News: Now showing in theaters: CRY MACHO, directed by and starring Clint Eastwood!

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - cigar joe

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
Eastwood News / Re: Morricone Concert
« on: January 03, 2007, 10:02:44 PM »
Anybody from this board going to the Morricone NYC concert? A few of us from the Leone Board are going to meet up before hand, we should all try and get together.


Eastwood News / Re: FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS features thread
« on: October 29, 2006, 06:36:40 PM »
In todays New York Times:

Burying Private Ryan
Published: October 29, 2006

WHEN Peter Bardazzi, a film professor, took his students at the Fashion Institute of Technology to see “Flags of Our Fathers” last Sunday, they were surrounded in the theater by gray- and white-haired people who seemed genuinely touched by the movie’s depiction of the marines who took Iwo Jima. But the young men and women with Mr. Bardazzi, he said, found it tough to sit through.

Shirlyn Wong, 23, said she had barely learned about Hiroshima growing up, let alone about the bloody battle for Iwo Jima, and World War II just didn’t seem all that relevant now. Iraq is where it’s at, she said, and the images of carnage that she’s drawn to are the videos popping up on YouTube, despite what she and her friends see as the best efforts of the government and news media to suppress them.

“As soon as you hear something on CNN about a beheading, or a sniper video, the first thing we do is check on the Internet for it,” Ms. Wong said.

It’s been a long eight years since “Saving Private Ryan.” And the underwhelming turnout for “Flags of Our Fathers” so far — it made just $10.2 million its opening weekend, a third of the gross for “Ryan” — may drive home something that Clint Eastwood, the director, and Steven Spielberg, his producer, could not have guessed when they set out to make it: the phenomenon that took hold in 1998 with Mr. Spielberg’s re-enactment of D-Day in “Ryan” and the publication of Tom Brokaw’s “Greatest Generation” may be, like that “last good war” itself, a thing of the past.

Jump-cut to 2006, with body bags filling in Iraq and an American public exhausted by the war’s toll, and it’s not so mysterious why a war movie — even a prima facie Oscar contender — should face an uphill battle.

Mark Rondeau, 45, a writer in North Adams, Mass., said he read “Flags” and loved it, and loved Mr. Eastwood’s work, but had no interest in the film, now that it reminds him of a war he’d rather not think about. “Private Ryan,” he said, came out in a “whole different era.”

“It was possible then to look back at World War II with nostalgia, and think that those were great men doing great things that Americans would never have to do again,” he said. “You’d think, well, people were shot to bits, but that was then. You could put sort of a mental distance to it. Now, if you see it happening on the sands of Iwo Jima, you know it’s happening in Iraq, at the same time, and for a lot less noble cause.”

The rest of the article is here:

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: GBU Timeline
« on: September 22, 2006, 04:07:51 AM »
Did you say "Dona" rather than "Santa" because there's a real Doña Ana, N.M. and it fits your timeline better?

Its the only town near and makea a good fit geographically for the events 8), a possible screw up in the screen play or just totaly ficticious (like Batterville & Langston Bridge).

If they actually did that much research, which I tend to think that maybe they did, since they mentioned the Sierra Magdalena and they are just west of Ft. Craig and usually not labled on any maps. So a screw up maybe.

Anyway I correted the original post

Clint Eastwood Westerns / GBU Timeline
« on: September 21, 2006, 09:12:13 PM »
If you wanted to fit the storyline into the actual events as they happend in New Mexico & Texas during the here is a possible senario. All the military Regiments are real and the dates on the New Mexico Campain are real.


GBU’s Historical Timelines

Jackson-Bill Carson

Soon after the start of the War Between The States, in late April or early May of 1861, a group of Southern patriots that include men with the names of Baker, Stevens, and  Jackson leave their West Texas homes and ride to Dallas where the Texas 3rd Cavalry is organizing. In Early July the regiment leaves Dallas and heads for Missouri on the "Texas Road" through the Indian Territory to Ft. Smith, Arkansas. They participate in the battle of Wilson’s Creek on August 10, 1861, CS casualties 1,095, US casualties 1,235 . The Regiment remains stationed in the border area of Missouri-Arkansas-Indian Territory. The 3rd Cavalry fights in the Battles of Chustenahlah on December 26, 1861.

At the end of January 1862 Jackson, Baker, and Stevens are detailed as a part of a 25 man Paymasters detachment for I Corp of the Trans-Mississippi District. Around the first of February, near Ft. Smith, they blunder into a Union Cavalry recognizance party. In the heat of battle the Paymasters wagon and $200,000 in gold coins disappears.  The sole separated survivors, all wounded, are Corporal Jackson, Stevens, and Baker.  At the beginning of the second week of February back in Dallas a military tribunal conducts an inquiry and acquits Corporal Jackson and Stevens.

Jackson either changes his name to Bill Carson and telegraphs ahead to re-enlist in Sibley’s Brigade, then hops a stage to El Paso, or Jackson, kills the real Bill Carson who is already on his way to join  Sibley  and assumes his identity. Baker belatedly arrives back in Dallas and finds out that Jackson has vanished.

Jackson, heads north from El Paso and he visits Maria his "soiled dove" paramour in the New Mexico Territorial town of Dona Ana.  He reaches Sibley’s Brigade joining the 7th Texas Cavalry (7th Mounted Volunteers) 3rd Regiment on or about February 25th, near Scorro, New Mexico, Territory.

Angel Eyes - West Texas Border Area

Early March 1862 -

Baker back in El Paso, hires Angel Eyes to find Jackson and kill Stevens.

Mid March 1862 -

Angel Eyes (AE) rides out to the Steven’s hacienda, he questions Stevens and discovers the fact that Jackson changed his name to Bill Carson and that he joined Sibley’s Brigade. Stevens also inadvertently spills the beans about the missing cash box. Stevens gives AE $1000 dollars to try and buy off his life, and for AE to kill Baker to boot, but AE kills Stevens and one of his sons.  AE goes back to Baker and collects his money and kills him. AE is now on a personal hunt for Carson.

In El Paso as AE watches the second hanging of Tuco "The Rat" Ramierez, he questions "Half Soldier" (who was in the 3rd Texas Cavalry and lost both legs at the Battle of Wilsons Creek ) about the  whereabouts of Bill Carson.  Half Soldier also tells AE that Carson re-enlisted, and that he lost an eye, and that AE can find out more information from the whore Maria in the town of Santa Ana (prehaps Dona Ana).  Maria talks.

End of March - 1862

AE is at Ft. Marcy outside of Santa Fe, New Mexico Territory. He finds out that Canby and the Union Forces have cut the Confederates to pieces at the Battles of Apache Canyon & Glorietta. If Carson is taken
alive as a prisoner he will be sent to Batterville Camp (900 miles East).
AE leaves for Batterville along the Santa Fe Trail, traveling at an average of 30 miles a day he reaches the vicinity of Batterville in a  month. (what makes the most sense is for Batterville to be near Ft.               Leavenworth, Kansas & St. Joseph, Missouri).

Mid May -1862         

AE waylays a Union Sergeant newly assigned to the camp assumes his identity, and awaits the possible arrival of Bill Carson   while running a black market ring at the camp.

TUCO’s Timeline

December -1861

Tuco in a ghost town hideout is attacked by three bounty hunters, he kills two and wounds one. On his escape route out, three more bounty hunters shoot him off his horse. Tuco is "saved" by Blondie.

Blondie’s con game begins. Blondie takes Tuco into Scorro, Texas, and collects the bounty. Before Tuco is hung Blondie shoots the rope and                              they escape North out of town and into New Mexico Territory to lay low until things cool off for a while.

· here occurs the First Major Time Jump in the film.

Mid March - 1862     

El Paso, second Tuco hanging (observed by AE). Blondie and Tuco (B&T) escape again north into New Mexico Territory. Blondie severs relationship takes Tuco’s half of the reward and leaves him 70 miles out in the middle of nowhere.  Tuco heads to the town of Dona Ana,
New Mexico Territory, arriving in the early evening terribly dehydrated. He rearms at the gunsmiths.

Tuco recovered, recruits some of his old henchmen to track down Blondie

· Second Time Jump

April 7th - 1862           

Santa Fe, New Mexico Territory, Sibley’s Brigade is retreating through town. Tuco spies Blondie’s saddle rig & horse. Blondie kills the three men that Tuco has recruited, but is caught by Tuco.

Blondie, about to be hung in his hotel room by Tuco is saved by a  cannon shot from an artillery barrage that blows out the floor under Tuco. Blondie escapes back to Texas (250 miles + or -) about 6 days travel.

Second week of April - 1862   

The Scorro, New Mexico Territory sequence (fits in here).

Tuco tracks Blondie South back down to Texas by following his campfires. Three campfires (50 miles a day more or less).

April 15th  - 1862   

Blondie & Shorty are running the con game again in San Elizario, Texas. Tuco captures Blondie & Shorty hangs. Tuco marches Blondie north back into New Mexico planning a special surprise for his friend.         

April 17th - 1862             

Tuco gets supplies (food, water, water basin, parasol) in Dona Ana  and marches Blondie into the "Journada del Muerta" (March of Death) desert, 100 miles stretching North to South with no water.

B&T meet "The Carriage of the Spirits" (an ambushed Confederate 3rd regiment Headquarters wagon full of bodies). Tuco begins to rob the dead but discovers Bill Carson/Jackson barely alive.

A delirious Bill Carson/Jackson tells Tuco about the buried gold in the Sad Hill Cemetery, Tuco asks about the name on the grave, but Bill Carson/Jackson begins to go into convulsions and demands water.  Bill Carson/Jackson dies but tells Blondie the name on the

Tuco now must save Blondie, so he loads him in the carriage and heads for help.

April 18th -1862               

B&T arrive at night at Confederate Picket Post find out they are at a place called Apache Canyon. Tuco asks for the closest infirmary and finds out that he is near his brothers San Antonio Mission hospital.

April 19th - 1862               

B&T arrive at San Antonio Mission.

· Third Time Jump

May - 1862                       

B&T leave San Antonio Mission cross the Rio Grande and head North into the dry Plains of San Agustine passing around the Union stronghold of Ft. Craig. Tuco has a map and talks about heading Northwest and the Sierra Magdalena on their left and about crossing back across the Rio Grande and then going all the way                across Texas (to the East).

B&T are captured by a Union Cavalry patrol North and West of Ft. Craig.

· Fourth Time Jump

July - 1862 

B&T marched into Batterville Camp, from Ft. Craig, 1,020 miles ( at a pace of about 20 + or - miles a day, over the Santa Fe trail. It would have taken them about 50 days) to this fictitious camp  (closest real Union POW camp was in Illinois). This site also is located near the longest railroad existing at the time (St. Joseph &                 Hanibal RR) west of the Mississippi.

Tuco tortured and tells AE that Sad Hill near Ft. Smith Arkansas is the name of the cemetery. Tuco & Wallace to St, Joseph & Hanibal RR. After ten hours on the train Tuco escapes and  catches the next train back.  Tuco track’s AE & Blondie South  towards Ft. Smith, and Sad Hill.

AE & Blondie & AE’s gang traveling about 30 miles per day and  Tuco traveling about 40 miles per day both reach Ft. Smith at the same time.  ( Ft. Smith, Arkansas changed hands several times during the Civil War and makes a good candidate for the                                battered town and its on a major river the Arkansas.)

Tuco kills one armed bounty hunter who has been on the lookout for him for eight months.

B&T kill AE’s gang and head for Sad Hill.

2nd week in July 1862

B&T blunder upon a battle for Langston or Langstone bridge over the Arkansas River. The small cemetery nearby at Sad Hill has swollen with the dead from the various skirmishes & battles in the border area of Northwest Arkansas ( Pea Ridge (Elkhorn Tavern) was on March 6-8th  1862, US Casualties 1, 349, CS
                                             Casualties 4,600).

B&T&AE shoot out at Sad Hill.

Off-Topic Discussion / Gunshot Effects in Eastwood Westerns
« on: September 02, 2006, 10:14:24 AM »
Was discussing a recent Myth Busters about the effects of gunshot wounds and there effects on people on the Sergio Leone board and though you all would like to see it here too.

Sergio Leone, & Clint Eastwood were accused of excessive violence, but this old article I remembered reading in 1971 in an American Heritage Magazine sure vindicates them.


Ahh the beauty of the internent!!!!


“Then how come they’re digging a grave behind the old corral, Luke?”


“Oh, Sam, what happened?”

“Nothing serious, Miss Sally—Luke just picked up a little bit of lead.”


“Now Miss Sally, don’t you fret. It’s just a little ol’ hole in his shoulder. He’ll be up and about in no time a-tall.”

Sure enough, in two or three days good old Luke is up and raring to resume his defense of sweet Miss Sally, the Bar-X spread, and the honor of the old, wild West. And Luke’s adventure and miraculous recovery, with slight alterations, occur over and over on the pages of western fiction and on the imaginative screens of Hollywood and television.

But what really happened to those gunshot heroes and villains in that tempestuous period of loose laws and fast gunplay? The reality was quite gruesomely different.

The disastrous effect of a large-caliber bullet on the human body can hardly be comprehended by those whose knowledge of shooting is limited to movie and television westerns. The favorite guns of the West were the .44 and .45 caliber revolvers. Bullet caliber is measured by the diameter in inches: the lead slugs for these guns were nearly half an inch in diameter. Such a bullet packs a terrific wallop, knocking the victim off his feet if it hits any solid part of the body. He doesn’t just drop dead, either. Here is a descriptionof a real gunfight by a man who knew the subject well, Dr. George Goodfellow, the “gunfighter’s surgeon” of Tombstone, Arizona:

In the Spring of 1881 I was a few feet distant from a couple of individuals who were quarreling. They began shooting. The first shot took effect, as was afterward ascertained, in the left breast of one of them, who, after being shot, and while staggering back some 12 feet, cocked and fired his pistol twice, his second shot going into the air, for by that time he was on his back.

It may be remarked that the recipient of the first shot was a tough man indeed to manage two shots himself before going down; but the significant phrase is “while staggering back some 12 feet.” Compare this, just for instance, with the climactic scene in the movie Vera Cruz (1954), in which Burt Lancaster and Gary Cooper are resolutely facing each other in a frontier street, their hands just above their guns. In a blurred movement they both draw, and two shots ring out; but neither man staggers back one foot, let alone twelve. The logical conclusion is, of course, that they have both missed. Not so; justice has triumphed again. After a long, tantalizing pause, bad-guy Lancaster crumples to the ground, dead. He has not moved an inch otherwise (or even stopped smiling), after being hit by that .45 caliber express train—an effect totally beyond belief. The U.S. Army, testing the Colt .45 in the Chicago stockyards, found that it would bowl over a 1,000pound steer with one shot, even if the wound was not fatal.

Another sentimental curiosity of western mythology is the hierarchy, so to speak, of wound areas. Good guys are almost invariably lucky and get hit in the arm, the shoulder, or the fleshy part of the leg. Bad guys are much more likely to take it in the chest, abdomen, or back, which means that they are thenceforth dead. And nobody ever gets hit in the face.

The explanations are not obscure. Even an audience comfortably deluded about the destructive power of a .44 or .45 slug would hardly believe a face wound that didn’t show up as more than a neat little hole. In reality, gunfighters were hit in the face fairly often, and the big lead bullets caused horrendous damage to mouths, teeth, noses, and eyes. You can’t show that on the family TV set, no matter how bad the bad guy is.

The reason that heroes so often are hit in the shoulder is that this is fondly imagined to be a relatively “safe” area, well removed from the vital organs. One would think that the human shoulder was made of some selfhealing material, rather like a puncture-proof tire. The fact is that except for fat men and weightlifters, you can’t penetrate much of the shoulder without striking a complicated arrangement of bones, tendons, blood vessels, and nerves. A shoulder wound from a high-caliber weapon could be not only incapacitating; it could be fatal. Civil war medical records showed that one third of the victims of shoulder-joint wounds died as a result of severe damage, such as severed arteries, or from subsequent infection. Even if the bullet hit the upper arm or forearm, sparing the shoulder joint, the injury was so great that the usual result was amputation. Any meeting between bone and the old high-caliber bullet was likely to be highly traumatic: in 1893 an Army medical report observed that “if a bone is struck, the destruction is enormous, the wound of exit frightful in size and irregularity.”

This brings up another important point that TV and movie writers might take more notice of—the great difference between the old lead slug and modern steel-jacketed bullets. The speed of today’s high-velocity slug in effect sterilizes the outer surface and at the same time usually enables the projectile to drill a rather neat, aseptic hole through tissue and bone alike. The old lead bullet, in contrast, readily lost shape on impact and tore viciously through the victim’s body, carrying along unstcrile pieces of skin and clothing. It made a large wound and often left a track out of all proportion to the size of the bullet. Extensive bleeding and shock were common, and infection virtually assured. Almost every gunshot wound was highly dangerous, no matter where the bullet hit.

If a gunfighter survived a gunfight but was wounded in the process, he still had to survive the medical conditions of the Old West. Doctors were scarce, and some of those available were of doubtful value. In most places there were few if any laws regulating the practice of medicine, and all too often a frontier doctor was anyone who chose to so designate himself. Perhaps a fourth of the “doctors” of the early American West held medical degrees; and even at that it must be remembered that in those days many medical schools would certify an M.D. after just a year or two of study.

No nurses were to be found, with the possible exception of a few tender-hearted schoolmarms or “soiled doves” from the dance halls; there were no hospitals worthy of the name, no laboratories, no antibiotics, and few medicines. The universal anesthetic and cure-all was whiskey, which, while it may have raised the morale of both patient and doctor, was not calculated to increase the efficacy of surgery.

Very often, incidentally, swift and accurate surgery meant the difference between life and death. “Given a gunshot wound of the abdominal cavity with one of the above caliber balls [.44 and .45],” Dr. Goodfellow wrote, “if the cavity be not opened within an hour, the patient by reason of hemorrhage is beyond any chance of recovery.” It hardly needs saying that blood transfusions were not to be had.

Parenthetically, it may be noted also that if there was actually a large percentage of abdominal and body wounds in western gunfights, it was not by accident. The arm, leg, and shoulder wounds so frequently enjoyed— that seems to be the right word—by heroes and subheroes on the screen were usually, in real life, the consequences of poor shooting and did not occur any more often than the shooter could help. He went for the broadest and most obvious target, namely the chest and abdomen of his opponent.

The opponent was well aware of this, naturally, and did his best to avoid full exposure. The dramatic showdown that has climaxed so many Hollywood and TV westerns, where two stalwarts deliberately stalk down the street toward each other, good guy waiting for bad guy to go for his gun, was certainly a rare occurrence. Far more often a man was shot without ever having had a chance to touch his gun. Jesse James was shot in the back; Virgil Earp was ambushed at night; Morgan Earp got it through a window while he was playing billiards; Billy the Kiel died in a darkened room without shooting back; Wild Bill Hickok was shot from behind while concentrating on a hand of poker.

A whole separate branch of the mythology of western fiction and film has to do with fist fights and barroom brawls. Ferocious encounters featuring multiple knockdowns, repeated haymakers to the lace, kicks to the stomach, thumps on the head with bottles, chairs, and miscellaneous furniture, and other egregious violence—usually produce nothing more than a temporary daze, with no visible bruises to speak of. Little boys find out better, of course, the first time they are in a real fist fight in the school yard.

In the meantime, the gunfight myths of the West live on in books, movies, and on television. Only the other night I watched Escape from Fort Bravo on TV, and 1 kept wondering when William Holden, the star, would acquire his mandatory flesh wound. Sure enough, he gets shot in (what else?) the shoulder, and for a while it looks as if he is done for—almost as if the screenwriter had been studying up on the real effects of large-caliber bullets. Then, just before the ornery redskins move in to finish him off, the U.S. cavalry thunders to the rescue. Minutes later, there is our hero, sitting straight and tall in the saddle and galloping away at the head of his own cavalry troop as if nothing has happened. Oh yes, he does have his arm in a sline.

Mr. Packer is a western history buff who is studying for a doctor’s degree in entomology at Utah State University.

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: the MWNN does NOT have a name!!!!
« on: May 29, 2006, 08:42:35 AM »
The Battle of Glorieta Pass, which is alluded to in The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, took place on March 28, 1862.

A Fistful of Dollars takes place no earlier than 1873 (that is the date on a grave in the cemetery scene).

For a Few Dollars More probably takes place around the same time as A Fistful of Dollars. The protagonist has the same gun, a Colt "Peacemaker" model that was introduced in 1873.

The only change I would make is to further update "A Fistfull of Dollars" to the  late 1880-90's.  The prop machine gun that Ramon uses is not a Gattling gun but  supposed to look like a fully automatic machine gun "he's not cranking it" so they were not available earlier in the 1870's.

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: the MWNN does NOT have a name!!!!
« on: May 28, 2006, 08:57:39 PM »
In For A Few Dollars More when Mortimer is flipping through the back issues of the newspapers in El Paso the photo of Manco in White Rocks is captioned as "Manco".

Correction no, it just makes out that he is a bounty hunter.

So there are 3 refs to Manco one in print.

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: Match lighting in clint movies
« on: April 01, 2006, 05:35:59 AM »
They should also work just scratching them along wood surfaces, or your pants leg (as long as you bend your knee to tighen the fabric and do it along the bottom of your thigh). It they don't they may be soggy, or gotten exposed to too much humidity at some point. Or you may have a defective batch.

Keep trying, when you do it with your thumb you really have to put pressure on the blue or white tip of the match head, depending on the grain of the wood enough pressure to break the match sometimes, just put your nail right on the tip and scratch sideways.  8)

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: Match lighting in clint movies
« on: March 30, 2006, 06:26:36 PM »
got to make sure they are "Strike Anywhere" matches.

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: Big Time Western performances
« on: March 26, 2006, 02:05:52 PM »
Yea JP Law is a bit wooden, but it has a lot of familiar faces from For A Few Dollars More, (Groggy) Luigi Pistilli, and (Nino) Mario Brega. You really have to see the pristeen wide screen DVD if you can find it. Not The Canadian DVD.

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Blondie - Tuco Canon Duel
« on: March 25, 2006, 09:11:15 PM »
Don't remember if this was ever posted on this board.

The two sequences still not included in the GBU SE one being the "Scorro" scene of which we have seen stills of both Tuco in a town square collecting donations while Blondie is in bed with a whore.

The other is the Canon Duel of which a still is included in the opening credits of the film, and a reconstruction using some stills and parts of the French trailer are shown here its pretty cool enjoy:

Clint Eastwood Westerns / Re: Big Time Western performances
« on: March 25, 2006, 05:39:20 AM »
Well, for Spaghetti Westerns I've found enjoyment in watching the following:

Lee Van Cleef in The Big Gundown & Death Rides a Horse.

Franco Nero in The Mercenary & Companero's

Tomas Milian in Run Man Run & Companero's

Gian Maria Volonte in A Bullet For The General

Klaus Kinsky in The Great Silence


Gregory Peck in The Bravados

Paul Newman in Hombre

no its just the SE has so much more GBU that I over look the sound,

Off-Topic Discussion / Re: What was the last western you watched?
« on: February 19, 2006, 12:01:29 PM »
Soldier Blue 1970

Saw this gory ultra violent classic yesterday from director Ralph Nelson (Lilies of the Field, Charly, Father Goose, Requiem for a Heavyweight) and it is right up there with the brutalest SW's. Decidedly not for the squeamish. This is no feel good "Dances with Wolves", I wonder why we don't see re-runs of this  .

It portrays the type of frontier warfare that any one who knows the down and dirty history of the conquest of America from the Peaquot War, the French & Indian War, Pontiac's Rebellion, the Cherokee War, the American Revolution, the Black Hawk War, to name a few all the way to the Apache Wars knows was executed on both sides. Scalpings, dismemberment, saber beheadings, rapes, child killing, the only thing missing is the fountains of blood (a la Tarrantino).

It was made during the Vietnam War and at the time reflected the current events here, it is definietly an anti war film.

Candace Bergen plays Cresta a white woman who has been captured by the Cheyenne and was the wife of a chief, who has been liberated and is being escorted back to civilization with a paymasters detachement Peter Strauss is Honus a soldier, who survives the massacre of same.

Bergen's charcter is the strong lead of the film she is originally a streewise orphan from Canal St. NYC, who goes west with her fiance who is in the army, she is captured and learns the ways of the Cheyenne well enough to take Honus (another Easterner well educated enough to quote Tennyson's Charge of the Light Brigade over the bodies of his comrades in arms) under her wing.

So Cresta is as foul mouthed as any Calamity Jane and her adopted Native openess with her body and ways are a marked contrast to the civilized world, and shocking at first to Honus. This also reflects somewhat our 1960's & 70's but you can see it befitting the Wild West also.

Together they make their adventurous way across the prairies. They run into Iverson's company of troops based on (Chivington's 3rd Colorado Volunteers on the way to attack the Cheyenne village on Sand Creek), (they, the Cheyenne's) were in their designated area and they met the approaching soldiers with a white flag upon which Chivington ignored, the resulting massacre resulted in what was depicted in the film.

Title song was by (Native American) Buffy Saint-Marie, score was by Bud Spencer and its more in the "Magnificent Seven Style".

This is no John Ford "Cavalry Trilogy" thats for sure, and this will illustrate why they don't make "Cowboy-Cavalry & Indian Movies" anymore, if you want to read up on Sand Creek Massacre here is a great link:

Off-Topic Discussion / Re: What was the last western you watched?
« on: February 08, 2006, 04:37:11 AM »
Barquero 1970

Finally saw this the other day, its was called the "most Italianate of American Westerns" by Phillip French in Westerns 1973 (more so than Eastwoods contemporary Hang em High) and I'll have to admit I was pleasantly surprised, it really starts off like gangbusters, after the unusual opening credits sequence (its shot to resemble an oil painting looking as if the film is being projected upon a canvas). Someone suggested that pantyhose over the lens gives this effect.

Director was Gordon Douglas, who not only was a child star but later directed some of the "Our Gang" comedies he also did "Rio Conchos", "Chuka", "Them", "Robin & The Seven Hoods", and "In Like Flint" to name a small  few and also TV the show Maverick, does a very good job.

Its initial first half has a way more SW feel to it than Eastwoods first AW "Hang Em' High".  Unfortunately what I watched was a DVDr recording off of a TV screening with the colors seeming abit too strong. It was shot on location in Colorado.

It starts off with two groups, a small army of mercenary outlaws and a trio breaking off and riding in opposite direction with ariver valley in the b.g. One side of the river leads to the Mexican border.

Lee Van Cleef is Travis the Barquero the ferryman, and we see him plying his trade as he pulls a wagon of settlers across, his only weapons are a bowie knife and some sort of longrange rifle of a Sharps or Spencer type. He has one prop from his SW days and that's his "Angel Eyes" tobacco pipe.

Now a something to point out here that a lot of folks today may not realise but rivers & water was a real barrier to movement throughout history. Not very many people could swim at all there were barely any good swimers. I lot of folks were deathly afraid of water and they weren't going to even attempt to cross a river on a horse unless it was at a shallow ford, anything deep or fast flowing would be suicide even on a horse. There is a little segment where one of the outlaws alludes to this.

We first see (Jack Remy) Oates in bed with a plump sweaty Hispanic whore Layeta, wearing his black hat with a fancy gold hatband in a whore house the "Double Eagle"in the town of Buckskin (very frontier looking with a lot of log cabin buildings), he's looking his sleaziest best.

Some sample dialog:

Layeta the whore (fawning) "am I not beautiful senior"?
Jack (looking disgusted) "I need a drink".
Whore "Say it senior."
Jack "you're beautiful...oh are you beautiful".
Whore "why do you wear your sombero"?
Jack " why do you wear your stockings"
Whore "because they are pretty"
Jack "my hat's pretty"

a bit later the whore is splashing perfume on herself while singing...

Whore "do I smell senior'?
Jack "yea you sure do".

The massacre of the town starts and Jack is shooting from the window.A Mexican male breaks into Jacks room and asks "whats going on"

Jack "we're shooting people". and Jack blows him away.
Jack to whore "you live in a lousy neighborhood, you ought to move".

Jack is in his "command post" (tough duty, lol) for the raid on the town by his small army of misfits. Their goal is the bank and a shipment of Winchester Rifles that an army patrol is escorting. Oates' second in command is a Frenchman Marquette (Kerwin Matthews)and its he who shoots the town sherrif to start off the fireworks.

As Jack dresses, Layeta asks "Senior wouldn't it be nice to take Layeta with you"
Jack "no"
Layeta "will I see you again"?
Jack "I don't think so" and he shoots her.

The action sequences are pretty good throughout the whole massacre when people get shot they go flying.

There are some very good character actors Forrest Tucker (Mountain Phil ) puts in an over the top memorable performance as a grizzeled mountian man.
All I remember of Tucker is his TV (F Troop) performance but he's a hoot in this flick too.

Marie Gomez plays Nola (Chiquita from The Professionals) she is Travis's woman. Mariette Hartley plays the unfaithful wife of a "squatter" who offers herself to Travis (a type of person she loaths but is attracted too) if he'll save her husband, he does, and she does, and Nola doesn't mind.

The film looses steam unfortunately once the confrontation becomes a Mexican standoff at the river, it even quotes FAFDM with a bit where Jack smokes reefer and has a flashback but it just doesn't work. The flash back recalls how he got his hat, not exactly a major plot point, and it feels as if it was stuck in there just to be going with the flow of the late 60's early 70's idea of cool. Now a better flash back would be to some kind of traumatic experience with water which would have echoed their dilema and really punctuate his later actions.

The film had potential but ends up loosing its way abit and feels more like a TV program at the end.

The barge battle was a bit hurried and I think cut or trimmed in the version I saw, its a bit too hurried and some of the action has no explanations (like how did Travis & the squatters figuer out what Remy had planned and plan their own defence) but you have to admit different.

The final duel between Travis & Jack is a bit flat has almost no dramatic build up at all, almost as if they ran out of time. Though on second watching there are some cool dialog lines between Oates & Van Cleef. Score is nothing special and Domenic Frontieri actually quotes "Hang Em High".

Van Cleef should have had a wee bit more screen time he's just not featured enough in my opinion, but he is acting in a very different role, not a cool efficient killer, not and ex outlaw, not a drunk, more of a pioneering business man. And this, come to think of it in hindsight may have been his biggest career screwup, he was typecast for years by Hollywood as an outlaw, then he got that role of a lifetime as Mortimer, he could of, or at least his agent could have really tried to do (as Eastwood did and parlayed the MWNN charater into an American film career) if they had held out. If he had played another strong Mortimer type in a successful American film here who knows how far he may have gone.

I highly recommend this for LVC fans.

Trivia Games / Re: Guess Who?
« on: January 17, 2006, 05:10:15 AM »
No, Chelo Alonzo was something I stumbled upon

The site with a nice little biography, for any interested, is here :

Trivia Games / Re: Guess Who?
« on: January 16, 2006, 08:33:32 PM »
Dr. Koch I presume

Trivia Games / Re: Guess Who?
« on: January 15, 2006, 05:49:33 PM »
Jesica Walter possibly?

Trivia Games / Guess Who?
« on: January 13, 2006, 04:47:14 AM »
Guess Who is this Eastwood Western actress?

GBU for me no contest, more of a wild ride, and Tuco always brings a smile.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5

C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T