Nolan Posted August 21, 2003 Share Posted August 21, 2003 We just saw Open Range with Kevin Costner (well actually we were in the theatre and Costner was on the big screen!) Finally a good western. As usual the critics pan Costner who I thought was very good and praise Duval who I thought was also very good, but his character was the same as in "Days of Thunder", etc... Excellent scenery, good characters, realistic gunfights (well except for the 10 gauge shotguns knocking the bad guys 6 feet backwards) and something most modern action movies don't have, characters with personal values! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgary Posted August 21, 2003 Share Posted August 21, 2003 That, and 7 shots from his revolver, at least once ;-) I have to say, it started off slow, but I enjoyed it. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOtherErik Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 I have to say, it started off slow, but I enjoyed it. I second that...but arn't all costner movies like that. I could have used more gun fights the way the previews portrayed it. heck, I didnt even know it was about cattle hearders. thought it was just going to be shooot em up bang bang. but over all it was very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistolPete Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 I want to go see this movie. Hopefully some free time and a lot of convincing of the fiance will allow me to see it before it goes to a rental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 I'll watch anything with Annette Bening in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 Saw it the other night and loved it. The greatest pickup line of all time: "Men are gonna get killed out there today, and I'm gonna be the one killin 'em." Critics said Duvall played his stock character, and Costner was overshadowed. Not true. Duvall was great, and Costners character wasn't underdone, he was wrapped real tight. Had to be. Go see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Ok... I'll be the voice of dissent. I think the problem with Costner's "epics" is that they're really just long action movies. If he'd just realize that, cut the extraneous stuff out and make it a 90-100 minute movie rather than a 150 minute movie, he'd be much better off with the critics and moviegoers. Also, the action scenes need to be MUCH better... it is, afterall, an action flick. The 30-40 shots fired from the gun without reloading (I'm almost positive he only had one pistol at the beginning of the fight, though he had two later on) is particularly onerous considering that loading/reloading of the guns was such an integral part of the fight scene. BTW, that was a 10-round string from Costner that was pumped into the guy that shot Duval (doing the old hammer slap). This was after he had fired multiple shots at other baddies. The flying-after-shotgun-blast is also something for "B" action movies or action movies that make no attempts at a plot (think Bad Boys, etc.) Unfortunately there weren't any real insights, no major plot developments, or no awesome visual effects (actually quite poor ones-- the green screen was quite evident in several instances)... nothing that made the movie worth 2.5 hours in length. Additionally, we weren't allowed to develop any real animosity towards the bad guys (the Irish guy was almost comical), nor any real compassion for the townspeople or Button. Character development was trite (man with a sketchy past, woman that's been waiting for the right man) and there's little for the relationship to be based upon-- "gee ma'am... you sure are purty... wanna get married?" Then there was the ending... one of those "and they lived happily ever after... and after... and after." The soliloquies from both Costner (in the bar) and Benning (in the garden) at the end were unnecessary. It made the movie more cumbersome than it already was. Maybe he was trying to break new ground with respect to movie timelines and character realizations... have things occur more like they do in real life (life-altering moments don't necessarily alter your life instantaneously). If that was the case, he failed miserably in that regard. Whatever the case, I'd say the movie was bland at best. Another Costner attempt at some sort of metaphysical realization that falls extremely short of the mark. The man just isn't as deep as he seems to think he is and he CANNOT portray it on film. I'm probably being too harsh, but I'm tired of seeing the same stuff from Costner... it's like he's trying to say "see, I CAN do it," though he can't (I consider "it" to be recapturing whatever it was that made Dances with Wolves a pretty good flick). The movie left me unfulfilled. I'd wait for it to be on HBO, just like I would with WaterWorld and The Postman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Sweeney Posted August 28, 2003 Share Posted August 28, 2003 Costner and Duvall both had two handguns to start with. So, if he drills the Irishman and fires a few more rounds, then does a "border switch" and pumps the other gun dry with the hammer slapping, he's still OK. Yes it was long. But I think the idea was that life moved slower then, so the pace of a modern aciton movie would be inappropriate. And yes, our knowledge of their history was sketchy. They didn't tell each other much, so we also couldn't know much. I might even go see it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted August 29, 2003 Share Posted August 29, 2003 KC has always struck me as having just enough personality to command a fort with no troops. That aside, Open Range was worth the price of admission just for the scene where Duval delivers the line "...it just sticks in my craw" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriggerT Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Good movie, well developed story line, but not nearly as much gun play as I thoguht before going into the theater. That's not a bad thing, and if anything makes the movie a little more realistic. Afterall, if the movie was all gun play, then everyone should be dead in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted September 21, 2004 Share Posted September 21, 2004 Costner and Duvall both had two handguns to start with. So, if he drills the Irishman and fires a few more rounds, then does a "border switch" and pumps the other gun dry with the hammer slapping, he's still OK.Yes it was long. But I think the idea was that life moved slower then, so the pace of a modern aciton movie would be inappropriate. And yes, our knowledge of their history was sketchy. They didn't tell each other much, so we also couldn't know much. I might even go see it again. Had to dig this one back up. I've seen the movie 3 more times and I must admit I like it. I think I'm losing my taste in my old age. I sat down and watched it once. The other two times I half watched it. However, they screwed the pooch on the shooting. There was no NY reload or anything like that, just 11+ shots out of one revolver. I still think Duvall makes up for Costner's acting (in)ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted September 21, 2004 Share Posted September 21, 2004 Agreed ... Duvall is Du Man! I liked enough to buy a copy when it came out on DVD. I watched it again over the weekend. Annette Benning is an elegantly beautiful woman. She seems to age very nicely, much the same as Jane Seymour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now