Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Western Movie Rambles


Recommended Posts

Good evening, Burnt Toastmaker -- I agree with everything you wrote. I find Thursday's personality and his interraction with this subordinates to be interesting and fascinating but it's not exciting to me. I cannot say to someone, "The first half of Fort Apache is exciting!" It's not.

 

I'm pretty much equating excitement with action.

 

The examination of a character and placing that character and how others react to him under the microscope doesn't necessarily translate to excitement. We're pretty much stuck in the mud with a stick in the mud. The only time we see anything going on is the raid and I just didn't find that scene to be all that interesting or exciting. The love story certainly doesn't interest me except in correlation to Thursday. Is it exciting? Not to me.

 

I haven't been saying the first two acts of the film aren't necessary or important. I believe they are vital. Without the build-up, the end is less powerful. But in terms of actual, on-screen excitement, the first two acts are lacking.

 

A film like The Horse Soldiers has character development AND excitement. And I like Fort Apache MORE. But The Horse Soldiers is more exciting. We just recently talked about The Plainsman. That film is more exciting than Fort Apache. Again, I much prefer the latter. I just watched Scarface. That film is exciting. There is plenty going on in that flick.

 

We just discussed Now, Voyager. That films focuses on Charlotte Vale (Bette Davis) and her rising from depression and loneliness to find happiness and love. It's a fascinating look at a character; it's rich with emotion. But would I tell someone, "watch Now, Voyager, it's exciting!"? No. That's not what one should expect with that film. I wouldn't tell someone to watch Fort Apache because it's "exciting." Not at all.

 

Fort Apache is basically "Mutiny on the Bounty"... minus the mutiny.

 

What are the two most exciting moments of Fort Apache to you... prior to Cochise?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Mr Sawdust and Saur Kraut....

 

I agree with everything you wrote. I find Thursday's personality and his interraction with this subordinates to be interesting and fascinating but it's not exciting to me.

 

You are cracking me up. Ha. (and you likely have no idea why..ha but let me try to explain.. ha)

 

Now I have to confess... I find your "interesting and fascinating, but not exciting" comment very helpful... especially when coupled with....

 

I'm pretty much equating excitement with action

 

Ok... I can live with that. .. but I am having trouble understanding why that is a source of complaint.... because it is not "action packed" is it less than what you want it to be? Does it have to be action all the time for a story to really appeal to you? I don't think so... but (If I am reading you correctly) I think you are saying that you prefer the "unfolding" of the characters to happen while all the action is going on too. (similar to The Horse Soldiers).

 

 

We can look at this from a lot of different angles here, but it is really going to come down to perspective.

 

I think Ft Apache is not supposed to be action driven like The Horse Soldiers was... because THAT film is about the long journey they have to go through and all the conflict that arises out of them having to take Hannah (and her maid) along with them. Ft Apache stays in one place (more or less) for most of the first part of the movie... so we get to see the day to day of "life on the Fort" and the training of the men, and the management style of the man in charge and those who report directly to him. And we get to see the conflicts that arise out of the different schools of thought that all the various men in leadership have.

 

So.. in one way.. you are right.. there is NOT a lot of "action"... it is more about getting to know the characters, laying that groundwork we've been talking about, and the looking ahead at the enevitable end of things... Going off or YOUR definition of "exciting".. it likely is NOT that exciting a film (at least until the end).

 

But I think (ha.. to borrow from a COMPLETELY different movie here..ha) what we have here is failure to communicate. Ha. Because, for me, the fact that it is "interesting and fascinating".... means that it doesn't HAVE to be action packed. Not all films are going to be not stop action and I KNOW you well enough to know that you would agree that this is OK.

 

So what we are left here with REALLY.. are just basically a couple of things...

 

A) a difference of perspective on the need for "action" in the story and B) a difference of expectations... as far as what we both wanted to see happen in the plot.

 

And this is totally cracking me up.. ha.. because... you are reminding me of... THE QT (of all people..ha) He uses almost the same argument as you sometimes when we are talking about films... only instead of saying the movie wasn't "exciting".. he uses the OPPOSITE word and would say... (if he shared your view) that the film was "boring".

 

And he and I used to go ROUND AND ROUND, because he would tell me in one breath that he LIKED a movie... and then in the next sentence he'd say how BORING it was..ha. It used to make me nutso trying to figure him out.. ha.

 

A perfect example... He LOVES the film Bridge on the River Kwai... we talk about it every so often.. and he has watched it many, many times. He thinks it is a VERY good story.. and thoroughly enjoys all the intricate details and conflicts between all the different characters (and we go around here saying "MADNESS" all the time..ha. It is one of his favorite movie quotes ever. ha. Even the kidling will say it.. and she has NO idea why.. HA!)

 

But if you ask him to tell you what he THINKS of the movie.. the first thing you will get out of him is that he thinks a lot of it is BORING. ha.. You men. You have a language all your own.. HA! :P

 

Anyway.. after years and YEARS of movie chats (and debates) with him... I have figured out that when he was saying BORING... what he really meant was... "not full of action... not "exciting".... to use YOUR word. But he will also tell you that some movies are meant to be "boring" and that "excitiment" would not be the best way to tell the story.

 

So... now... having said all that.... can I answer THIS????

 

What are the two most exciting moments of Fort Apache to you... prior to Cochise

 

I don't know. but I CAN tell you... that the beginning of the film is one of my most favorite portions of the whole movie. I LOVE the interraction between Thursday and his daughter in the stage on the way to the Fort... the very opening scenes... You get to see how POMPOUS a jerk he is (and how sweet and endearing she is.... and also how VERY much she loves to "dote" on him and how much he believes it is his due.) You more or less get to know almost everything you need to know about both of them from the very beginning...

 

But it doesn't stop there... it just keeps going and going.. I love how all the characters are introduced.. one at at time.. or in small groups.... until Thursday arrives and interrupts the big party.. and Thursday says something like... "I take it this party is not in my honor" and the Duke tells him it is a birthday party... for another general... General Washington... (you know.. Father of the country... hero of American History.. First president of the United States... that guy) and Thursday is both "put in his place" and yet... arrogant enough to think (you can read his mind) that the party should have been for him ANYWAY.

 

Now.. ok.. those early scenes are not "exciting" but I like them.. they lay some really excellent framework... and the story just continues to build from there... so to me.. the movie is not "less" entertaining.. due to lack of "action".

 

Maybe this all will only make sense to me..ha. But I just think that sometimes a film doesn't NEED a lot of "action" to tell the story... and sometimes the action DRIVES the story... and other times... you get a mixture of both... or something in between.... and it's all good. I am more about the characters and what motivates them... and why they do what they do... and I know YOU are too sometimes... so I say... excitement?? Phooey. ha.

 

Give me "boring" now and then... so long as the story is a good one and I can get into the characters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning, Quiet Gal -- Ok... I can live with that. .. but I am having trouble understanding why that is a source of complaint.... because it is not "action packed" is it less than what you want it to be? Does it have to be action all the time for a story to really appeal to you? I don't think so... but (If I am reading you correctly) I think you are saying that you prefer the "unfolding" of the characters to happen while all the action is going on too. (similar to The Horse Soldiers).

 

Those are good questions. With Fort Apache, I find the first two acts to be boring. All that I can cling to is the anality of Thursday. That's it. Everything else that is going on in the first two acts really doesn't interest me. There is no real conflict. Just about everything is internalized with the exception of maybe a little, here and there. The only other character that interests me is Collingwood (George O'Brien). What they do at the outpost isn't interesting to me, at all. I can't remember a single moment from the first two acts that excited me.

 

Do I need everything to be action? Not at all. I love 12 Angry Men and Inherit the Wind. They are not action films full of excitement. But I find more conflict, controntation, and humor in is those films, so there is something going on. I'm far from bored. But, I would never say to someone, "you need to watch Inherit the Wind, it's exciting!" It's not "exciting."

 

I think Ft Apache is not supposed to be action driven like The Horse Soldiers was... because THAT film is about the long journey they have to go through and all the conflict that arises out of them having to take Hannah (and her maid) along with them. Ft Apache stays in one place (more or less) for most of the first part of the movie... so we get to see the day to day of "life on the Fort" and the training of the men, and the management style of the man in charge and those who report directly to him. And we get to see the conflicts that arise out of the different schools of thought that all the various men in leadership have.

 

I agree. I find the day-to-day life to be boring unless there is something going on, some conflict. I don't feel the conflict is externalized in Fort Apache. They bite their tongues. Again, this makes the ending powerful, so the first two acts are integral. But for me, they are a boring watch.

 

So.. in one way.. you are right.. there is NOT a lot of "action"... it is more about getting to know the characters, laying that groundwork we've been talking about, and the looking ahead at the enevitable end of things... Going off or YOUR definition of "exciting".. it likely is NOT that exciting a film (at least until the end).

 

Thank you! I love character studies and the examination of people, but I would never tell others that this is "exciting."

 

And this is totally cracking me up.. ha.. because... you are reminding me of... THE QT (of all people..ha) He uses almost the same argument as you sometimes when we are talking about films... only instead of saying the movie wasn't "exciting".. he uses the OPPOSITE word and would say... (if he shared your view) that the film was "boring".

 

Well, I'm like the QT with this because all of this started because I said that I find the first two acts of Fort Apache to be boring. And they are, to me. Either you love watching Thursday and his anality and how his subordinates bite their tongue or you will end up thinking, "when will something of interest happen?" The first two acts are used to set the stage for a grand finale. Thank goodness for the grand finale.

 

And he and I used to go ROUND AND ROUND, because he would tell me in one breath that he LIKED a movie... and then in the next sentence he'd say how BORING it was..ha. It used to make me nutso trying to figure him out.. ha.

 

And that's what I've said! I LIKE Fort Apache... because the end saves it. I also like Fonda's performance and what I feel about blind authority and the "book." And I can like things in a film yet still not like the film. I like the Duke's performance in She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, but I don't like the film.

 

A perfect example... He LOVES the film Bridge on the River Kwai... we talk about it every so often.. and he has watched it many, many times. He thinks it is a VERY good story.. and thoroughly enjoys all the intricate details and conflicts between all the different characters (and we go around here saying "MADNESS" all the time..ha. It is one of his favorite movie quotes ever. ha. Even the kidling will say it.. and she has NO idea why.. HA!)

 

But if you ask him to tell you what he THINKS of the movie.. the first thing you will get out of him is that he thinks a lot of it is BORING. ha.. You men. You have a language all your own.. HA!

 

That's perfect! He's being HONEST. I can like dumb things, silly things, light things, and BORING things. Top Secret! is my favorite contemporary film of all time, for goodness sake. Do I need to have others say, "it's brilliant, it's genius, it's a serious comedy?" Heck no. It's a dumb, silly, light comedy. I understand this.

 

2001: A Space Odyssey is a film that mesmerizes me. If I cannot come to understand how others (most) would find it to be boring and stupid, I'm being blind and stubborn... like Thursday. Now I can speak of how I find the visuals and silence of the film to be exciting and thrilling, but most everyone else is going to shrug their shoulders and say, "it's boring as heck." And guess what? They are right. And I would certainly NOT say it's an "exciting" film. Far from it.

 

Anyway.. after years and YEARS of movie chats (and debates) with him... I have figured out that when he was saying BORING... what he really meant was... "not full of action... not "exciting".... to use YOUR word. But he will also tell you that some movies are meant to be "boring" and that "excitiment" would not be the best way to tell the story.

 

And he's right! The first two acts of Fort Apache are meant to be boring... except the love story. That could have been and should have been more exciting, but it just wasn't... to me. But when you are watching anality, it's not going to be exciting. Thursday is draining the excitement from the film and life. He's a miserable man. Ford succeeds in showing us such a man and the end he delivers is arguably the best of all Ford films.

 

What are the two most exciting moments of Fort Apache to you... prior to Cochise

 

I don't know. but I CAN tell you... that the beginning of the film is one of my most favorite portions of the whole movie. I LOVE the interraction between Thursday and his daughter in the stage on the way to the Fort... the very opening scenes... You get to see how POMPOUS a jerk he is (and how sweet and endearing she is.... and also how VERY much she loves to "dote" on him and how much he believes it is his due.) You more or less get to know almost everything you need to know about both of them from the very beginning.

 

A small discussion in a coach ride is exciting?! Women! :P

 

It's a terrific little scene, for it provides us with a window into how Phil (Shirley Temple) views her father and how her father views his lot in life at that moment. It's an important scene.

 

But it doesn't stop there... it just keeps going and going.. I love how all the characters are introduced.. one at at time.. or in small groups.... until Thursday arrives and interrupts the big party.. and Thursday says something like... "I take it this party is not in my honor" and the Duke tells him it is a birthday party... for another general... General Washington... (you know.. Father of the country... hero of American History.. First president of the United States... that guy) and Thursday is both "put in his place" and yet... arrogant enough to think (you can read his mind) that the party should have been for him ANYWAY.

 

And that was a nice little scene, too. Everyone turns quiet out of respect and fear and then Thursday ends up with egg on his face.

 

Now.. ok.. those early scenes are not "exciting" but I like them.. they lay some really excellent framework... and the story just continues to build from there... so to me.. the movie is not "less" entertaining.. due to lack of "action".

 

It's not all about action, it's about conflict and confrontation or passion or... something! Do something! I don't want to see a dance or some guys chugging booze as the only "something"! The first two acts are "yes, sir... yes, sir... yes, sir." Oh, goodness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How DO you do, Mr Grey... (ya little thrill seeking JUNKIE) ha. :P:P

 

Everything else that is going on in the first two acts really doesn't interest me. There is no real conflict. Just about everything is internalized with the exception of maybe a little, here and there. The only other character that interests me is Collingwood (George O'Brien). What they do at the outpost isn't interesting to me,

 

Ok... ha. we really are at a point where this is all more or less boiling down to (as Miss G said, I think) a matter of personal taste. (or was it preference). ANYWAY... and I repeat what I said last night... ha.. what is "interesting and fascinating (to use your description) to ME... does not always have to be "exciting" all the time for me to enjoy it... BECAUSE it is "interesting and fascinating" ha.

 

Do I need everything to be action? Not at all. I love 12 Angry Men and Inherit the Wind. They are not action films full of excitement. But I find more conflict, controntation, and humor in is those films, so there is something going on. I'm far from bored. But, I would never say to someone, "you need to watch Inherit the Wind, it's exciting!" It's not "exciting."

 

Ok... so you are saying (I THINK) that you can live without the "rock'em sock'em robot-like stuff" so long as everybody spends the whole movie just sitting (or standing) around yelling at each other?? You still want people to FIGHT. (ha) Because 90% of both of those movies...ha.. that is what is going on.. HA.

 

No... I am kidding... KIDDING!!!! (all 12AM and ITW fans SIT down..ha)

 

I think (maybe) I am getting more of a piece of the puzzle here.. And this conversation has been beneficial in that it is helping me understand another little bit of the "mystery" that IS Frank Grimes.. ha. I think you are saying that while you like the movie (as a whole) you just wanted it to "move on' and get to the good part (the action) ... and that all the "other stuff" was either too "fluffy" or too mundane to interest you. And then YES... that is going to be a matter of personal taste... because EVERYBODY has their own idea about what makes a movie interesting, fascinating, and/or exciting.

 

Thank you! I love character studies and the examination of people, but I would never tell others that this is "exciting.

 

Well it all depends. ha. Some people find PAINT DRYING exciting.. ha. So it might depend on who I was talking to. ha. But really.. my point is that I think you are equating "exciting" with more valuable or enjoyable, maybe... at least with Ft Apache... but to me... I think it is enjoyable and valuable as it is. And PS: "Exciting" is not a word I might use in describing Ft Apache either... but leaving it out of the description doesn't harm the film in anyway..

 

And that's what I've said! I LIKE Fort Apache... because the end saves it. I also like Fonda's performance and what I feel about blind authority and the "book." And I can like things in a film yet still not like the film.

 

And see... I don't think the movie needed the action at the end to "save it" because to me.. it did not need to be saved. I think the whole film (including the action at the end) is able to stand on it's own. I think it is very well put together and is an excellent example of one of John Ford's finer western/military/character study type films. I did not need to rely just on the excitement factor of the story to like the story... and for whatever reason... at least in this film.. you did.

 

But that is because we are different people... and we are looking at this thing from two completely different points of view, each from our own perspective and each with our own expectations for the film.

 

I think our biggest issue here... really... is just those two words... "perspective" and "expectation". Our differences of opinion are not about what the movie is (in terms of substance, maybe) but more about what we VALUED in the film and what we wanted to see. And THAT is always going to be a personal thing... because.. as I am sure folks are starting to get sick of hearing me say..ha.. (but I will say again) Movies are NOTHING if not subjective... We are not going to all like the same things... and even if we do... we are not going to like them in the same way or for the same reason... wouldn't it be a BORING and un-EXCITING world if we did???

 

2001: A Space Odyssey is a film that mesmerizes me.

 

OH my golly... ha. Talk about a BORING movie.. HA!!! :P

 

If I cannot come to understand how others (most) would find it to be boring and stupid, I'm being blind and stubborn... like Thursday. Now I can speak of how I find the visuals and silence of the film to be exciting and thrilling, but most everyone else is going to shrug their shoulders and say, "it's boring as heck." And guess what? They are right. And I would certainly NOT say it's an "exciting" film. Far from it

 

Now see.. YOU have just taken a film that proves my point EXACTLY.. that has to be one of the most subjecitve movies ever made. WHAT the heck was it about??? WHAT the heck is the big deal??? A monkey discovers how to use a "tool" and jumps up and down for ten minutes and with a bunch of other monkeys.. ha.. and then there is a big floating rock out in space.. The End. HA!!! :P:P:P:P:P (kidding... only KIDDING!!!!!) Anyway... That film is a VERY good example of what I am talking about. Each person who views it has to do so from their own perspective.. and HOW they view it will reall determine whether they liked it or not.

 

And he's right! The first two acts of Fort Apache are meant to be boring... except the love story. That could have been and should have been more exciting, but it just wasn't... to me. But when you are watching anality, it's not going to be exciting. Thursday is draining the excitement from the film and life. He's a miserable man. Ford succeeds in showing us such a man and the end he delivers is arguably the best of all Ford films

 

Wow.. you are hard to please.. ha. Again... to me.. all the stuff you found boring about the beginning... I really liked. But that is because I am not defining "BORING" as the lack of "EXCITEMENT"... if it interests me... and I am fascinated by it (you should NOT have given me those two words..ha) I am NOT going to find it BORING.

 

Golly I would have hated to try to entertain you as a little kid.. ha. I can just hear it now. "Aunt Ro... I want a pony and a baseball bat... and give me some video games and let's make a volcano on the kitchen table... and OH... How about taking me to the carnival so I can ride the roller coaster, and while you are at it.. can you tap dance for me and then stand on your head and whistle dixie????? I want to be interested and fascinated... BUT I want excitement TOO!!" ha. :P:P:P

 

GOOD GRIEF. I would have said... get over it kid.. go read a book!! (ha) :P

 

A small discussion in a coach ride is exciting?! Women!

 

NO... No, no, no, no no!!! But is WAS intersting and FASCINATING!!! :P:P:P:P:P:P:P:P:P

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do, Quiet Gal -- Maybe you should give the QT the test. Go ahead and watch Fort Apache and ask him if he thinks the first two acts are "exciting." Keep in mind, I'm speaking in general terms. What you or me or anyone else finds exciting is very subjective. I'm speaking from the objective. If I'm to recommend Fort Apache to someone, I wouldn't sell it as "exciting."

 

Ok... ha. we really are at a point where this is all more or less boiling down to (as Miss G said, I think) a matter of personal taste. (or was it preference).

 

I guess. If it's 100 degrees out and I go around telling everyone it's cold, I guess that means it's cold. Is a tear-jerker like Now, Voyager or An Affair to Remember "exciting"? Is that how you would describe such a film to someone?

 

Ok... so you are saying (I THINK) that you can live without the "rock'em sock'em robot-like stuff" so long as everybody spends the whole movie just sitting (or standing) around yelling at each other?? You still want people to FIGHT. (ha) Because 90% of both of those movies...ha.. that is what is going on.. HA.

 

Hey, that's a good point! But I also like moments of passion and love. Just give me something of consequence. But I don't believe Fort Apache is about this. It's like A Christmas Carol without the ghosts.

 

I think (maybe) I am getting more of a piece of the puzzle here.. And this conversation has been beneficial in that it is helping me understand another little bit of the "mystery" that IS Frank Grimes.. ha. I think you are saying that while you like the movie (as a whole) you just wanted it to "move on' and get to the good part (the action) ... and that all the "other stuff" was either too "fluffy" or too mundane to interest you. And then YES... that is going to be a matter of personal taste... because EVERYBODY has their own idea about what makes a movie interesting, fascinating, and/or exciting.

 

It wasn't a matter of "moving on." It was a matter of giving me something of interest. We are just sitting in a stew for about two acts, waiting to boil. So we just sit and sit and sit... waiting. Ultimately, this lends to a MORE powerful conclusion, so it ends up being a total success. Fort Apache is the opposite of She Wore a Yellow Ribbon, in this regard. That's why I like Fort Apache. But it's the sitting and sitting and waiting that I find boring.

 

My favorite director is Alfred Hitchcock. He decided to turn the tables on his "wrongly-accused man" theme with The Wrong Man. Instead of having the man run away, he has him stay put. What we get is a FASCINATING film but, to me, it's also a BORING film. If I told others that North by Northwest and The Wrong Man are BOTH "exciting" films and then had them watch them, they'd come back and smack me silly. I could tell them, "well, I find The Wrong Man to be very exciting. It's all about personal taste," but I would be fooling myself.

 

The Paradine Case is a BORING film. I could go on and on about how involved the psychological underpinnings are "so exciting" and "you could just feel the boiling underneath the surface of the characters. It's thrilling." Yes, I could. That doesn't change the fact that it's slow and boring.

 

And PS: "Exciting" is not a word I might use in describing Ft Apache either... but leaving it out of the description doesn't harm the film in anyway.

 

Thank you! That's fine with me! And, yes, what you may find enjoyable in Fort Apache, I find boring. I didn't say the first two acts weren't enjoyable. I can see where they are, especially if you like watching men boil underneath or you like outpost life.

 

And see... I don't think the movie needed the action at the end to "save it" because to me.. it did not need to be saved. I think the whole film (including the action at the end) is able to stand on it's own. I think it is very well put together and is an excellent example of one of John Ford's finer western/military/character study type films. I did not need to rely just on the excitement factor of the story to like the story... and for whatever reason... at least in this film.. you did.

 

And this is where I DO believe personal preference takes importance. I don't find Ford's look at cavalry life to be entertaining, nor do I find his "boozin' and brawlin'" to be entertaining. That's just a matter of preference. The reason why the ending saves Fort Apache for me is because if it doesn't have a pay-off for the slow burn (simmering) in the first two acts, I would have been left feeling mighty empty. But what Ford gives us is delicious. As I said before, I believe it's the most powerful ending to a Ford film. It hits you like a ton of bricks. Conversely, She Wore a Yellow Ribbon takes us through a farewell, only to pull the rug out from beneath us, at the end. That ending just made me dislike the film, all the more. So the long ride ends up being not worth it... to me. And I prefer Rio Grande to them both, anyways. It's a beautiful film about love and family.

 

I think our biggest issue here... really... is just those two words... "perspective" and "expectation". Our differences of opinion are not about what the movie is (in terms of substance, maybe) but more about what we VALUED in the film and what we wanted to see. And THAT is always going to be a personal thing... because.. as I am sure folks are starting to get sick of hearing me say..ha.. (but I will say again) Movies are NOTHING if not subjective... We are not going to all like the same things... and even if we do... we are not going to like them in the same way or for the same reason... wouldn't it be a BORING and un-EXCITING world if we did???

 

It's not about liking the same things. Not at all. I completely understand why others like the first two acts of Fort Apache. I'm just surprised y'all think they are "exciting," in a general sense. All of this is similar to my discussion with Jackie about Wagon Master being "light." Wagon Master is a "sweet" film to me and I find Fort Apache to be a "bitter" film. They have such a different feel to them.

 

2001: A Space Odyssey is a film that mesmerizes me.

 

OH my golly... ha. Talk about a BORING movie.. HA!!!

 

And I don't disagree with you at all. My liking the film and finding it to be fascinating has NOTHING to do with it, either. It's a boring film.

 

Now see.. YOU have just taken a film that proves my point EXACTLY.. that has to be one of the most subjecitve movies ever made. WHAT the heck was it about??? WHAT the heck is the big deal??? A monkey discovers how to use a "tool" and jumps up and down for ten minutes and with a bunch of other monkeys.. ha.. and then there is a big floating rock out in space.. The End. HA!!! (kidding... only KIDDING!!!!!) Anyway... That film is a VERY good example of what I am talking about. Each person who views it has to do so from their own perspective.. and HOW they view it will reall determine whether they liked it or not.

 

But I REALLY LIKE the film and I just agreed with you that it's boring. Shouldn't I just let my own opinion override it all? "I like it, so it's exciting!" Oh, goodness.

 

Wow.. you are hard to please.. ha. Again... to me.. all the stuff you found boring about the beginning... I really liked. But that is because I am not defining "BORING" as the lack of "EXCITEMENT"... if it interests me... and I am fascinated by it (you should NOT have given me those two words..ha) I am NOT going to find it BORING.

 

That's a good point. I have been linking the two, and I'm wrong to do so. A film that interests you or fascinates you isn't boring. I find Thursday to be interesting and fascinating, but what goes on around him bores me. He is where my interests lie.

 

Golly I would have hated to try to entertain you as a little kid.. ha. I can just hear it now. "Aunt Ro... I want a pony and a baseball bat... and give me some video games and let's make a volcano on the kitchen table... and OH... How about taking me to the carnival so I can ride the roller coaster, and while you are at it.. can you tap dance for me and then stand on your head and whistle dixie????? I want to be interested and fascinated... BUT I want excitement TOO!!" ha.

 

GOOD GRIEF. I would have said... get over it kid.. go read a book!! (ha)

 

But you would tell me to sit in the corner and face the wall and say,"it's exciting." And when I'd say, "but, Aunt Ro, this is boring." You'd say, "well, that's just a matter of personal preference."

Link to post
Share on other sites

>2001: A Space Odyssey is a film that mesmerizes me. If I cannot come to understand how others (most) would find it to be boring and stupid,

 

For me "2001" is painful to watch. To me it may be the most boring thing I've seen. Maybe if they knocked an hour off of it... but I digress.

 

I'd like to apologize to all for having created such a dust-up over the word "exciting." Little did I know...

 

No. Much of "Ft. Apache" doesn't fit that description. In fact maybe it is meant to give a sense of life in the Army. It, I assume, was not always exciting.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh good gravy.. ha. Grey Guy... you are one in a million.. ha.

 

Maybe you should give the QT the test. Go ahead and watch Fort Apache and ask him if he thinks the first two acts are "exciting."

 

Ha.. funny you should say that.. the LAST time I watched this film (which was way back in the Spring when we rambled on it before) he walks in the room, sits down, sees what I am watching and says, "What? Another cowboy movie?" HA!!! But then he sat down and watched it with me and enjoyed it very much. (he had seen it before too) And no... he did not go on and on about how "exciting" it was... but I don't recall he called it boring either.

 

If it's 100 degrees out and I go around telling everyone it's cold, I guess that means it's cold.

 

Well first of all.. if it is 100 degrees and you think it is cold... where did you come from?? ha. The center of the EARTH?? ha. And second.. I am thinking that you are missing the POINT of what I said about perspectives. To continue with your example... the temperature IS what it is... that is the fact... whether you think it is too cold or too hot.. THAT is your perspective. How can you... Mr.GREY... be so black and white about all this??? We are talking about opinions... which vary from person to person. Not cold, hard, thermometer driven facts

 

Is a tear-jerker like Now, Voyager or An Affair to Remember "exciting"? Is that how you would describe such a film to someone?

 

No.. I would not describe them as exciting... but why would I want to???? When I said things depend on our perspective.. I was not really talking about whether I thought something was exciting.. I was talking about whether I MINDED if it was exciting or not.. or whether I thought it needed to be exciting for me to like it... whether or not it was "boring". To me, THOSE things are all dependant on perspective.

 

I think that word "exciting" is our whole issue here.

 

You may have said somewhere along the way that you did not find the first part of the film "exciting" and were bored with the story until the end.. and when people disagreed with you about the "boring" part.. you may have thought they were also saying you were wrong about it being un-exciting. (but I could be wrong about all that.. I might have to go back and re-read everything people have written. Did anyone else call the beginning of the film "exciting" or did folks just argue with you that it was "NOT boring"?) Because exciting is NOT the opposite of boring... and I think we have just discoved in both of our last posts.. that is what was happening... both those words were getting used that way.

 

That's a good point. I have been linking the two, and I'm wrong to do so. A film that interests you or fascinates you isn't boring.

 

Ha... we have a winner!!!! That is exactly the point I was referring to. THAT is what I mean about "perspective".

 

So.. no... nowhere in my thoughts and musings on Fort Apache am I going to say (at least I HOPE I never did..ha) that I think the beginning of the film is exciting... so I concede your point... the first part of the film is not as exciting as the end. But I also say... who cares???? (other than you!! ha.. :P) It doesn't have to be "exciting" to be good. And THAT is where we really differ. THAT is where the perspective angle comes in. I am not saying it is a matter of perspective whether it is exciting.. I am saying it is a matter of perspective if it MATTERS.

 

The personal taste that I have.. that enjoys all the things you disliked about the beginning.. is the same sort of issue that leads YOU to say that you like all the things I find boring about 2001. And we are BOTH right about it all (at least from our own points of view) from the "subjective" part of the equation...

 

How hot DOES it have to be to be hot??? (and yes... 100 degrees is WAY hot for me) but I would rather be hot THAT way.. than be at the center of the EARTH kinda hot... so THERE is your perspective)

 

But you would tell me to sit in the corner and face the wall and say,"it's exciting

 

No.. I wouldn't tell you it was exciting... but I WOULD tell you to go sit in the corner. (Ha)

 

And when I'd say, "but, Aunt Ro, this is boring." You'd say, "well, that's just a matter of personal preference.

 

Nope... wrong again... when you'd say "it's boring" I would say, "That's a tough break for you, isn't it? Life is not always going to BE exciting so you will have to get over it" (just ask the KIDLING about that one... ha. She HATES when I say that) :P (and NO.. I am not being MEAN... I am just saying.. life... and movies... don't always HAVE to be "exciting" all the time to be enjoyed. And I think you have agreed with me on THAT much.. so... I guess I won't make you stay in the corner TOO long. (not this time anyway)

 

PS Chris... a little dust never hurt anyone.. ha (I have to believe that.. otherwise my whole house and practically my entire way of life would be just one big contradiction... ha)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that word "exciting" is our whole issue here.

 

Yes, it was.

 

You may have said somewhere along the way that you did not find the first part of the film "exciting" and were bored with the story until the end.. and when people disagreed with you about the "boring" part.. you may have thought they were also saying you were wrong about it being un-exciting. (but I could be wrong about all that.. I might have to go back and re-read everything people have written. Did anyone else call the beginning of the film "exciting" or did folks just argue with you that it was "NOT boring"?) Because exciting is NOT the opposite of boring... and I think we have just discoved in both of our last posts.. that is what was happening... both those words were getting used that way.

 

We agree! I don't find the first two acts of Fort Apache to be "exciting," they bore me. Others did disagree with me about it not being boring, and they were in the right to do so. My problem then ended up being with the usage of the word "exciting," for I just don't see the beginning of Fort Apache to be that, in an objective sense. The boring part truly is subjective. We are in total agreement.

 

That's a good point. I have been linking the two, and I'm wrong to do so. A film that interests you or fascinates you isn't boring.

 

Ha... we have a winner!!!! That is exactly the point I was referring to. THAT is what I mean about "perspective".

 

And you are right about that.

 

So.. no... nowhere in my thoughts and musings on Fort Apache am I going to say (at least I HOPE I never did..ha) that I think the beginning of the film is exciting... so I concede your point.

 

Thank you! I think we've reached an understanding. :)

 

the first part of the film is not as exciting as the end. But I also say... who cares???? (other than you!! ha.. :P) It doesn't have to be "exciting" to be good. And THAT is where we really differ. THAT is where the perspective angle comes in. I am not saying it is a matter of perspective whether it is exciting.. I am saying it is a matter of perspective if it MATTERS.

 

And I agree with all of that. I merely said that I find the first two acts of Fort Apache to be boring. They are unexciting. However, the first two acts completely set up the final act, so they are vital to the powerful impact of the end. So even when I knock the first two acts of Fort Apache for being boring and lacking excitement, I acknowledge their great worth.

 

The personal taste that I have.. that enjoys all the things you disliked about the beginning.. is the same sort of issue that leads YOU to say that you like all the things I find boring about 2001. And we are BOTH right about it all (at least from our own points of view) from the "subjective" part of the equation.

 

So how is it that I understand that 2001: A Space Odyssey is boring to most and that I agree with that? How is it that I can see this?

 

By the way, I'm rewatching Fort Apache. I'm 43 minutes in and, uh, oh, my. I'm waiting for something to happen. It's been a coach ride, a stop-off, an interrupted dance, a welcome home, a calling card, a chewing out over dress code, a CONFRONTATION (which is my favorite scene in the first two acts), a house call, a goofy drill with recruits, a housewarming, a dinner, and now Genevieve. What is this, Pride and Prejudice?!

 

There is a budding romance going on, but that doesn't grip me, even though I really like Phil (Shirley Temple). Wayne has been good as the "rebel."

 

I'm trying to see if anything interests me before Cochise. I can't remember what else is to come other than the raid and the goofy booze stuff and the young couple going off on their own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy, Cowboy Chris -- For me "2001" is painful to watch. To me it may be the most boring thing I've seen. Maybe if they knocked an hour off of it... but I digress.

 

And your opinion is generally the prevailing one. I can't recommend that film to someone and say, "it's exciting," just because I like it. It's not exciting.

 

I'd like to apologize to all for having created such a dust-up over the word "exciting." Little did I know...

 

No need to apologize for anything. I'm just being stubborn... and honest. I could just roll over, and there are times it's better that I do. But I'm too stupid to do that. I need to speak my peace. Then I'll roll over. :D

 

No. Much of "Ft. Apache" doesn't fit that description. In fact maybe it is meant to give a sense of life in the Army. It, I assume, was not always exciting.

 

And I believe that is it. I don't find watching military life to be all that interesting or exciting. Ford's dances and "boys being boys" rarely interest me. The serenade in Fort Apache doesn't do anything for me but the ones in Rio Grande do. I guess I'm looking for events and occurrences and there aren't that many to be found in Fort Apache. They can be found in She Wore a Yellow Ribbon and Rio Grande. The Horse Soldiers is full of events and occurrences. I reiterate, I like Fort Apache more than those films with the exception of Rio Grande.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this, Pride and Prejudice?!

 

Ha... YES... maybe... it is "P & P the Cavalry Years" ha.

 

OH you....

 

I say again... you are ONE in a million.... enjoy the EXCITING ending.. and just try to think of the first part of the movie as.... intersting and fascinating. Maybe it won't be so.... boring!!!!! (I will be using those words against you for the next gazillion YEARS!!!!!) ha :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, what a kettle of fish! Chris, I don't think it was you it was _me_ that started all this, ha! Because I do find ALL of Fort Apache exciting, and that is mainly because I don't find Thursday merely "****" (I hate that word). He's *dangerous* to me, and the minute he enters a scene it become electric. I like the fact that the others cannot just jump all over him and CONFRONT him immediately (except when he really overstepped his bounds in the O'Rourke household). It makes the tension so much stronger. Again, I find Thursday's presence at this little outpost exciting in itself. I see now that others won't view it that way, but I do. He's an exciting character and characters have always been what draw me most into a movie.

 

If a character is in the middle of world war three and non stop action, but I find them personally to be a bore, then that is not an exciting movie, no way, no how. I don't care, Sylvester Stallone and that Austrian guy are BORING as heck to me and I don't care that they made "exciting" action movies...their movies are BORNIG to me and NOT exciting because their characters are boring. So my use of "exciting" is definitely subjective, and I concede that others won't have the same definition of exciting.

 

Dang!

 

Edited by: MissGoddess on Feb 27, 2010 3:59 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Mr. Grey Goose......

 

This thread has become a little "exciting" and sort of "boring" at the same time.

 

*"At the end of the rainbow...Fort Apache."*

 

To a certain extent, I agree with you about Fort Apache. Even though it is Pappy's first film in the trilogy, in many ways it is the slowest of the three. But I think that has more to do with the three films as a whole instead of the film itself.

 

Now, I am not sure about how Ford had decided to start a trilogy about the calvary, or even had thoughts when he first started Fort Apache about filming two additional films about the calvary. But looking back on these three films, I think that he must have had some inkling of doing three calvary films at some point.

 

And Fort Apache was the first film he decided to do. And because of this, somewhere I am sure he wanted to show audiences what life was really like at a frontier post way out in the wilderness.

 

And part of this was the filming of scenes around and in a fort. The daily ongoings of personnel in a fort. And guess what? This stuff can be boring to the average or in your case above average film-goer.

 

Myself? I kind of like the whole movie actually. Do I find the entire movie exciting? No. Riveting? No. But I do like the pacing. And I love how the film builds tension from the very moment we see Thursday with O'Rourke at the rest stop. That just continues throughout the early to almost mid point of the film.

 

Thursday can never say his name right. And then there are the scenes of Mickey returning to his parents. Not exciting I grant you but just another reason why I believe Ford is one of the great story tellers and I think is also a very keen observer of an average everyday life of everyday soldiers stuck out in the middle of nowhere.

 

The other thing I like is how Ford focuses some of the attention on the women at the fort. The scenes with Mrs. Collingwood and Mrs. O'Rourke are genuinely played by the two great, unsung actresses, Anna Lee and Irene Rich.

 

Luckily, Ford gives the viewer a chance to catch their breath. Instead of action from the get go, we are treated to a rare thing that occurs in today's movies.....

 

Character development.

 

There are many scenes in the beginning to latter middle of the film (where Cochise makes his entrance) that I find absorbing. Not exciting, but absorbing.

 

The scenes leading up to Hassayampa where we see Thursday and Philadelphia for the first time. He just can't believe that the War Department has stuck him all the way out here.

 

Then we get to see Mickey O'Rourke for the first time. At the rest stop. Then our introduction to the four sergeants who have come to greet him and escort him by ambulance to Fort Apache.

 

The ritual of spanking and the four sergeants getting down to the business of having a drink, cuortesy of Col. Thursday, with Sgt. Mulcahy ordering a whiskey chaser.

 

Oh, and may I present to you Mr. O'Brien! O'Rourke, sir!"

 

The scene where Thursday asks the elder O'Rourke if the younger O'Rourke is related to him.

 

O'Rourke: "Not by chance sir, but by blood, he is my son!"

 

Thursday: "How did he get into West Point?"

 

O'Rourke: "It happened by Presidential appointment, sir."

 

Thursday: "Are you a former officer O'Rourke?"

 

O'Rourke: "During the war I was a major in the 69th New York

Regiment, the Irish Brigades sir.

 

Thursday: "Still, its been my impression that presidential appointments were restricted to sons of holders of the Medal of Honor."

 

O'Rourke: "That is my impression too sir!"

 

I could go on and on.....maybe I will.

 

The mutual attraction between O'Rourke and Philadelphia when they first meet at the rest stop.

 

The part where Mrs. Collingwood speaks with Philadelphia about her mother just after Thursday arrives at the fort during General George Washington's birthday dance.

 

The dinner party where Philadelphia sticks her head into and Sam Collingwood laughs off his potential appointment to West Point.

 

The genuine affection you can see between father and son when Mickey arrives home. Just the one brief moment when the elder O'Rourke lifts his head up from reading the good book to see that his cherished son has finally arrived home safe and sound.

"Woman of the house, your son is home!"

 

The scenes showing Col. Thursday finding that his new home is not exactly what he was hoping or looking for. The scene where he sits in the chair and can't get out of.

 

Then there are the scenes involving the four sergeants involved with the training of the recruits that have just arrived. Sort of reminds me of the scenes in Rio Grande, although those scenes in RG were handled with much less slapstick than this film.

 

I loved these scenes with Sgt. Quincannon (Dick Foran), Sgt. Beaufort (Pedro Armendariz), Sgt. Mulcahy (the great Victor McLaglen), and not to be left out, Sgt. Schattuck (Jack Pennick, who served in the US Marines in China in 1912 and also saw action in WWI. Then went on to enlist in the US Navy during WWII where he served as Chief Petty Officer under Commander John Ford in the Field Photographic Unit and, according to Ford, was decorated with the Silver Star medal for action in which he was wounded at Majaz al Bab, Tunisia during World War II.)

 

Then there are two scenes that really stick out to me. The first is where Thursday tells his officers that their own brand of western attire is not what he expects his officers to wear. He tells them to look at the recently arrived Mr. Murphy from West Point.

 

Then the scene where he meets alone with Collingwood.

 

So these are finely produced, very well written scenes between the main characters in what you have called the boring parts of the first 2/3's of Fort Apache. I see these scenes as very well made scenes with much heart and truism.

 

And another way Ford uses the opening of the film to try and develop the characters as much as he can, so that when we see them all at the end of the film, just before and after they all die, gives the viewer a chance to take stock in these characters that Ford has given much screen time to at the beginning of what you have called a not too exciting film.

 

So don't get dismayed. Sometimes you are right, and then there are times when you are wrong. I think your reaction is sort of in the middle between right and wrong. Overall, Fort Apache is a fine film. A little slow at the beginning, but a fine film nevertheless. A film that builds its tension slowly at first then rather fast towards the end. Many directors could have learned from this approach.

 

Message edited by fxreyman

Link to post
Share on other sites

> I'm just being stubborn... and honest. I could just roll over, and there are times it's better that I do. But I'm too stupid to do that. I need to speak my peace. Then I'll roll over.

 

Always speak what's on your mind. That is what helps make these discussions so --exciting-- interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy, Reyman -- That was a brilliant post. It's one of your very best. I'm glad you took the time to share your feelings on Fort Apache.

 

And another way Ford uses the opening of the film to try and develop the characters as much as he can, so that when we see them all at the end of the film, just before and after they all die, gives the viewer a chance to take stock in these characters that Ford has given much screen time to at the beginning of what you have called a not too exciting film.

 

I agree with that. But does Ford not do this in his other films? Why do the first two acts of Fort Apache bore me where the others do not? There must be something to it.

 

When I was at Borders today, I checked to see what the review of the Fort Apache DVD had to say about the film. It's from "All Movie Guide." I thought this to be perfectly said:

 

Devoting substantial screen time to community dances, domestic details, and a romantic subplot involving Thursday's daughter, Ford celebrates the "civilization" that the cavalry defends even if the fort itself is not an ideal operation; Wayne's final speech attests to the need to support the honorable tradition of that defense.

 

What I struggle with is the substantial screen time devoted to community dances, domestic details, and a romantic subplot. For me, this is John Ford's Pride and Prejudice. Now if you're into P&P, you're gonna eat this stuff up. If you're not, you're gonna be asking yourself, "when's something going to happen!"

 

But, as I have been saying, the first two acts are vital to the film because it makes the ending all the more powerful. So we are in agreement over the value of the film, as a whole. I just find the first two acts to be a tough watch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it was me that started all this, ha! Because I do find ALL of Fort Apache exciting

 

HA!!! So it was YOU!!! ha. :-) OH no..ha.. say it aint SO!! ha. Now he will not be fit to live with... ha.

 

KIDDING... only kidding!!! :-)

 

(ha.... and PS I am WAY so very WAY with you on Sly and that Terminator guy.. ha... at least for the most part.... there is too much blood and guts with VERY little point to all that "excitement" ha.)

 

Dang!

 

And Dadgum TOO!! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

*That was a brilliant post. It's one of your very best. I'm glad you took the time to share your feelings on Fort Apache.*

 

Wow! Am I nominated this year???

 

Thanks so very much for your kind words. While writing my post I had Fort Apache on my computer so I could remember some of the details. I love watching films on my computer.

 

And another way Ford uses the opening of the film to try and develop the characters as much as he can, so that when we see them all at the end of the film, just before and after they all die, gives the viewer a chance to take stock in these characters that Ford has given much screen time to at the beginning of what you have called a not too exciting film.

 

*I agree with that. But does Ford not do this in his other films? Why do the first two acts of Fort Apache bore me where the others do not? There must be something to it.*

 

Well, it could be that you were expecting a slam-bang action thriller. But what you got was really a movie that tries to show you and the rest of the audience what life was sort of like during the old calvary days back in the mid to late 1800's.

 

Ford does this a lot. In many of his films. But to me that is alright. Sometimes a little background is better than no background. Unfortunately for people like you, there is way too much background and not enough action. I mean, what were you expecting..... something like Saving Private Ryan. Now there is a film with a slam-bang beginning and a slam-bang ending. It is the middle of that movie that bogs down.

 

*What I struggle with is the substantial screen time devoted to community dances, domestic details, and a romantic subplot. For me, this is John Ford's Pride and Prejudice. Now if you're into P&P, you're gonna eat this stuff up. If you're not, you're gonna be asking yourself, "when's something going to happen!"*

 

Well, all I can say is that you'd better get used to that element in most of Ford's films. Even a film like My Darling Clementine has a good chunk of the beginning devoted to setting up the characters and the story. The Quiet Man, same sort of thing. It does not really get fun until late when Thornton goes after his wife at the train station and heads to her brother's house and then the fight happens.

 

Even She Wore a Yellow Ribbon has some slow moments as does Rio Grande. Although both of these films pale in comparison to Fort Apache about all of the so-called "boring" details.

 

*But, as I have been saying, the first two acts are vital to the film because it makes the ending all the more powerful. So we are in agreement over the value of the film, as a whole. I just find the first two acts to be a tough watch.*

 

Well, I am glad for that. At least I won't have to have you horse-whipped for all of this nonsense!

 

Edited by: fxreyman on Feb 27, 2010 8:46 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

How do, Reyman -- Well, it could be that you were expecting a slam-bang action thriller. But what you got was really a movie that tries to show you and the rest of the audience what life was sort of like during the old calvary days back in the mid to late 1800's.

 

I really like Rio Grande. Is that a slam-bang action thriller? How about Wagon Master? What about Pilgrimage? Are they slam-bang action thrillers?

 

Ford does this a lot. In many of his films. But to me that is alright. Sometimes a little background is better than no background. Unfortunately for people like you, there is way too much background and not enough action. I mean, what were you expecting..... something like Saving Private Ryan. Now there is a film with a slam-bang beginning and a slam-bang ending. It is the middle of that movie that bogs down.

 

I'm not sure. I'm the guy who just spoke of liking Now, Voyager and An Affair to Remember. I like films such as Separate Tables. Is 2001: A Space Odyssey "slam-bang" and full of action?

 

Well, all I can say is that you'd better get used to that element in most of Ford's films.

 

I've seen 29 Ford films. The only other Ford film that bored me was She Wore a Yellow Ribbon.

 

Even a film like My Darling Clementine has a good chunk of the beginning devoted to setting up the characters and the story.

 

I'm never bored with My Darling Clementine. And I LOVE the dance in that film. Boy, is it ever beautiful. It's loaded with feeling.

 

The Quiet Man, same sort of thing. It does not really get fun until late when Thornton goes after his wife at the train station and heads to her brother's house and then the fight happens.

 

But I was into that film the moment Sean sees Mary Kate. It never loses me from there. It's the best courtship film that I've seen. I love how we see their love for each other grow.

 

Even She Wore a Yellow Ribbon has some slow moments as does Rio Grande. Although both of these films pale in comparison to Fort Apache about all of the so-called "boring" details.

 

Rio Grande grabs me because it's a family film. It's about finding each other again and love for your son. It's wonderful. She Wore a Yellow Ribbon does have more entertaining moments than the first two acts of Fort Apache, although I really wasn't into many of them.

 

Well, I am glad for that. At least I won't have to have you horse-whipped for all of this nonsense!

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy, Fordy Guns -- All right, I have finally finished watching Fort Apache for a second time. And I must admit, I was wrong. It's not the first two acts of the film that I find boring. It's only the first 50 minutes. Once young O'Rourke (John Agar) and Phil (Shirley Temple) go off on their ride, the film takes off for me. The only thing I find boring from then on is the dance.

 

I love the meeting of officers about the Apaches and how Thursday (Henry Fonda) keeps correcting Yorke (John Wayne) and how Yorke then repeats what he says. That's terrific.

 

The ending holds up. The second meeting with Cochise (Miguel Incl?n) still makes my jaw drop.

 

I actually liked the raid of Meacham (Grant Withers) in this viewing. I also ended up liking Vic McLaglen a lot more. I thought he was excellent. So I guess I'm warming to his being a silly sidekick.

 

The "epilogue" is also wonderful.

 

So I'd say the first half of Fort Apache is what I find boring but the second half is stunning. The film really ends with a flourish. Like I said before, it's arguably the most powerful ending of all Ford films. It's a stunner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy Mr Grimes,

Well it made me smile to read your words, and that you'd re-watch a Ford film is quite a compliment to the old man himself. I know he's not a favorite. I think I was most happy to hear you say you're warming to old Vic. There's a dear old thing.

 

I can totally understand it's a matter of taste, whether one enjoys all the minutiae of daily life on an outpost, and of course the rowdy "boys" stuff doesn't appeal to everyone either. I'm glad the movie wore better on a second viewing. As I've said, it was the same with me. I didn't get so much from it, or any of the cavalry pictures, when I first watched them.

 

I love the meeting of officers about the Apaches and how Thursday (Henry Fonda) keeps correcting Yorke (John Wayne) and how Yorke then repeats what he says. That's terrific.

 

This behavior of Thursday's was rather interesting to me. He repeats it more aggressively with Pedro Armendiaraz (acting as his interpreter) at the meeting with Cochise. He certainly is a steam roller, and a stickler that his idea is put across exactly as he said it. He really is intimidating. I don't know if I've ever seen a more convincingly forceful performance by Fonda. He seems consumed by his own ideas.

 

Thanks for watching it again and sharing your observations. Maybe one day I can try to do the same with Once Upon a Time in the West. Oh, dear!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow... He is liking our beloved Victor even more now??? That IS impressive. :-) I guess we won't have to throw him in the guardhouse afterall. :P

 

Maybe one day I can try to do the same with Once Upon a Time in the West. Oh, dear!

 

Now let's not take this thing TOO far, Goddess.... he will start to think that he can get GUILT us into doing things like that... and then he really WON'T be fit to live with. HA!!!! :D

 

(PS... if you DO rewatch it let me know... I will loan you a case of my Pepto!!) :P:P:P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy Mr Grimes,

 

Mr. Grimes? Oh, my.

 

I think I was most happy to hear you say you're warming to old Vic. There's a dear old thing.

 

I laughed at his boozin', so I guess my problem is actually with the brawlin'.

 

I can totally understand it's a matter of taste, whether one enjoys all the minutiae of daily life on an outpost, and of course the rowdy "boys" stuff doesn't appeal to everyone either.

 

That's pretty much what it is.

 

I'm glad the movie wore better on a second viewing. As I've said, it was the same with me. I didn't get so much from it, or any of the cavalry pictures, when I first watched them.

 

I can't say I'm into the cavalry (military) stuff. That rarely interests me. I prefer straight-up westerns. I prefer individualism and villains other than indians.

 

This behavior of Thursday's was rather interesting to me. He repeats it more aggressively with Pedro Armendiaraz (acting as his interpreter) at the meeting with Cochise. He certainly is a steam roller, and a stickler that his idea is put across exactly as he said it. He really is intimidating.

 

But what I loved was how silly it was for Thursday to be issuing commands right in front of the man who is to receive these commands. But the chain of command must be recognized. Thursday could tell the elder O'Rourke what to do, but it has to come from his commanding officer, Yorke. By the book.

 

I don't know if I've ever seen a more convincingly forceful performance by Fonda. He seems consumed by his own ideas.

 

I agree with you. Fonda is one of my favorites because he plays so many different characters. He's unafraid to play the unlikeable. Just look at the kind of characters he played for Ford. Look at how completely opposite Tom Joad and Colonel Owen Thursday are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

>I agree with you. Fonda is one of my favorites because he plays so many different characters. He's unafraid to play the unlikeable. Just look at the kind of characters he played for Ford. *Look at how completely opposite Tom Joad and Colonel Owen Thursday are.*

 

Oh my gosh, there's a dissertation in that statement... you could write oodles on it....I hope you do..

Link to post
Share on other sites

>

> Mr. Grimes? Oh, my.

>

 

Just observing protocol. :P

 

> I can't say I'm into the cavalry (military) stuff. That rarely interests me. I prefer straight-up westerns. I prefer individualism and villains other than indians.

>

 

Now that I can understand. It can get more involving when the villain is someone easily defined and individual. It creates another source of tension. Ford really is not all that big on villains. In fact, you can almost always say that when he does show a "villain" that man can be viewed as the other personality of the hero. I mean, like Liberty Valance and Tom Doniphon are two sides of the same archetypal westerner.

 

>

> But what I loved was how silly it was for Thursday to be issuing commands right in front of the man who is to receive these commands. But the chain of command must be recognized. Thursday could tell the elder O'Rourke what to do, but it has to come from his commanding officer, Yorke. By the book.

>

 

Yes, it is crazy to be so energetic about following the tiniest detail of formalities in such situations. Especially with men who aren't used to that at all. They needed some discipline, as Jackie pointed out earlier, but this was going to a ridiculous extreme. Yet, I know you may not agree, in spite of his obsessive behavior, I cannot say that I think Thursday an utter fool. There is something in his myopia that is almost admirable. Not quite, but almost. This I think is the genius of the film and Fonda's performance, that I cannot just write him off as a complete idiot.

 

>

> I agree with you. Fonda is one of my favorites because he plays so many different characters. He's unafraid to play the unlikeable. Just look at the kind of characters he played for Ford. Look at how completely opposite Tom Joad and Colonel Owen Thursday are.

 

Good call. Joad was a rebel against exactly the kind of unreasoning authority Thursday represented. He'd have fought with him within five minutes of meeting him, I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...