[RIP As the World Turns]

She hated John Dixon.

 

OH who didn't???????????????? ha OH... and that LOUSY James Stenbeck TOO! ha.

 

Why any women would EVER marry EITHER of those guys was ALWAYS beyond me.. ha.

 

Golly guys.. I have not seen this show more than a handful of times since I was a kid.. (especially not in the last 20 years or so, I think) but BOY do I remember it growing up.

 

Gee, our grandma's and mom's must have all been watcing at the same time!! ha. (I have VERY similar memories of all the characters you are mentioning!)

 

Sorry to hear it is going out. Hope it ends well for everyone. (except maybe those lousy Dixon and Stenbeck guys.. ha But who knows.. since I haven't seen it in a while.. ha.... maybe they have turned over a new leaf by now and I am just being too harsh on them. Nah... surely not... where would be the fun in THAT? HA!)

[RAMBLES Part II]

Hello my rambling friends!!!!! It has taken me a bit longer than I intended but I have finally gotten a chance to re-watch Wuthering Heights again. (at last!)

 

Wow. There is a LOT to sort through and I know there is no way I will be able to answer back to all the points that have been raised in this ramble. Though I did go back and try to read through most of it all, I am going to focus more on the recent ones (in part because of Mr. Grey?s BIG turn around on the movie, and also in part to keep this from being perhaps one of the longest posts ever in recorded history. HA)

 

First I have to tell you something that struck me as funny this morning when I was thinking over the whole story and all the characters.. ha. THIS movie could have been called PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, ha. because there sure were a WHOLE lot of "prideful" and "prejudiced" people running around all over it. ha. (but maybe it was just the "era" for that sort of thing, ha.)

 

And then next I have to say that I still have ?comparison? issues between this version of the story and the 1992 film. I REALLY did not realize how different they are (in terms of even the story and some of the characters) and I have NO idea how the two films compare to Miss Bronte?s book (never having read it myself) but there are some major differences (among other things, in the newer version Cathy and Edgar have a daughter, also named Cathy and Hindly (if I remember right) has a son and at the end of the film, they sort of form a relationship, etc) Also Heathcliff and Isabella have a son (who dies) and I think Isabella dies too (but I am not sure about that one)

 

ANYWAY, all of those details aside, the most NOTABLE differences between the two versions of the story are Heathcliff and Cathy characters. I said this before, but will risk repeating. The newer film is MUCH darker and far more ?grim? (especially Heathcliff) or at least that is how it seemed to me. And in some respects, to be truthful I LIKED the darker ?spin? on things because it made it VERY easy for me to be TOTALLY disgusted with both him and her (more or less) so I have carried my prejudice against them in my heart despite the fact that I liked the story a LOT. And Heathcliff and Cathy seem more ?brash and passionate? (and MUCH harsher)in the ?92 version, most likely because it was filmed in 1992 I am sure, but I wonder. COULD they have been written that way in the book, (more ?passionate and harsh? I mean) and then toned down for the sake of the 1930?s movie going populace? I have no idea.

 

I guess what I am saying is, (perhaps not TOO well) if I had seen the 1939 version BEFORE I saw the other story, my opinions on Heathcliff and Cathy would likely be much different. But because I saw the other film first, I have ALWAYS held a very strong dislike for them and what they do to one another.

 

But in truth, THIS version of the story makes me rethink a LOT of what I used to feel for them. (oh great, now I am sounding like FRANK GRIMES! Ha) I can?t say that I have given up my ?disgust? for them as people, but (especially after re-watching it all this week) and then also reading through some of your posts, I feel the Oliver and Oberon performances paint BOTH of these characters in a far more sympathetic light than I have ever remembered them in the past.

 

So let?s start from there and move forward from that perspective. (and in the meantime, I am strongly considering reading the BOOK now so I can figure this all out from THAT perspective too, and then maybe I can reconcile (or add to, ha) all this confusion in my cluttered mind, (ha)

 

First of all, I want to comment on something Jackie mentioned (because it lays the groundwork for a LOT that will follow in the story afterward.

 

Miss Favell says: Cathy's father destroyed Heathcliff by taking him out of the gutter and then forgetting about him, allowing Hindley to torment him. Where was he when Hindley was tearing the wings off of flies and beating stable boys? These landed "gentlemen" were either cruel, or hopelessly weak or, more to the point, blind

 

I think you have made an excellent point. If Earnshaw HAD been more aware of the needs (for better attitudes) in his OWN children, his attempt to help HEATHCLIFF have a better life might have been more successful. It is not enough to just ?take someone out of the gutter? if all you are going to do is throw them to the wolves instead. I wonder if he was away a lot (on business?) or if he fell ill soon after Heathcliff came into the picture and did not really have a chance to be a better benefactor to this new ?charge? he?d taken in. I don?t know. But he certainly was either CLUELESS or unable to stand up to the behavior and attitude issues in his own children. He was like the ?weekend? daddy who shows up w/ presents, pats the kids on the head, and then moves on to his own wants and interests and leaves someone else to supervise and care for his children. He expected them to adopt HIS good will and morals..but he did not seem to be able to instill them in an effective way (for whatever reason) and it truly did more to HARDEN Heathcliff?s heart (in many ways) than to help it.

 

I LOVE the moment where the young Heathcliff gives him a hug when he THINKS his life has finally gotten better and he has found a home. But sadly it appears that he was later to find out that although Mr Earnshaw had helped him ONE way, he?d just harmed him as well, in a completely different manner.

 

I think Heathcliff was ?savable? and I see Hindley as THE major set back from him truly being ?saved? as a child and then later on CATHY became the ?set back? for him instead. .As time went on, and they all grew up, I think Heathcliff COULD have (and maybe should have) just packed up and left to get out from under Hindley?s HIDEOUS treatment of him. And he most likely would have, IF ONLY it were not for Cathy. So as badly as he was treated, time and time again, there came a point where it really was as much his own fault as anyone?s as he WILLINGLY placed himself in that role. (BOY! talk about ?The things you do for love?, ha)

 

After he runs off (because he THINKS she has rejected him, all bets are off. He is a TOTALLY lost soul from there on out. COULD he have repented and finally just moved on to start his life over? Anything is POSSIBLE, (it should would have made at least HIS life much happier in the end) but I think his heart hard by then (and his HATRED for the names Earnshaw and Linton was too overpowering) For all his strength of personality.. he really was WEAK in character that way.

 

As for Cathy, well I have to say I really tried to pay a LOT closer attention to her this time (more than before, for sure) and I saw a LOT in her I never really noticed before.

 

First of all, early in her relationship with Linton, Cathy is sort of ?swept off her feet? with the idea of having all the ?pretties? she thought she?d ever wanted. It really was an attractive package for her to gaze upon and she WAS immature and very irresponsible. (and self centered too) All of which are a VERY bad combination of character traits for someone when a big ?glitzy? carrot (like the Linton lifestyle) gets dangled out in front of her.

 

Miss Goddess says I think she was rash, thoughtless, a childish slave to her impulses. NONE of these are excuses, but I think Emily Bronte was sketching for us a young woman of mecurical, wild nature

 

You have described her to a ?T? ma?am. I think you have her pegged exactly right. Another thing I would add is that she really isn?t a ?mean spirited? person, though sometimes she ACTS that way. She reminds me of a toddler who is just HONEST enough to not hide the fact that he (or she) REALLY (really, really, no, REALLY!) wants that luscious chocolate COOKIE on the fancy plate on the table. Once they see it, no matter HOW many times Mama might have said ?It?s not polite to ask? their every waking thought will become, ?HOW CAN I GET MY HANDS ON THAT COOKIE??

 

And Cathy REALLY (really, really, no REALLY!) wanted all the ?pretties? and excitement and perhaps even the romance that a relationship with Linton would bring her. But that was only a TEMPORARY happiness (much like cookie will only make you happy until it is gone) Because her REAL heart and her REAL passion were for Heathcliff. But she was just to immature to realize it and revel in it. She wanted Heathcliff AND the cookie, but reality was just ?real? enough for her that she KNEW she could not have both.

 

She wakes up to this truth gradually, and it takes her several tries to get it right. I like the part where she comes home from the Linton?s (all dressed up quite nicely, a WHOLE new ?Cathy? and she is very ugly toward Heathcliff (and he leaves) but then she comes to her senses and takes off the ?pretty? dress and puts on her every day clothes and runs out to meet him on the Moors. But then she falls back in love with her ?dream? again and gets all ?goo goo eyed? over Linton and his finery and leads him on to the point he proposed to her. But then she comes to her ?senese? again (but SADLY doesn?t FULLY realize her REAL heart without having to talk it all the way through first. And then TRAGICALLY that is what causes Heathcliff to only hear PART of what she said (because she starts out talking about how much she ?loves the cookie? first and he leaves before she says that BIG all powerful revelation ?I am Heathcliff?.

 

So what DID Cathy mean by the whole ?I am Heathcliff? speech? I know that you, Mr. Grey, had a lot of issues with this part of the story (at least early on) and I have given it a lot of thought. The whole build up to that moment where the ?lights? come on for her explains it for me best. She sees life at The Grange akin to ?heaven? and all the ?Lintons-like? people as being ?above? her (and Heathcliff) socially and perhaps in temperament and even in ?morals? but she has reached a place now where she is HAPPY being lower and actually LONGS to be lower than ?the angels?. She finally wants (and embraces) the truth that it is ok to be happy without ?the cookie? (ha. I am getting HUNGRY for cookies now, ha I think I need a snack!) It is GOOD to be ?like? Heathcliff. She IS the same as he is (in terms of what will make her happy in life) and I think THAT is what she means by saying she is ?Heathcliff?. (When I married the QT, our pastor used a phrase in our wedding that sums it up well, I think: ?You are no longer two, but one. One in interest, one in destiny, one in purpose?) Anyway, THAT is what I took Cathy to mean by what she said.

 

Frank Grimes says: And this is actually where I stopped hating Cathy. When she chases after him in the storm and cries because she hurt him, drove him away. I still doubt her sticking with Heathcliff, but I at least see the conflict

 

I am like you and Molo, I want to know WHAT would have happened if she had caught up with him that night. I don?t know if she?d have stuck with him or not. I think she might have. (THEN) but only because of her ?recent revelation? but who?s to say. You could be right and the attraction of all those ?cookies? she was missing out on (ha) might have been more than she could handle. But I also wonder what would have happened if he had walked in and yelled at her (before she finished talking) OR even MORE tantalizing is the thought of what MIGHT have happened for them if he had just stuck it out in that little room behind the kitchen a BRIEF moment longer and he had heard the whole story.

 

Those are the ?fascinating? questions that make talks like this so much fun. WHAT would have happened. IF only....

 

But alas.

 

Miss Goddess says: It's an ironic twist that her resultant illness from that night landed her in Linton's "lap of luxury" and made it that much easier for her to succumb. I can't say I blame her but I just know what her feelings were deep down about Linton himself. I know she never responded to him in any except gratitude and appreciation for his kindness. Otherwise, I'm sure she was well aware of the difference in her feelings for him and for Heathcliff

 

I have to say that at first it seems like GEE, Cathy just bounces around all over the place, from one ?true love? to another. (and early on, before her big revelation, I think that was true) But after Heathcliff leaves her, she is ?done in?. Not just by the illness from being out in the storm. I think she really felt as if he was gone forever from her and she had NOTHING in life to look forward to. And I think she was grateful to Linton for helping her. You are right, her love for him WAS more about her gratitude and appreciation for his kindness. It was as if her first love? had died and this was the ?kind man? she married in her grief. She loved him (for being so kind to her) but she NEVER had that passion for him that she had for Heathcliff.

 

And I have to say that (despite his ?entitled? and perhaps somewhat ?superior? attitude at times, (he WAS an elite and wealthy ?society? gentleman afterall) I really do see Linton as being a decent guy. (and I need to go back sometime and revisit that ?92 movie because I do not remember him being that way as much in that film. (but I also did not remember David Niven?s version being that likeable either, until I watched it all again this time, so it COULD just be the faulty memory of an OLD woman, ha)

 

Jackie says: And the worst thing is that someone like Edgar never even knew he was doing anything at all - by simply living his life as a manor born "gentleman" - taking what he wanted when he saw it , no matter how benignly

 

I have to confess that although he was not necessarily KIND toward Heathcliff (in general) in fact on a couple of occasions he was downright AWFUL in the way he spoke to him, I don?t think he was any WORSE toward him than you?d expect someone of his ?breeding? to be. (no I am not making excuse, I am just trying to understand his mindset)

 

And I think he absolutely WORSHIPED the ground CATHY walked on. I felt SO sorry for him during that scene on the stairs (where he just got the note from Isabella and Cathy is begging him to go kill Heathcliff, Because then he FINALLY gets it. She wanted him to kill Heathcliff, not to save Isabella but rather to save herself from having to live in a world where Heathcliff was not HERS. And now he has to face the ugly truth that (despite the fact she wants him dead) she REALLY does still love the ?other man? in a way that he will NEVER ever be loved by her.

 

And I liked HER response to that revelation as well. I think she really HAD tried to deny her feelings for Heathcliff up to that point. But then she knew that the truth was just HANGING out there for them both to see and it pained her that she had hurt him. (Because despite all her love for Heathcliff, I really do believe she WANTED to be faithful to her husband and that she had TRIED to care for Linton the best way that she could) It was a powerful moment to be sure.

 

Miss Goddess to Frank and Molo: +And you and Molo have made me appreciate that these two really were in love with a dream, a childlike fairytale as much as with each other. That dream was

clean and born of innocence...reality, human weakness and the world intruded to ruin it+

 

You have it exactly right ma?am. I think if they had been allowed to just stay out on the Moors without the real world intruding on them and if they had just been able to be themselves (without the ugliness of reality creeping in to steal their dreams) they had lived ?happily ever after? But life is NOT a fairy tale. And they WERE very flawed people in a very impossible situation. This actually is a ?grey? moment, ha. If their life had BEEN more ?black and white? then they MIGHT have been able to make better choices. But because it was not CLEAR to them what they should choose (in order to be TRULY happy) they made choices they BOTH regretted and it led them to make even WORSE choices later on down the road and ultimately they destroyed not only their OWN happiness, but the happiness of most everyone around them in the end.

 

Wow.. this is a long post.. my apologies for blabbing on and on and on.. and thanks for letting me get in here so late.. I aplogize that it took me SO long to finally get to see this film again. I appreciate you folks putting up with me! :-)

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 16, 2010 3:28 AM

[RAMBLES Part II]

So how's that for a quick turnaround and admittance of being wrong?

 

What is the world COMING to??????? Now I HAVE to rewatch this again soon... Mr. Grey.. you have given me a LOT to think about here...

 

OH. this is a dramatic moment on the old message board!!

[RAMBLES Part II]

Sure... you say that NOW.

[RAMBLES Part II]

Only most of them!

 

Oh Molo.... and I thought you were my friend.. HA!!!! I can see I have my work cut out for me now. I guess I will have to go stock up on more supplies. (It is going to be a LOVELY season for rope freezing this year)

 

[Western Movie Rambles]

hope you like that episode. I thought it kind of fit nicely into our discussion, and showed a lot of the strengths of the show.

 

It did!! I will have to check out some of the other episodes for sure!

 

For man also knoweth not his time: as the fishes that are taken in an evil net, and as the birds that are caught in the snare; so are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it falleth suddenly upon them

 

Poor Pappy.. (sniff) talk about a sympathetic bad guy!. (I KNEW he was not going to get away.. but golly he was likeable enough.. )

[RAMBLES Part II]

When confronted about her leaving she concedes that, in her words, she is a coward. She has no family and no place to go

 

Could it be that these women, save for Hallie, marry as a security measure more than love? Possibly.

 

Mr. Moviman... between you and Miss G, you have both hit on what I have been remembering of my impression for at least some of Cathy's actions.. so I will hint at where I will most likely be leaning when I do finally get a chance to watch again.. as this is the comment I have been holding back until I watched again as was I wondering if most of her trouble was the "lack of courage" in the face of the few options she had open.

[RAMBLES Part II]

Hellooooooooooo Moloooooooooooooo!!!!

 

BOY oh boy oh boy!! I turn my back for one night and when I come back LOOK at all the fun I have missed, ha. (Miss G and Jackie are HOLDING that Grey Guy's feet to the fire.. I don't even need to bring my ROPE! ha)

 

And Mr. Mad Hat.. I want to thank you for getting into the fray as well.

 

Okay let me set the scene for you

 

I LOVED your story about your "late night" movie moment out on the sun porch. ha. (WHERE was the snake this time???) Oh wait.. he was on the tv... that lousy HEATHCLIFF!! ha.

 

(sit down, Miss G.. I am only kidding!! HA!!! )

 

Rohanaka writes: (I have to paraphrase because I can not find your quote anymore) "I hate both characters". (is that about right?)

 

Close enough.. ha. I don't know if 'hate" is the right word or not.. I certainly found very little to LIKE in them and even less to love.. I know for SURE you could say that I was DISGUSTED with them.. OH they just made me so mad.. ha. (but I was mad at them for their own good.. because I DID want for them both to end up happy.. mushy romance kinda gal that I am.. ha)

 

I think so far (based on what I read from your post) you and I are coming down pretty close to the same idea on most of the story... but I want to watch it again (because it has been a while) I am waiting... not TOO patiently for the library to come through for me)

 

And again I want to refresh my memory before I say too much more... especially now because the discussion on Cathy is REALLY intriguing me.. and to be very truthful.. my memory for Heathcliff's character (and who he was) is much better than my memory for her.. so I will have to see if I can get this watched (soon I hope) and then will maybe be able to comment more...

 

But PS: I have to ask this.. ha... because I am starting to take it PERSONALLY. HA!!

 

WHY do all these "troubled" women (who go around making trouble for everyone else too) have variations on the name KATHY?????????? ha. How come they are not named something like "Eloise" or "Mathilde" or "Gertrude" or SOMETHING???? ha. (I am probably going to have to turn in my "Kathy" membership if this much "upset" and "drama" all the time is a pre-requisite for my name.. ha. I am WAY too boring to keep up with the likes of THESE gals. ha.

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 12, 2010 5:19 PM

[Western Movie Rambles]

Howdy Tall T!! (I am liking your new nickname, ha) :-)

 

I believe Patrick would have made sure Mrs. Mims was safe and sound, and then go about tracking down Usher for the murder of Hank, Jeff and Rintoon.

 

With Brennan's hearty determination, there would be no where safe for Usher to go.

 

You might be right. At the very least he would have joined in on any posse that might have set out for him once they made it back to town.

 

You're listening to this tinhorn? Naahhh Rohanaka, you're most likely right. Can't look rough and tough with a candy cane in your mouth. My explanation was being fancy-schmancy/ artsy-fartsy. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Or a piece of candy

 

Oh girlie.. don't listen to ME either. ha. It is only an "impression" I got.. anyway.. that is the beauty of these sorts of conversations.. we all bring out thoughts to the table and ramble around about it. It makes for a fun chat when we all see something a bit different in the same thing like that.

 

Me a Western gal? I've got neon & asphalt in my blood. I visit here as a mere pretender to the throne you all own.

 

Well.. you must have a little "rawhide" in that blood as well, little darlin, ha. This certainly has been a banner year for the two of us.. ha. You are feeling all "westerny" and I have dipped my toes in those dark inky "noirs" (though not lately. I need to go find a good one to watch again soon, sometime) Now if we could only get the GREY Dude to lighten up and like Bronte (and/or Austen)stories, ha. Of course the earth would likely go spiraling out of control and fall off its axis or something if THAT were ever to happen.. HA! (guess two out of three aint bad)

 

PS Jackie.. made it through part of my first Paladin!! woo hoo.

[RAMBLES Part II]

I am! I guess "Cathy" is the female "Harry Fabian

 

YIKES!! ha. Perish the THOUGHT, Grey Dude!! (Ms Bronte likely just rolled over in her grave!! ha)

 

I am going to wait until I get a chance to see this movie again (I HOPE not too much longer on my wait w/ the library.. I was #1 on the wait list for it.. so lets hope it will come in soon) and then I will try to answer more fully on some of what you said.. and also some of Miss G's comments too.

 

But I will answer this part of your comments now:

 

It is my belief that girls/women have ideas in their mind of what they want their guy to be. They will run down a "list" of these items. It is also my belief (and experience) that guys do not think this way. I rarely hear a guy going over any kind of list about a girl. "She's this, she's that." I just don't hear that from guys. Women, it's completely the opposite. Even on this board, you will hear all of this from the women but never the guys

 

People often say, "your 'dream girl'," but I just don't have one. I don't think many guys really think this way. What about girls?

 

I'll give you an example. My cousin's ten-year-old daughter and my brother's girlfriend's 7-year-old daughter talk about kissing boys. That's their "thing," right now. Boys ain't talking about kissing girls in the same context

 

I've had women tell me, "you'll find some girl that likes sports... " But I have never thought that way. I just think it's undefinable

 

 

You DO have a point about some of this. I think the answer is two-fold.. first of all.. little girls are sold a MUCH different set of stories (fairytale princess stuff) than boys. (generally speaking )and so I can see why you are saying that. (And PS: boys are sold a bill of goods too... look at the "ideal" women that get paraded around on TV and movies and magazines... we don't all come in the same package that you see in those images) so it starts early on for both boys and girls..

 

But there is more two it than that as I still maintain that once we reach a certain age (and level of maturity. or lack thereof, ha) we all have our "lists" (males and females alike) for what we want and THINK we want to find in our mate... and I have heard you say on here yourself in some of our rambles some of the qualities YOU would like to see in a woman or at the very least in a relationship. So you do have a list, whether you realize it or not.

 

So let's take a step back for a moment here and reason this out.

 

Maybe the women you are thinking of (who have such a long list) are just more specific because they have been working on their lists a lot longer..ha. (you know.. way back in that fairytale princess stage) Anyway.. all I am saying is... (and I am speaking ONLY in a general sense here and not specifically of anyone) that men make their lists too.. and sometimes a person (whether a man or woman) needs to step out of their "dreams" to be more objective when looking at potential love interests.. because let's face it... not TOO many "dream girls" or "dream men" are running around out there... but I don't mean that to sound as negative as it may seem.

 

I did not marry until I was almost 30 years old.. and I did not just casually date a lot of people while I was single (just to be 'dating") because I did not see the point.. I was more about "relationships" because I wanted to really get to know the other person.. so in those nearly 10 years of sometimes having a relationship and sometimes being alone, I had a little time to think about all of this. And I guess I am saying that I ONCE used to think (back in my foolish childhood) that I had a vision of what the perfect man would be (and BOY did I have a list and a half) and I never seemed to find that guy no matter where I looked.

 

But later in life... I realized I did not WANT the "perfect man" because ha.. then he'd just spend all HIS time finding fault with me (because I am about as far away from perfect as you can get) :-)

 

It really is not about lowering your expectaions either.. but instead it is more about deciding what your expecations REALLY are.. and washing off some of the "glitter" to make a better list. And what I found out was that what I REALLY wanted (instead of someone "perfect) was someone who was "perfect" FOR me

 

And to find THAT person... you have to REALLY know and be honest about yourself (flaws and all) to be able to recognize that other person (who is just right FOR you) when you find them. It is a process. (and rarely do the bells and whistles and fireworks that can sometimes come w/ all the "passion" of attraction at the beginning of a relationship let you SEE that other person clearly.. you have to step back from all that at some point and look at their true character objectively to see if they really are the right one for you)

 

Ok.. ha.. listen to me blabbling on and on.. sorry..again. And gee.. this has LITTLE (if anything) to do w/ Wuthering Heights.. (sorry Miss G to babble on and on out of context here) Enough is enough... So Grey Guy.. I will spare you all my "marriage" advice here.. ha. Instead, Dr. Rohanaka will be appearing live to sign autographs and will have a question and answer session at the next "How to Find your REAL True Love in 10 Easy Lessons" book signing tour.. coming soon to a Barnes and Noble near you. ha.

 

Rohanaka says: And PS: some men WANT to impress the girls and will LOOK for dragons to slay if they think it will win them points

 

The Grey Guy replies:

And I would probably be one of them. But I'm a sap

 

Ha... not true. (at least about being a sap, anyway) For all the kidding around we do, (and we DO kid around a lot.. and MOSTLY at your expense... it is just TOO fun not to, HA) I have found you to be a VERY good "dragon fighter" for the sake of some of us gals.. when there have been dragons on this board. And those of us who are getting the fire breathed on us do appreciate it.

 

Oh gee.. that sounds too nice for the likes of you.. I need to go think of some more "slams" to throw at you instead.. I can't be having you thinking I am turning "softie" here. (where is my rope?? What have I done w/ my hat pin.. I need to go find an octopus) HA

[RAMBLES Part II]

One of us would probably backhand the dragon and possibly slit its throat without thinking when it tried to interrupt us.

 

Ha.. well.. at least it would still be dead. (there is more than one way to kill those rotten dragons, ha)

[Western Movie Rambles]

Have Some Candy, Ro?

 

HA!! No thank you.. not if it is as well traveled as the candy in THAT movie.. HA!

 

Miss Maven.. I am so proud of you!! ha. You are DEFINITLY turning into quite the western gal!! (see.. If I can learn to like Bogart.. there is hope for us all!! ha)

 

What a fun read your ramblings are and this one is not exception. :-)

 

I love when movies gives the bad guy a touch of humanity...but still keeps ?em bad to the bone! He wishes he could/he knows he cannot

 

And there is that "touch of gray.. I mean GREY that the Grey Guy finds so fascinating. ha. (And that I have to confess.. oh don't tell Grimes on me, ha.. it is becoming more interesting to me as well than I ever really realized) I DO like to see my "white hats" do what is right... no matter what. (even if they have to stop and think about it a while first) But OH those Black hats.. I am a bit torn. ha. Sometimes it is good to just watch them plow a field w/ their evil ways and not look back (so I can enjoy them getting mowed down later on.. sort of like ****, maybe) but lately I must confess it is also WAY cool when they have those "moments of conscience" that turn their black a little gray too (more like Boone's character). And yet.. at the end of the day.. unless they repent (which I also ALWAYS enjoy).. they ultimately stay black as night..

 

There are sometimes more possiblities with a villian in movies like this one (than in other movies maybe) and it makes for a more interesting (and multi-layered) black hat that way, I guess. And you know me.. I am always wanting to know why they do the things they do.. so those little glimpses inside their heads (and/or hearts) are fun that way. (I must confess) ha.

 

I?ve come to think that Brennan had such horse sense that he probably could see the good in a bad guy and give him a chance to work it through on his ranch. And I think he talked plain to him b?cuz he thought maybe he could reach him on some level. Naaaah, that little boy down the well offered no redemption for Frank Usher. Besides, real cowboys don?t show fear. Here is where I?m going with you, Movieman. Maybe you can say you?re afraid, but don?t, for Pete?s sake, SHOW it

 

I am with you Miss Maven on this.. I think he used those conversations as "distractions" while he looked for opportunity. He might even have used them as a chance to make himsel look "weaker" and less of a threat than he was.. so they would lower their guard a bit more when his chance came. I think it worked on two out of the three anyway.. (****.. I don't think ANYTHING would have made him less willing to take out anybody.. all he wanted was to kill.. oh.. and then go back to those women..ha) Anyway.. I don't think Brennan was at all interested in helping any of them to reform.. and I also don't think he was about letting Usher just "ride away" a free man, either.

 

I think if it had just been him and Boone (without the woman present) he'd have fought him on his feet (not shooting him outright) to keep him from getting on that horse to ride away. But he did not want to risk anything happening to himself or her (because of HER) so he played it safe and just kept the gun on him... he wasn't going to shoot an unarmed man.. and it was wiser at the moment not to fight him... and that was the ONLY reason Boone was getting a CHANCE to get away. (that is how I saw it anyway) I think if Brennan HAD been able to stop him from riding off.. (and not have had to kill him to do it) he'd have taken him straight to the sheriff because I do not see any way he'd have let Boone just "up and leave". (I kept wanting him to shoot Boone's horse and make him walk in front of them all the way to town... (I know... ha. that would be mean.. and I guess was likely above his "cowboy code" too.. no sense making the HORSE pay for someone else's crime, ha)

 

I believe the one pang of conscience he had was exhibited in the way he batted away those striped candy with his gun. With the candy, the Boy (?s ghost) came back and it was a devilish reminder. Conscience, regret...and fully understanding and accepting his part in all this...no ma'ams

 

hmmmm.. I had a whole other take on that. I thought he swatted it away because he was annoyed at how "childish" Billy Jack was acting at such a "bad guy" moment. To me it was a sign of impatience with his cohort more than guilt.. but you could be right.

 

The Grey Dude says: ?So is Doretta the "Charlotte Vale" of westerns??

 

Miss Maven replies: HA! Man, that gave me a big laugh. I love the cross-referential thing. Shows you know your oats movies. ?Don?t lets ask for the moon. We have the cave

 

HA!!! I totally missed that in Mr Grey's original post.. GOOD one, Grey Guy!!

 

 

RE: the Kipling Poem:

 

If you can keep your head when all about you

Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;

If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,

But make allowance for their doubting too;

If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,

Or, being lied about, don't deal in lies,

Or, being hated, don't give way to hating,

And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise;

 

Wow.. those lines are PERFECT for Brennan. This may be the first time I can ever recall Kipling being quoted in a western ramble.. ha. But it fits very well. (golly.. I am getting shades of that actor (and Doc Holiday) quoting Shakespear in My Darling Clementine ha) Way to raise the bar and add a touch of class for us here in the old west, little missy.

[Western Movie Rambles]

I love it. Never hear that one

 

Ha.. it's an "oldie but a goodie" around these parts. ha.

 

When you get ready our friends and I can make any number of acceptable suggestions

 

Thank you sir. Between you and Miss G, and Ms Favell.. and now mrsl and wouldbestar too.. I will have a lot of Scott movies to sort through. (and I am sure there are more where those came from!)

[Western Movie Rambles]

Hiya mrsl!!

 

Here I am sticking my nose and it's two cents in

 

Your two cents are welcome anytime, ma'am.

 

My absolute favorite of his movies is Ride Lonesome, for a couple of reasons. Just as he is kind and gentle with Mrs. Mims, he is equally so with Karen Steele, not at first, but after a while you see what a fine, warm, and good gentleman he is. Talk about an expressive face!!!

 

Now that is a good recommendation if I ever heard one.. and OH boy.. Pernell Roberts too... yeehaw. I will make a point of finding that one for sure.

[Western Movie Rambles]

Kinda like my stupid original opinion of John Wayne all over again

 

Ha.. or me and Henry Fonda.. or me and BOGEY.. (or me and tomatoes for that matter!! HA!)

 

And how about that scene where he is telling her how awful her husband (who he just killed) was, and how she should be relieved! I actually loved that scene.... he was right, that Mims was a snake. He would have made her life a living .....well, you know

 

Ha.. yes he would have for sure. And it was a "healthy dose" of grim reality for her. But in the end.. she saw it for the truth and so it was a good thing. It is never easy to face those sorts of truths. and the timing was pretty lousy.. but in the end, I think it helped make her stronger to face it.. and I actually think it was a good thing that it came from Boone (and not Scott). She already HATED him.. so there was none of that "hate the messenger" thing to worry about.

 

Be careful! It's addictive! You'll be running to the library asking for season 1 before you know it

 

Ha.. I am already trying to see when I can plan some time into my weekend the next few days to at least get started watching the first youtube. I really am looking forward to it.

[RAMBLES Part II]

Hello My DEAR Grey friend..

 

They annoy me.

 

Ha.. they ticked ME off. I just get so MAD in movies (and in real life too) when I see people let their own stubbornness and selfish behavior keep them from their own happiness in life. What a waste! BAH!!

 

This has become one of my least favorite of films

 

Now that is sad and surprising to hear. I thought you were Mr. Tragedy and Darkness. ha.

 

And what kind of love is it if you leave it so easily? I'm speaking of Cathy. I do believe Heathcliff loves her. In fact, I believe he's paralyzed by his love of her. He shovels "dirt" to be with her. She wouldn't do the same for him.

 

They are both victims of their own pride (and selfishness) in some way or another. The tragedy for both of them is that they discover TOO late that all the "obstacles" they thought stood between them and their own happiness were mostly of their own making and they waited too late to do anything about it.

 

find it odd that she says she's "Heathcliff." She isn't. She's definitely "Cathy

 

I want to wait until I get the chance to see this again before I answer you. I think you are right (to a point) but I want to hear all of what she said in that conversation w/ the housekeeper before I say for sure.

 

I don't view Cathy as sacrificial. Not at all. In a way, she's very similar to Vance (Barbara Stanwyck) in The Furies. Vance would always ride to Juan (Gilbert Roland) whenever she was upset. But after using Juan for her selfish needs, she'd ride away from him to where her real interests lie

 

I can see the comparison you are making between Cathy and Vance as far as them both turning to the men they know will make them feel better emotionally when they get upset. But to follow your lead and contrast the men they turned to: Juan was selfless.. (in his love for Vance) and Heathcliff.. was not. So the similarity more or less ends there for me.

 

I give Heathcliff the benefit of the doubt since he did sacrifice for her.

 

Unlike Heathcliff, Juan never sells out. He's truly a sacrificial love. He stays true to himself. Heathcliff actually becomes what Cathy wants him to become but it leaves a bitter taste in his mouth

 

I had to put both of these statements by you side by side and read them a couple of times because at first I thought you were trying to have it both ways.. either Heathcliff was willing to sacrifice or he wasn't.. but I THINK (if I am understanding you) that you are saying that his real sacrifice was in "selling' out because he thought it would put him in the right status to finally be "worthy" for Cathy. (is that what you are saying?)

 

If so, I am not sure if I agree totally that those were his motivations entirely (or not) and again.. I will watch it more closely this time so I can answer you better.

 

And PS: I agree w/ the last part you said regarding Juan.. he stays true to his love for Vance (by giving himself up for her)and Heathcliff did sort of "sell out' to become more or less everything he did not like (in others). (but again.. I want to re-watch before I say for sure why I think he did it)

 

She's like Dr. Frankenstein, looking to create her monster. And this plays into my belief that women do dream of their ideal and men really don't

 

OH I will likely go way further with this than you might have intended but by golly I am still waiting on my copy of the movie.. ha. so I have to talk about SOMETHING.. so here it goes. HA! I think you are painting w/ a pretty broad brush to say that. (I can't tell if you are being serious or not) It is not always the WOMAN that wants to "makes the monster". I think that there could be a lot of examples we could find where men THOUGHT they had the "ideal" woman only to be made fools of and find out how wrong they were. I think it is a common thing on both sides..

 

Some PEOPLE spend all their time idolizing an "ideal" of the perfect mate and then they try to create (or RE-create) someone they want to fit into that mold. And other PEOPLE (men and women) are the opposite of this in that they try to look at a potential mate for who they really ARE and try to see them for themselves (instead of trying make them fit a pre-conceived notion of how they ought to be).

 

Nothing is SO blind as someone who has deluded himself (or herself) into believing someone is "something" they are not. ( Look at poor Edward G Robinson in Scarlet Street) You can't MAKE another person BE the person you THINK they are.. they either really ARE that way or they are not.

 

But having said ALL that.. do people.. men and women alike... have "dreams" of what they WANT to find in a "perfect" mate?? Sure. Everyone does. But the happier person is the one who is more willing to look at things honestly (and w/out the "rosey" glasses) when it comes time to decide if someone else is the "right one" or not. Better to be loved "clay feet" and all than to be put up on that pretty pedestal and be found TOO late to have those feet of clay... OH the fall out from that is NEVER a pleasant thing.

 

Ok. ha I apologize if I took that too far. You know me.. blab, blab, blab. :-)

 

And maybe that's Emily Bront?'s point. That girls expect boys to go off and slay dragons for them and then come back to spoil them royally. But isn't that one-sided

 

Well I do agree that SOME girls are like that. But it would be pretty sad if ALL girls were.. because YES it IS one sided. And PS: some men WANT to impress the girls and will LOOK for dragons to slay if they think it will win them points.

 

For me and my money.. it is WAY more rewarding (in a relationship) to tackle the dragon as a TEAM. The QT has HIS strengths.. and he brings them to the table.. and I have mine.. and I bring those to the table.. and then it's "DRAGON WATCH YOUR BACK" We are one team working together.. and that is a beautiful thing.

 

Miss G was right, I don't like Cathy because I feel she's the worst of woman. There are women in this world who say they believe in love but they'll quickly toss it aside for other things. What do we value most in life?

 

Well that's what it really boils down to in the end, isn't it? And you are right.. women like Cathy make all us gals look bad. ha. (But men like Heathcliff don't win TOO many points in my book either. He was cruel, spiteful, and very bitter.. He lashed out like a spoiled child to hurt the one he loved (and the one who took her from him) Not exactly a "model" fellow in the true love department... and not at all "selfless" and sacrificing, was he? Don't misunderstand.. he was certainly "the wounded" party.. and a very "tragic figure" in that regard. But HOW LONG (especially after the ones who hurt him are DEAD AND GONE) did he have to carry THAT grudge around and let it destroy everything he touched and all he came in contact with.. what a sad way to live (and die).

 

PS: Miss G. I NEVER knew that about Bronte and the Austens... golly.. what a thing to say.. I will take those roses ANY day over this "reality". At least (most of) Austen's characters FINALLY came to their senses.. before they DIED!!

[Western Movie Rambles]

Helllloooo Ms Favell!!

 

Brian Donlevy is definitely growing on me as an actor - especially in the roles where he shows a soft side

 

I need to check out that softer side more.. ha.. because USUALLY when I think of him it is either as A) a sniveling coward.. (like this movie) or a TOTAL monster and menace.. like Beau Geste.. he did a good job w/ BOTH those personas.. sometimes TOO good a job, oh my golly.. ha.

 

Have you seen Ride the High Country? Because McCrea and Scott are sooo..... GREAT in it. Yes, GREAT is the only word

 

I think I actually have seen the ending to this movie.. but not enough to get a feel for what it was all about. I think I need to check it out again sometime from the sound of it.

 

I totally understand what you are saying about Randolph Scott - for years I thought he was just a terrible actor, with cold slitty eyes and a really twangy Virginia accent. I could not see what the fuss was about

 

I likely sounded more negative about him last night than I intended. I do like him in some of the films I have seen.. he has just not really registered all that high on my "favorite" scale before. He just seems to often wear the same "stone" expression in everything.. I guess... But wow.. those screencaps you posted really tell a different tale.. you really CAN see the emotion under the surface... especially behind his eyes.. like in that cap you posted where he hears the news about the little boy. He must be one of those "still waters run deep" kinda guys.. you picked some REALLY good examples to hilight deeper side for sure.

 

I really do think he did a very good job in this movie.. and I also liked him in Seven Men from Now too.. so I think most of my issues w/ him will get resolved if I spend a little more time w/ some of his films. (Like they say.. ha. "Ignorance can be fixed" But I won't finish the rest of that quote.. it might work against me somehow.. HA!)

 

Richard Boone is just fantastic - and you have hit on his strength - he IS very conversational... I LOVE the way he tosses off his lines as if you were right there in the room with him. He doesn't seem to be acting at all.

 

I love how he talked to Mrs. Mims by the campfire (that first night) "Lady, you sure can cook" (or something like that) For some it might come off as a "ho-hum" passing line.. but for him.. you could hear the suprise.. the admiration.. and a hint of insult (as if he were "taunting and teasing" his prisoner) all at the same time.

 

If you EVER get the chance, I recommend HGWT - I don't think you will be disappointed. There are some episodes on you tube

 

Woo hoo!! Thanks for that, little lady. After reading comments about it from you and Miss G and others.. I will look forward to it. :-)

[Western Movie Rambles]

She ironically got more attractive as she "came undone", too

 

She did, didn't she. I think her voice even became stronger.. and yet softer (in some respects) though that likely does not make any sense. ha.

 

PS: Mr Movieman:

 

Scott and McCrea made only westerns after about 1947 or so. If you love westerns....

 

Does a one legged duck swim in a circle? ha. I will take your advice sir.. I am always open to finding new favorites.

[RAMBLES Part II]

I don't like him in this film or Pride and Prejudice. He annoys me. Not my kind of guy, at all. I find him to be very off-putting.

 

You might be one who would like the 1992 version of this story more (maybe, I don't know) I found the characters to be very "grim and dark"... way more so than in this version.. And boy oh boy, that Ralph Fiennes is no Olivier. :-) (but for you that might be a good thing) ha.

 

To be truthful the later version has its merits, but overall.. I prefer the "romanticized" version of the 1939 film... (which I HOPE will be in at the library soon for me so I can watch it again to refresh my memory and then maybe I will talk more about IT and less about the more modern film, HA!) .

[RAMBLES Part II]

Oh me.. are we REALLY in the same boat for our dislike for Heathcliff and Cathy, Grey Guy?? WHAT is the world coming to?? ha.

 

One thing I will say is that I likely am more a fan of this whole story than you are (despite my distaste for the two characters)

 

And PS: I still need to go back and re-read all that I have missed here before I can respond TOO much more to what all you have said but HERE is where I want to hang my thought for the moment:

 

I guess you could say that this is a classic case of two people loving each other but wanting different things out of life. And I like that. There are many in this world who love each other but they are just too different to come together

 

I think it comes down to this (for me) Love is a REALLY hard word to define sometimes (because there are SO many "types" of love. And when it comes to Heathcliff and Cathy.. I don't SEE the love.. all I see is the passion. They are on "passion" overload, in fact. Don't misunderstand.. they DO love each other.. but it is that "all consuming passion" sort of love that burns brightly, but does not warm the heart of one person toward another.

 

To me REAL love (the kind that is what marriage and ultimate lasting happiness between a man and woman truly is all about) is NOT only about PASSION but also about selflessness and seeking the best for the other person. And that is only the tip of the iceburg.. there is even more to it than that. But I guess what I am saying is they were WAY too passionate to REALLY love one another more than they loved themselves. So did they REALLY love one another in any sort of way that would lead them to be happy if they ever WERE to be able to be together?

 

I do think there was a "level of love" they each had for the other.. but it was such a possessive and very much self centered sort of love that I don't think it would ever bring them true happiness. And it just made them seem to be (to me) entirely too self absorbed to be all that sympathetic.

 

I think this story is a TRAGIC tale of love gone wrong as much as anything else. Basically it is just one huge lesson in how NOT to treat your true love (if you ever want to be happy this side of the grave) (ha)

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 10, 2010 3:54 AM

[Western Movie Rambles]

Miss G says: It sure is good to have you back rambling again

 

(Ha. You better wait until you read THIS long and blabby ramble little missy!! Ha. I am sorry in advance for such a lengthy post, but I have a bit of catching up to do!)

 

Wow.

 

I just watched the Tall T and I L-O-V-E loved it! But now for SOME unexplained reason I have a hankering for some striped cherry stick candy!!! (ha)

 

OH good grief and GOOD gravy, HA! Didn't?t he have a SADDLE BAG to put that stuff in for crying out loud!!

 

WHERE was the prop guy? (was there some sort of prop guy strike going on the day they filmed all those scenes?)

 

?Hey Budd, what should I do w/ this candy??

 

?Aw heck, Randolph, we lost our prop guy, guess you will just have to hang onto it? HA!

 

So here is Randolph Scott riding around out in the desert with all that dirt and dust flying around and that candy was in his hand the WHOLE trip?? And then when he gets to that ranch where he rides the bull, he gets knocked down in the dirt by that run away horse and the candy falls down with him and then that rancher picks it up and sits on the fence watching Scott ride that bull (and the WHOLE time he is sitting there he is holding that package of candy!!!) And THEN after Scott loses his horse and he is walking along that dirty road he has the candy sticking out of the pocket of his sweaty shirt.

 

Ok. So there you have it. This is just about my ONE and only major complaint for this whole film. I TRULY liked this movie a LOT but I just could not get over this whole ?candy? thing. Ha (the mom in me is just GAGGING from the thought of how DISGUSTING that stuff would have been by the time all that went on, ha) I KNOW we were supposed to get the idea that he LOVED the little boy and was bringing him that candy no matter what, but good gravy, I got tired of seeing it handled like that.

Ha. Those sticks had to be SO covered in dust and dirt (and who knows WHAT was on the ground at the cattle ranch earlier, ha) by the time it arrived at it?s destination if that poor little kid had not been a goner already he?d likely have died from stick candy poisoning!! (ha)

 

Golly I hate to see good candy go to waste! Ha. (at least Billy Jack got to have SOME of it before Frank knocked that one stick out of his mouth. HA. (and just in the knick of time, too or HE might have croaked from ingesting all the dirt and germs and then that would have evened the odds considerably sooner and the movie would JUST not have been as exciting! ha)

 

But I digress.

 

OK, NOW onto the REAL ramble.

 

*Tall T Spoilage Ensues*

 

WOW, have you folks covered a LOT of territory. I am going to be hard pressed to catch up so I will try to cover as much as I can.

 

First I want to say again how much I enjoyed your opening thoughts, Ms Favell. You have really set the tone with laying out the characters as ?Good, Bad, Ugly, and REALLY Ugly?. And you were SPOT on w/ the comparison to Fargo too. My goodness what a weasel that Mims guy was. In some ways, to ME he seemed to be THE worst offender of them all. (except for maybe ****. That guy was pathological for sure) But wow what a piece of work to stoop so low as to bargain for his own life at the expense of his wife and everyone else if you think of it.

He met the end I only WISH Macy?s character could have gotten in Fargo (except maybe I think it was pretty sweet seeing him get hauled out of that hotel room in his underwear, just crying like a baby, so I don?t know)

 

Brennan is the only man in the movie who has a sense of morals, and the nerve to back it up. He sees things straight, even when life is unpleasant. There is only one way to live, and that is truthfully, honestly, whether you are on the right side or the wrong side of the law. And it makes no difference if what you see is good or bad, but you must actually see it, and see it for what it is, in order to act. You have to put your money where your mouth is

 

He was as good a white hat as I love to see in a movie like this. I really enjoyed his resolve. His first motivation (when they are captured) was for himself (he says he doesn't?t want to die even if she does) but then over time he takes ownership of her situation too. But really, I suspect, he?d have done that whether the two of them had formed a bond toward one another or not. He was the direct opposite of Mims in that he was NOT a ?save my own skin first? sort of guy.

 

Do you think Frank (Usher) would have had the memory of the boy's death in his head for all of eternity, or do you think he would have walked away without a thought - if Brennan had not come along to act as a sort of ideal of what he might have been

 

What I am asking is if you think that Frank had a real conscience, not just regrets? I still am not sure

 

Jackie, I like you in that I WANTED to feel sorry for Frank. But he was just to horrid (down inside) for me to give him that sympathy I WISHED I could have given him. If he had been the ?underling? working for one of the other men, I might have. But he was clearly ?the boss? at least it seemed that way to me. So that tells me he either A) TOLD **** to kill the dad and little boy at the station. Or could not stop him from doing it (and then did not hold him accountable by shooting **** in turn)

 

So to me this says a LOT about his character.

 

I think he is a PERFECT example of someone who may have had some spark of a conscience but just has gotten WAY too good at ignoring it. He was as ruthless as they come in that he ONLY had his own best interest at heart in the end. He MIGHT have had a moment here and there (where possibly he caught himself reflecting on what MIGHT have been if he had chosen a different path. And that scene w/ the food for Mrs. Mims might be an example).) And maybe he DID see something in Brennan?s inner character that he WISHED he could have had himself, but I think in his mind he realized he?d gone too far and it was too late. Because really for the rest of the entire movie, it just was all about him and at the end of the day, I think he had no measurable conscience really. (but was just not ruthless enough to get his own hands dirty so he lets his men handle the dirty work) So no. I don?t think he felt any lasting guilt for the boy. Maybe if he had lived and grown old, I?d like to think SOMEWHERE in the dead of night a cold chill would have gotten to him and he?d have the fear of his guilty conscience to keep him up at night, but it would not have been a ?repentant? life changing sort of guilt. That was just my impression.

 

Miss G says:

He's a cautious man of the west...he can wait for the right time and opportunity. Look how carefully he plans every move, so calculating, it's brilliant. He's really every bit as smart as Frank but infinitely wiser

 

That is a good way to compare and contrast the two men. Brennan planned his moves before he carried them out. Frank was a ?think on your feet? guy. Only evidently he did not really THINK on his feet well enough to succeed. He NEVER intended for their stagecoach robbery to turn into a kidnapping so he made a plan (for the ransom) that made it necessary to split him and his men up to carry it out. And that is what cost him everything. He did not have the wisdom of seeing the ? danger signs down the road? the way Brennan did.

 

He and Brennan both had the ?idea? of owning their own place someday. Brennan knew how to work and plan and carry it out. Frank was looking for an ?opportunity? to drop in his lap.

 

Mr Movieman says:

Why did Boone come back? Scott gives him the chance to just go away but he can't. Maybe he won't admit to being beaten. He is no worse off if he goes. He is short two people who he didn't really feel any real relationship with. Where is the strength? Is it coming back to confront Scott or would it have been to just ride off?

 

Movieman, I am w/ Ms Favell. I think it was ALL about the money. (but it MIGHT have also been about not wanting to be beat?) I truly do think the 50 grand was just too much to walk away from without a fight.

 

I have to say Boone really was VERY smooth. I think of all the actors in that film, he comes off as the most ?natural? Someone mentioned how ?stoic? Scott is in this movie, and to me that is a good way to describe him. I have always seen a level of this in his acting that has kept him not as high up on my list as I might have placed him otherwise. Not saying I don?t LIKE him as an actor, I just think he sometimes come off a bit ?stone faced? no matter WHAT he supposed to be registering. But BOONE on the other hand just flows naturally like water. He is NOT anything other than who he is playing on screen at the moment and he is PERFECTLY conversational in the way he delivers his lines. (as if you could just jump right in the chat with him) He gives the right emotion every time. I LOVE his ?smart mouth? replies. (and his nasty comebacks that almost sound like a joke (but you know he is not joking at all) I still think Big Jake is my favorite for him but WOW this film has got to be a close second. (and PS: SOMEDAY I am going to check out his TV series that you all have brought up recently as I have never seen it but BOY would I like to now)

 

Ms Favell says: She sees what she wants to in her husband, because otherwise, life would be unbearable. And yet, when the truth is finally laid out for her, it isn't as bad as she thought, because she already knows the truth, deep down. She is NOT the "old maid" that she thought she saw in the mirror, and she has stronger resources than even she imagined

 

I really like the transition for her character. She starts out very ?plain? and non-descriptive, but in the end she is much like Brennan. She has let her hair down literally and figuratively and by the time it is all over, she has even taken on a similar ?color? and appearance as he has, fitting into the deceptively plain, yet ?wild and free? landscape.

 

The Grey Guy says: I also view the film as strength vs. weakness and how the two can be sometimes confused for the other. Brennan (Randolph Scott) is clearly the strongest character in the film, yet, he admits to be scared and he makes a fool of himself a few times, including bumping his head and Then you got Frank (Richard Boone), **** (Henry Silva), and Billy Jack (Skip Homeier). They've got all the power on their side because they got an arsenal and are crazy enough to use it without remorse. Does this make them strong? Well, all of their weaknesses are used to undo them.

 

That is a terrific way to compare and contrast them all. And I would add Mims in the list of people who were ?undone? by their own weakness too.

 

And PS: Mr Movieman. Again I say SEE what you started!! Gee, I am really glad you brought this film up for a ramble. I might never have sought it out on my own (because again, I am a bit guilty of not being TOO big on Randolph Scott (in general) but I also have not really just sat down a made a study of his films the way I likely should have. This one was terrific, and I am truly glad to have gotten in on this here chat .

 

Thanks again for letting me blab!

 

Edited by: rohanaka on Sep 10, 2010 3:59 AM

[Western Movie Rambles]

found this DVD cover art for the German DVD of The Tall T and thought

it was surprising who dominates the image

 

Oh my golly... way different from the other... Boone looks downright menacing...

 

PS: Went to the library.. my copy for this movie is here!! Yeehaw!!! I am looking forward to it after reading all these posts (I know.. ha.. shame on me for giving in to the temptation and reading all the spoilers.. ha) Will try to watch tonight. or tomorrow if possible... then maybe I can catch up. (WH still not in yet.. but at least I have seen that one before... )

[Western Movie Rambles]

I have to spray dust and cobwebs everywhere so he'll feel right at home.

 

Ha.. just tell him you will meet him at my house... ha. (the way things have been around here lately.. that is sad but true)

 

You make this place worthwhile...

 

Well, now you are being way so very far nicer than I deserve.. but thanks.. (and ps: right back at ya, little gal) :-)

 

and safe for us civilians

 

Ha.. yes.. me and Barney Fife. (nip it!!)

[Western Movie Rambles]

That gives me an idea! Oh, Peacemaker

 

I'm on it!! Great idea!!! (meanwhile.. we are going to have to rent a bigger storage shed to house my arsenel soon.. ha. I am running out of room!!)

[Western Movie Rambles]