whole story before I conked out... that scene on the lawn.. when all those people are marching to come and get her and she turns to face them.. stops only for a moment (out of fear, I am sure) and then walks TOWARD them defiantly.. oh me oh my.. what a moment.

[BRONXGIRL'S MOTHER, HENRY FONDA'S HIRSUTENESS, ETC.]

Yes, and as the sun sets below the Mediterranean horizon it's time for the TCM Provencal Film Fest. Goat cheese and sun-dried tomato appetizers will be served on olive-oil and rosemary infused flatbread. Champagne will flow and good spirits will blossom and thrive. Jack LaRue will assist in the butlering, glowering underneath a chandelier. David Niven will tell charming stories and pinch all the women. Elsa Mackenberg will proclaim the party as brilliant!

 

Ah.. sounds LOVELY, little darlin'. (Except if David Nivien pinched me.. I'd have to slap him or something.. ha. Oh.. and I am SUCH a teetotaler.. can I get a tall glass of Dr Pepper with all that?? ha)

 

Oh golly.. I wouldn't last five minutes in France.. ha. The second after I got there, they'd declare me "culturally unfit or SOMETHING .. and then send me packing back home.. sigh) You'll all just have to tell me all about it when you get back. ha.

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Oct 16, 2010 7:11 PM

[EARTHQUAKE -- "You've just rammed into Zsa Zsa Gabor's hedges!"]

I goggled Petite fours.. ha.. so I am going with that answer.. ha.

 

PS: Are you going to put on West Side Story or Grease 2 for music to clean by???? PS.. that is what I should be doing even as we speak.. sigh..

[EARTHQUAKE -- "You've just rammed into Zsa Zsa Gabor's hedges!"]

OH me... HOW could I have almost missed such a momentous occasion?? Congrats on the 13K my dear Boca "Twin" This calls for a celebration! Enjoy!

 

[A Walk on the Noir Side]

It's a very unique film

 

OH me. That was quite a clip. Very intense. I also watched the other youtube that I saw pop up for this film when I clicked on your link. (it showed a woman being interrogated and tortured) Dadgum, that Mann was quite the dark and grim fellow wasn't he?

 

I will have to put this one on my radar to try and catch it I ever see it playing... but I do not know if I would actively seek it out. I think I am too big a chicken for that much "intensity" ha. Yet I also know myself well enought to admit if I started watching it.. this would probably be a movie I would not be able to walk away from once it was on ((just based on what I saw here)

 

However I imagine (again..just from those two clips) I would likely be an emotional wreck by the time the movie was over.. ha. But I mean that in a good way. :-)

 

Oh.. and PS: I hope to get back w/ you on They Live By Night in the next day or so..that is IF I can manage to stay awake this time... ha.. And no. it is not a reflection on the movie.. ha. .it is just ME being too much of an old fogey movie watcher these days, I guess.

 

In fact.. ugh... it pains me to admit that I just woke up from an "unplanned" nap only a little while ago, ha. That seems to be happening to me a LOT lately. (A dvd and a soft couch is a recipe for disaster, I guess. ha) :-)

[Western Movie Rambles]

Happy, Happy, HAPPY Birthday Chris!!

 

Wishing you all the best, dear sir!!! Enjoy your day!

 

[Western Movie Rambles]

You're focusing on the wrong person. Reverend Powell (Robert Mitchum) is the villain (King Herod), not the hero. The hero is Rachel (Lillian Gish). And what is her "weapon"? Yes, she shoots him with a shotgun, but her real weapon is the Bible and her faith. And she preaches to the children, which is us.

 

I was only focusing on him because that is who I thought YOU were focusing on in one of your posts.. I may have misread you.

 

And it is true that there are some very BIG moments with Rachel expressing her faith (and even using like a "weapon" to defend her little ones) but I still do not think that is what would qualify this as a "religious" movie.

 

Truthfully.. I think we have different definitions for that. It would not be the first time. I seem to recall having a similar conversation with you regarding your use of the word "boring" to describe a Ford film that you found " intersting and exciting" (if I am quoting you correctly) We evidently march to the beat of our own "DICTIONARIES" ha.

 

I will try to watch it next week. I doubt it will be my speed because of religion and war, but I need to watch it to find out. I'm banking on Hawks

 

Well, let me know what you think of it. I'm tough. ha. I can take it. Oh gee.. I will be on the edge of my seat for sure, now. (Guess I'd better go put another rope into the freezer.. and maybe sharpen my hatpin.) HA!

[Western Movie Rambles]

I'd hate to bring up THE NEXT VOICE YOU HEAR into this

 

Ha.. Ollie so would I. It may only be because I have only seen just a part of that movie.. but I have never quite known what to make of it.. but OH me.. just imagine.. if...

[A Walk on the Noir Side]

Mr. ChiO says: The story is a mish-mash of hard-boiled detective fiction, romantic melodrama and B-Western dressed in 18th century costumes

 

The Grey Guy replies: Basically, Shakespearean noir. Fascinating. And you're also right about the mixing in of melodrama and western

 

Well NOW you gents have really got me curious. That sounds like a truly intriguing combination. Oh my golly.. the more I hang out here.. the more I realize that I have WAY too many movies I have yet to see to even come close to keeping up w/ you folks.

 

WOW, I am truly thankful to have started this thread so long ago to be able to get a chance to learn more about and hear of so many movies I might otherwise have NEVER known about before.

 

But AAAGGHHH.. my list of "wanna see's" is SO "bulging at the seams" lately. I do not think I will ever catch up.

 

I am such a "movie watching" wannabe compared to most of you... To borrow from a famous late night talk show host.. .thank goodness this is "ONLY an exhibition.. and not a competition" Ha.

[Western Movie Rambles]

one of my very favorite films is The Night of the Hunter and that is very religious.

 

Funny you should bring up Night of the Hunter, Grey Guy..

 

Mitchum's character is a PERFECT contrast to Gish's (in terms of him having a "said faith" and her's being a "REAL faith". I L-O-V-E love the scene where she is inside w/ her shotgun sitting in the dark in her rocking chair.. and he is outside.. and starts singing "Leaning on the Everlasting Arm" and she sings along too.. BOTH of them were singing the same song.. but from a TOTALLY different point of view.. and for a completely different REASON. Anyway.... to get to my point.. despite "religious" references... and his constant use (or misuse) of scripture, etc... I do not in ANY way view this movie as a "religious" film but there are moments of "faith" in the story.. however NONE of them are on the part of Mitchum's character. But again.. it all comes down to interpretation and point of view, I guess.

 

For the record, one of your very favorite films is Sergeant York and I'm wary to watch it because I feel like it's going to be too religious. And I'm a Howard Hawks fan. Maybe I need to take that challenge and see if my fears are justified or not

 

Well I do not presume to know how much "fear" you should have of it.. but I can say that if you feel THIS film (HH) was too "religious" you will likely have similar feelings about Sgt York. There are numerous moments throughout the film where people are praying.. quoting scripture, and putting their faith to use in real and practical ways. But again.. in no way do I view it as a "sales pitch" for becoming a Christian so much as it is a story.. about a man.. who happened to come to faith and it changed his life.. and then he carried that change in him throughout the rest of the events in the story. I personally think it is a very inspiring story (based at least in part on fact) about one man maintaining his personal integrity and accomplishing an outstanding and truly heroic feat, despite great odds. I hope you will give it a chance someday.. but given the issues you have had w/ HH, I am thinking it is not going to be your "cup o tea" too much.

 

(Oh..ha.. and PS: aside from the religous stuff.. there is at least one scene that has some "good ole' boy" comedic bar room brawling in it too.. ha. And we all know how highly you regard THAT sort of action in a movie too. HA!)

[Western Movie Rambles]

I just happen to disagree

 

Well again I say... fair enough, my dear (DEAR) Grey Guy. There are some very strong "moments" of faith in the movie.. but again.. I do not think it is all THE movie.

 

But I say again... I DO think we are all entitled to our own opinions and so we may not always see eye to eye on things... .and that is OK with me if it is OK with you.

 

we see him reading the Bible and we are even shown a passage. So it's being pushed

 

Ok.. so following THAT line of reasoning.. If I see a movie character smoking a joint and shooting up after they met up drug dealer (a lifestyle which I find VERY distasteful by the way) are THOSE sorts of things being "pushed" on ME? Why is his behavior so objectionable (considering what he had been experiencing and what he was doing?)

 

And PS: for the record.. when they show the scripture that he is reading.. did you notice what was on the table next to him??? And also.. did you notice how selfish the tone of his prayer was to God?? He was FAR from being any sort of "model" set up for us to follow after (if the intent of this part of the story was to win the viewer over to "religion")

 

But maybe we are getting hung up on the word "religious". To me.. a "religious" movie may not be the word that fits with what you seem to be struggling over.. because I think the REAL issue here (for you) is not so much the "faith" of the characters but more that you feel the "faith message" is being "pushed" upon the viewer in a purposeful and intentional way. So perhaps the term "Evangelistic" movie might be a better description. at least in how you define what it is you have a problem with about the movie. I THINK you are implying that HH is a film that seeks to "evangelize" as it entertains. And see.. to me.. that is not the way I see it.

 

But of course we don't have to see eye to eye.. so I will not belabor the point anymore. Two people can look at the very same painting and study it for hours on end and both will walk away with an entirely DIFFERENT point of view and that is what we have going on HERE as well.. you see it one way.. and I see it another.. Never mind that we saw the exact same thing (in terms of physical content).. our perspectives are what make the difference for us.

 

And again.. please know I am not in any way trying to make you see things "my way".

I see we are at an impasse.. and to go on and on and on more or less would just be us repeating ourselves.. ha. So I'll give you the last word and this will be "it" for me on the subject.

 

And PS:I appreciate your honesty... and your friendship. I hope you know that NOTHING I have said here was meant in anything but the most respectful way. We are clearly not going to agree.. but I want you to know how much I appreciate your willingness to let me discuss this with you in a reasonable manner. I have always found you to be very fair when it comes to conversations like this. And that means a lot to me. Believe me.. if I thought for ONE minute this was going to be a "bloody mess" of a battle.. ha.. I'd have been done w/ this chat a long time ago. :-)

 

(see.. now don't you wish you would have insulted me or something.. ha. THEN I might have shut up sooner!! ha)

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Oct 14, 2010 1:08 AM

[Western Movie Rambles]

We're all lucky to have you as a friend, Movieman. You're nothing but class

 

Woo HOO Grey Guy.. something we agree on!! :p

 

PS: Good golly.. ha.. in re-reading my earler post... I see that not ONLY am I the "blabbing" queen.. I am also "Her Serene Highness of Misspelled Words"! ha. So my friends.. feel free to LAUGH at me behind my back.. ha. If EVER I deserved it.. this would be one of those times. ha. Oh my golly.. what a POOR poor typist I am. But it is late and I am too tired to go back an correct it all, ha. Alas.. I shall go down in history as the girl who was TOO tired to spell.. ha) I can live with that. :-)

[Western Movie Rambles]

But does a bad guy have to sit down and read the Bible to change? Does he have to pray to God? Does he have to follow God? That seems highly religious to me.

 

Ok.. stick with me my DEAR Grey friend.. If I am not careful I will sound like I am trying to have it both ways.. because I do NOT think this is a "relgious" movie.. but rather a movie with "relgion" in it.

 

First of all.. to answer your questions above: NO. A person does not have to read or pray, etc.. to change. There are many ways to "change" a person so one does not have to adopt a "relgion" to change their attitude about something. But Blaze DID.. and that is the point. That is what changed HIM. (along with the feelings he had for Faith.. but more on that in a moment)

 

And PS: Regarding the comparisons you are making to the other movies... both of the women in AATBM and HN were not "evangelists" as someone already pointed out.. but Faith was.. so you would expect her to be "preaching" and "praying".

 

Plus.. the women in those other two films LOVED the other two men pretty much from the beginning of the story so THAT is what those two storylines focused more on with regard to their characters, rather than their faith. I don't think Faith felt that way about Blaze anywhere NEAR as early on as he did about her. So for MOST of the story.. you see her as who she was in that moment.. rather than being "interested" in him as "husband material".

 

But at any rate, getting back to your question.. the types of changes BLAZE experienced in this film DID lead up to all the actions you are referring to later on (the praying.. and Bible reading) so I guess the bottom line is WHAT it was that truly changed him (vs what changed the other two guys) WAS it his love for her that changed him (so deeply?) Maybe in part.. but I submit there was more to it. I think there WAS a "spiritual" change in him apart from his love for her. (And PS: we get to see Quirt making changes gradually.. but who KNOWS really about what sorts of changes WILL had by the way.. since he was already getting MARRIED at the beginning of the story? And.. the change in HIS character was not the "focus" of the story so much as it is in HH)

 

And PS some more: Not to take anything away from her.. but I think Amy adopted the "Quaker" lifestyle as much as she did the Quaker faith. She did not want "violence" as a part of her life.. but that was more because of what happened to her father and brothers than it was about what she "believed" in) But I digress...

 

That's pretty doggone religious, to me. The cross is very prevalent in the film.

 

Grey Guy.. to be as carefully respectful as I can here.. (no kidding) I think you are missing a key point. Why SHOULDN'T it be "prevalent"?

 

One of the things I think you are not taking into account is the REASON they are in Hell's Hinges in the first place. The brother was a pastor.. sent there to preach and be a minister to the folks in the church and the town. And his sister was there to help. It should come as no suprise that there would be those sorts of "images" and messages in the story. (though admittedly OTHER films might not be so "up front" about the plot in this regard)

 

Also.. one the key character (as a part of the plot) is led to faith (and repentance) by the life and message of one of the other key characters. So it should come as no suprise that there is "scrippture" being quotes as a part of that. It is a defining part of the story. Should they just "gloss" over all that as if it is not THE reason for the rest of the film (more or less?)

 

I don't say this to be confrontational.. but to me.. if I were going to watch a movie that centers on.... say.. someone going to watch a football game.. I would expect to see a football.. and some tackles.. a "football coach" and even perhaps someone selling hotdogs in the stands, ha. Those are things associated with that sort of story. So to see "religious" themes in a story that is centured around people of faith (and those opposed to them) is no big suprise, at least to me. But that does not NECESSARILY make it a "religious" film so much as a film that has "religious" characters and themes as a part of the story.

 

And in answer to your other question...

 

So what do you think the film is really about?

 

That is not so easy to answer... Because I agree with what Miss G says here:

 

I thought the movie was about a "good bad man". I was focused on his character, to tell the truth, so the others were seen by me as catalysts for what action and decisions he would make

 

Sometimes.. good men will do bad things.. and other times.. 'bad men" will do good things. The story (to me) is about Blaze.. and how he grows and changes as a person because of something (or someone) who comes along and makes a difference in his way of thinking. (Much like Bull and the boys in 3 Bad Men)

 

So, athough I don't entirely agree that this would be a "religious" movie.. I do admit that there is a level of "religion" in this film (more so, perhaps, than many other films that have characters who are people of faith) but again, I do not think that neccessarily makes it a "religious" film.

 

Again.. if it were a story that had football players in a football game as a major part of the story, it might not BE a "football" movie.. but you would STILL expect to see a football game somewhere along the line.. (does that make sense?)

 

It is a film where two of the main characters are "a pastor and his sister" moving to a town to "set up a church" so it would make sense that there would be messages of faith SOMEWHERE in the midst of everything. And again.. I think that this film takes a rather innovative approach to that subject in that it does not apologize or try to hide the "subject" matter. So maybve THAT is why you notice it more in THIS movie than in other ones you may have seen befofe.

 

One of the main charactters is a committed and devout Christian. That is who she (Faith) was.. so that is how she acted.

 

But having said that... I think this film is MORE than all I have mentioned above.. because it is also a drama about the brother and sister.. and how she is there to try and "help" him to NOT go astray (if you watch her expressions early on in the film she KNOWS he is weak and needs to be held accountable.. and she LOVES him enough to want to help him) And the story also shows how the brother's duplicity brings about a tragic ending to not only his church.. but his very life.

 

AND then on a whole other level.. it is also a romance. Blaze may well have a "repentant" heart and becomes a believer in this story.. but there is NO denying that he falls head over heels for Faith.. and his watchcare over her and his love for her (when she learns about her brother being at Dolly's, etc) not to mention his second prayer "for" her at the end are very moving. But I do think for MOST of the movie..his "love" is one sided. She DOES eventually fall in love with him SOMEWHERE along the way. And she may not be "in love" with him as early on in the story as he is with her.. but by the end of it.. I think she has come to love him in a romantic way is relying on a future with him as they walk off into.. what was it.. the sunset??? (ha)

 

Anyway.. it is not so easy to fit this movie into just one box because it is not just "one type" of story or another.. so in that sense, I guess you could say it is a "multi-faceted" western, ha. Yet another of those "complex" things Jackie brought up..

 

(Ok. ha. leave it to me to spend PARAGRAPHS saying what everyone was able to pin down so eloquently in just a few lines.. ha. I am the "blabbing" queen to be sure)

[Western Movie Rambles]

As usual, it's about sensibilities. Everyone has their lines. What's violent to one person may not be to another. This is an area where my sensibilities are easily disturbed. It's on the "too much" side, for me.

 

And I can totally respect that. I do agree there are some "story lines" that may be more one person's "flavor" than another. You have heard ME come down on why I don't like certain themes that others find appealing.. so we all have our "things" when it comes to stuff like that.

 

As for this film, I think where we differ the most is that what you saw as "preachy" I saw as simply saw as a way to show who she was as a person.. (it really does all more or less come down to personal opinion and taste) For my money, it was not unreasonable to expect her to say those sorts of things.. (and have scripture used to describe things going on in the story as well) considering her character and who she was and what was happening)

 

I like that you get a more complete picture of the characters (in silents films) by the sorts of things that are said about them in those little lines that pop up to tell the story. and I liked how she was "unashamed" of who she was.. and so was the movie.

 

And PS:

 

But I don't know what the image below is about

 

This is soley my opinion.. so I would not presume to be any sort of authority.. but the message I got from that image is that she was literally CLINGING to the cross as her source of strength in the face of the persecution that had been going on from the Hell Towners (if I am remembering the scene correctly) She is pleading her cause to the only one in her mind who could truly defend and protect her... there is other symbolism too.. in that she is wearing white.. and she is on the "stormy rocks".. perhaps of doubt or fear. Someone else might have a different view.. but in my mind.. she was leaning and relying on Christ (and him alone) for help. (and that is about all I will say about that.. ha. So now, to borrow from Sean Connery in The Untouchables... "there endeth the lesson") :-)

 

PS: Jackie.. you are usually the "treasure trove" for me.. ha. so I am glad I found a "youtube" for YOU this time. ha. . And PS: some more.. YOU are not nearly so far behind in your movie watching as I am, little darlin'. ha. If I am not careful.. the SHIFTLESS one will have to turn in his "crown" and name ME the most "shirking" when it comes to movie-watching "duty" ha.

 

Oh me.. where DOES the time go???? :-)

[Western Movie Rambles]

Helllo Mr. Grey...

 

Well, you're right. He resists with Bob's words but he listens when Faith talks. He wants to be with her, to do right by her. For him to do this, he must enter her world. And I believe he does so with honesty. He's not doing so just to humor her.

 

I think I may have not valued his motives as much as I should have (early in our chat) because it had been a while since I watched the film and I had forgotten some key moments. I think he did change very quickly on ONE level.. so you did have it right when you said that. But I also think the deeper, lasting, and life changing moments were also gradual for him. To use a couple of "biblical" terms.. there is a difference between "justification" and "sanctification" and I do not presume to be any sort of authority on those two doctrines.. but a person is "justified" once.. at the moment of belief..

"redeemed" at the moment of repentence if you will. But "sanctification" is a process.. and it never truly is something that will be achieved this side of heaven.. but as believers we are called to keep working toward that goal.

 

As a new believer.. Blaze did not have the background or the time spent in following after the One he had come to know yet.. so he was bound to fall back on the things he DID know.. until such time as he grew and became more mature in his faith.

 

Which leads me to THIS from Jackie:

 

Wouldn't you say a simple hero would round up the perpetrators and march them off to jail? If a man has not experienced evil, it is a very simple thing to be moralistic. You can talk a good game, but unless you are tested, your goodness is a hollow bell. I found Hart's mix of good and bad to be very profound, especially in the scene where he holds the Helltowners captive in the fire. Is this what a good man would do? I say, no! It is complex. How do you feel watching the movie at that point? I was thrown for a loop, because it seemed almost outrageous that a hero would do such a thing. It is a villain's place to hold someone's feet to the fire. It made me think twice about my notions of good and bad. A good man can slip off the wagon every now and then, and maybe that is not a bid thing always. I say that Hart is suggesting that a hero should be a mostly good man, but that the added grit that a bad past offers is what was needed out west to survive. In tempering his morals with humanity, he created a new, stronger, complex character.

 

Oh little darlin...' that was very well said. And you are right.. it was not what a "good man" WOULD do.. but none of us is good in the "truest" sense of the word. We all have our faults and failings.. and deep down inside he allowed the things in him that were NOT yet "perfected" to come out. He had not learned enough yet (nor attained the sort of personal strength needed) to be able to turn the other cheek. He was not wrong to be angry... but he was WRONG about the way he chose to respond to the anger. He WAS thinking like a "bad guy" but at least he was doing it out of a "righteous" anger.. and ultimately.. the new righteousness that he had in him caused him to let them all go. He might not have done that otherwise. "Complex" is the right word for it.

 

And PS: for the record.. even the BEST can fall sometimes. But again.. to be "sanctified" is a process and Blaze was at the VERY beginning on this road. It is not always easy to control the "natural" instincts we all have in our hearts to do things "our way" so he had a LONG way to go.. And by the way.. ha.... trust me when I say.. I could write a book about THAT.. But let's don't go THERE! ha) :-)

 

The Grey Guy says:

 

I guess the bottom line is I don't like the topic matter. Those kind of films drive me crazy. They upset me.

 

Fair enough.

 

But to be honest.. I am curious what it was about the film that "upset" you. I know there was a lot of "Christian" imagery.. like the part where she is praying and you see the image (over top of her face) where she is clinging to the cross on the beach) etc.. and I can see someone not "liking" the way some of the themes were presented.. or maybe even not liking the subject matter. We are all entitled to our own opinions so I would never presume to say you should or should not like or dislike anything..

 

And I do freely admit the "faith messages" and imagery is very strong in this story. I know you felt like it was too "Sunday School-ish".

 

But I truly feel that the subject was shown from balanced perspective. I say this mainly because if it were a film that wanted to just go "all out" with a "gospel" message and "preach" to the viewer, it would NOT likely have had the PASTOR be a lecherous drunk who dies in his sin... at the very least he likley would have repented at the last minute. Jackie is right.. this film gives us WAY more than the "typical" storyline. I have to say I found it all very refreshing.

 

At any rate, I think these sorts of stories are very valuable.. and very RARE. In fact.. even MORE rare now than when this film was made. And I am not even saying all this just because I am looking at the story from a "faith" perspective. But I am simply saying that this film DID sort of raise the bar in terms of being "innovative" because it did NOT take the typical "road" when it came to faith issues. So many times faith is kept "in the background" of the story and of litte consequence to the characters or why they do what they do.. OR more often the "believers" are all just a bunch of "hypocrytes" instead of being genuine followeres of what they say they believe.

 

And the thing I liked THE most about this story was that it did not go EITHER of those two routes.. you had a LOT of "grit" and a VERY compelling story.. but it was still fair in how it showed the sister.. Not TOO many "people of faith" in movies of this nature (especailly westerns) are shown in such a positive and inspiring light. But there she was.. working and living out her REAL faith in spite of her brother's FALSE faith.. and in the midst of all the OTHER stuff that was going on.

 

So many times (especially when western movies get made) it is always the "good girls" or the "church ladies" who are looking down their noses at the "lesser than" citizens. They are often shown as the "fine upstanding citizens" who are the most "hypocritical" of all. But she (Faith) was NOTHING of the sort. She was real, and she was genuine in her spirit, her love, and her faith. And she did not look down on ANYONE... no matter their station in life or their "mocking" of her and the things she held dear. Again.. I say.. refreshing.

 

Ok.. I did not mean to go so far out on a limb there, but I truly do see this film that way. (I hope nothing I have said was in any way sounding "confrontational) I freely admit not everyone will see it from my point of view. But as I am always fond of saying... that is what makes these sorts of chats fun (at least for me) I genuinely enjoy a good discussion and a "respectufl debate sometimes too, as you well know (and also the occassional "goofing around knock down drag out with you too, HA.) but I hope I have not come across in any way too heavy handed here.

 

And having said all that.. thank you (all of you) for putting up with me. Feel free to just roll your eyes and say "Oh that Kathy.. she is going off on one of THOSE tangents again" ha)

 

(PS.. Miss G... you are so right.. I wonder if the makers of this film had ANY idea we'd all be here lo these many, many... MANY years later just gabbing away about this movie.. who'da thunk it???)

 

OH.. and PS: some more.. Jackie..thanks for those links to the two films. Also.. I found Diary of a Lost Girl on youtube too.. SOMEWHERE along the line I hope to get a chance to watch ALL of these.. someday...

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Oct 13, 2010 8:46 PM