The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

A civics lesson masquerading as a western showdown movie. This one is not just well-acted and well-written, but interesting in director John Ford's storytelling technique, employing flashbacks and nonlinear plot the way many more recent movies have. Lead actors John Wayne, James Stewart and Lee Marvin portray complimentary and contrasting archetypes, while a number of excellent supporting players flesh out the cast very well. This flick adds to the growing body of evidence to be found in filmdom -- particularly westerns -- about just how important guns were, and therefore are, to this society; it's become clear to this viewer, at least, that understanding this country's explains continuing mania for firearms is impossible if you don't watch old movies. Nevertheless, the film also makes a strong case that law and a civil society must rest upon something greater than a hail of bullets. Finally, the story's climax satisfies, and then its ultimate end delivers a provocative final scent. Really excellent work, and better than many more revered westerns--it should be on everyone's watch list.

Winchester '73

A complex narrative and circuitous storytelling collide with a host of genre standards in the Old West. In this case, that's a pretty good thing. I say 'standards' instead of cliches since many of the tropes present are so well done that this film ultimately serves as an exemplar of the style rather than as an exercise in eye-rolling contempt that a lesser effort would elicit. James Stewart plays against type (again--this is at least the second time I've seen him play a mostly ornery cowboy) as a revenge-seeking saddlehand, Shelley Winters looks good, and of all people both Rock Hudson and Tony Curtis (wet behind the ears in both cases) make appearances in small roles, while Stephen McNally and Dan Duryea make for effective and somewhat entertaining psychopaths (another staple of the Western genre). Those elements, plus some timely injections of humor and action, keep things interesting and lively for the duration. Those not as fond of the category might not like this one all that much, but as a (growing) Western aficionado, I found it worth my time. Oh, and it also shows that America's obsession with guns--in this flick, literally one particular, titular gun--is not a recent phenomenon.

The Far Country

Like a study in white trash ethnology. You can't watch this film today, with today's frame of mind, without seeing it in those terms. When you see it that way, a lot of this country's history makes a certain amount of sense. There's a real "appeal to violence" that pervades the sensibility of this show. You see it throughtout, like in the character played by James Stewart. Much like in "The Man from Laramie," Stewart plays a guy far removed from the stammering charmer seen in various comedies, not to mention his public persona. He's a flinty son of a bitch who takes the entire running time to learn to stop being a total dick--maybe. And he's supposed to be the good guy. The rest of this crew is either complete knuckle-draggers or their victims. The movie is redeemed somewhat by the plenitude of postcard scenery; Canada's Jasper National Park, standing in for Alaska and the Yukon, never looked so good. Other than that, there isn't much here; the story, such as it is, starts off all right but eventually doesn't hold much interest. If this one gets lost in the wilderness, it's probably not worth sending a search party.

The Man From Laramie

The obvious question that arises when watching this flick: what the hell is wrong with Laramie? James Stewart’s character supposedly comes out of there, and he starts off the movie as a surly poke…and pretty much stays that way throughout the running time. Not that he’s alone in that mood; pretty much every character in this story is about as cuddly as sandpaper. Yeah, it’s a revenge flick, so some amount of that is warranted--but you have to have a rooting interest for at least one of the characters, don’t you? Add into all that orneriness a dash of nonsensical motivations--including one major plot point that doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense--and you are reminded that not all the Westerns of days of yore were cinematic masterpieces. There’s enough oater entertainment here to make watching through the feature length manageable, but that’s not really a spittoon-ringing endorsement. Oh, and I almost forgot to mention the hilariously bad theme song: It’s downright ridiculous, musically corny, and seems lyrically to have absolutely to do with the actual movie. You have to wonder who the hell thought the song was a good idea. All in all…be careful when you’re roaming the wide open range--sometimes there are "cow pies" you might step in. This may be one of them.

Mr. Smith Goes to Washington

It is impossible in 2019 to watch this film without relating it to today's political madness. The corruption, the use of media to distort public opinion, the overwhelming effect of money and greed on every thread that forms our political process--all these things were understood long ago, and the testimony of the past could inform opinion today, if contemporary participants were willing to listen to that wisdom. Beyond its civic usefulness, this is a very strong piece of cinema. Director Capra shows all his skill, visual and otherwise, while James Stewart and Jean Arthur give their roles all the earnestness and cynicism, respectively, required to bring the story to its fullest expression. This should be required viewing for all Americans, and all would-be Americans as well; the lessons learned just might be the key to turning around our current dysfunction. Watch it and think about it.

Harvey

The proof that this is a fantastic movie? When the moment of crisis comes, the moment when Elwood P. Dowd is in danger of becoming just an ordinary guy--maybe--the viewer will most likely be moved, possibly even heartbroken. That’s quite a bit of work for what is a fairly restrained film, one that gives its comedy a lot of room to breathe and injects just enough pathos to give it all some heft. It’s been remade at least once, but that was a quixotic idea, for without Jimmy Stewart and his essential self, the role of Dowd and the entire story would be either too silly (and not in a good way) or absurd to the point of falling entirely flat. Thankfully, we have this one result of when Stewart and company teamed up to do it right.

How the West Was Won

Alternatively entertaining and asinine. Yes, movies were different back in the day, especially westerns, which hardly exist nowadays. Still, you kind of wonder when musical numbers randomly break out in the midst of the story of westward ho! expansion. Anyway, there's a lot of hokum here, some decent action scenes, a hilarious cameo scene with John Wayne as Sherman and Harry Morgan as Grant at Shiloh--visually incongruous barely begins to describe it--and just a little bit of regret about, you know, all that stabbing Indians in the back. And the bad restoration job on the DVD I watched--including distractingly viewable seams between the original Cinerama panels--didn't help. As a time capsule piece, I guess it may be worth a look, once in a while. Otherwise, not the best work of an admittedly all-star cast.

After The Thin Man

Actually a bit better than the original, in one viewers humble opinion. The ultimate resolution is a confused bit of detective film hooey, but the Charleses share lots of snappy dialogue, and Nicky is still drinking like a fish. Enjoyable.