Sometimes you just need to sit back and take it all in. Just appreciate a movie for being pretty much perfect on all levels. Case in point? The 1989 CBS miniseries Lonesome Dove, based off the Pulitzer Prize-winning novel -- also an all-timer and one of my favorites -- from author Larry McMurtry. Aired over four nights, the miniseries pulled in crazy ratings, better reviews, and rave reviews for its cast. It deserves every positive thing it got. It is a true classic, and regardless of its TV roots, one of the best westerns of all-time.
Along the Rio Grande River in the town of Lonesome Dove in south Texas, former Texas Rangers Capt. Augustus McCrae (Robert Duvall) and Capt. Woodrow F. Call (Tommy Lee Jones) own the Hat Creek Company, working as cattle buyers and sellers, selling an occasional horse but nothing too lucrative. After creating quite a name for themselves as Rangers when all of Texas was still a wilderness, the duo has drifted into obscurity some. They're pleasantly surprised when a good friend from their past and a former ranger himself, Jake Spoon (Robert Urich), rides into Lonesome Dove telling them how beautiful and untouched the Montana territory far to the north is. Call gets the idea in his head to put together a herd of cattle and drive them all the way to the territory, starting up the first cattle ranch in Montana. Gus and several of their men are wary but go along with it. The veteran Rangers have their reasons for going -- both very different -- but no one involved has any real idea what awaits them on the trail.
It's impossible to condense a 900-plus page novel and a four-part miniseries running 384 minutes into one concise paragraph explaining the plot. Expanding a little, the two Rangers drive a cattle herd from south Texas to Montana, experiencing all the good, bad, dangerous and terrifying that the trail has to offer. Without getting too cheesy/flowery, it's about friendship, love, betrayal, pride, loyalty and on the biggest level, the changing times in the west, seen through the eyes of old and young men alike. There is a subplot I've lost interest in over the years and repeated viewings/readings, but Lonesome Dove is as perfect a movie as I've ever seen. I highly recommend the novel too if you're a reader looking for a good book.
Director Simon Wincer does an admirable job bringing McMurtry's novel to life. Decisions that are made to streamline the story excise non-essential characters, scenes and explanation to make a four-part miniseries into a miniseries running longer than six hours that flies by. The filming locations are perfect, helping set up the passage of time with cinematographer Dean Semler turning in a beautiful-looking story. A TV miniseries might seem limiting, but the visual scope and beauty here is a huge selling point. Throw in a sweeping, emotionally perfect score (listen HERE) from composer Basil Poledouris, and you've got all the makings of a halfway decent story!
What sets 'Lonesome' apart I've always felt is its ability to mix the romance of the wild west with the realism of the wild west. There's something straightforward and iconic about the visual of a cowboy on horseback trailing along with a cattle herd against the horizon. There's something simple about it that is able to permeate itself through a ton of westerns, good and bad. A man on his horse, doing a job that isn't easy and ready to fight off whatever comes at the herd because it's his job. The counter? There was nothing romantic about it no matter what you may want to think. It was back-breaking work, and death comes cheap (as it's said several times) to those who aren't careful and even to those who are. It doesn't take much for the winds to shift from good to bad. Straddling that line, 'Lonesome' is a somber, moving story that has the ability to tear your guts up through good and bad. It's the rare western with that ability.
Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones. That's it. That's all. I could leave it at that and be good, but that'd make for a short review, wouldn't it? Both men have had remarkable careers, but I don't believe either has ever (EVER!!!) been better than they were here. Duvall's Gus is fast-talking, loves some whiskey and good biscuits, a ladies man, and an all-timer at avoiding work. Jones' Call is a man of few words, ridiculously stubborn, hard-working to a fault, and lives by a code. A true Odd Couple-esque dynamic, these are phenomenal performances. They play off each other with ease. Their dialogue crackles with energy whether it be two friends busting each other, two partners figuring out how to solve a problem, or two longtime friends having a rare heart-to-heart in a trying moment. Both are amazingly excellent, but Duvall is on another level here as Gus. His energy, his non-stop talking, his physical mannerisms from a quick smirk to sucking his lips to his unique walk...my goodness, Gus McCrae is one of the all-time best western characters. Robert Duvall is the freaking man.
Though there are many characters in the miniseries, the heart of the story is Gus and Call's Hat Creek outfit and their motley crew of cowboys. Danny Glover is a quiet scene-stealer as Josh Deets, the outfit's tracker and scout, a fiercely capable worker and fighter who never complains, just putting his head down and getting the job done. Rick Schroder is excellent as Newt, a young, inexperienced 17-year old cowboy orphaned years before and picked up and cared for by the Hat Creek outfit. Tim Scott plays Pea Eye, a well-meaning but not so intelligent former Ranger. And last, there's unofficial member Dish Boggett, played by D.B. Sweeney, a more than capable cowboy who finds a niche with the group. There's a bond, a camaraderie amongst the crew that feels natural and real, not actors, but real people and their relationships. It is the rare western where you can say that.
You could write a thesis paper about individual characters here, making my job reviewing the miniseries a tough one! Diane Lane doesn't deserved to get buried so far down in a review, but here we sit. Her Lorena Wood, a beautiful young prostitute who finds herself on the trail with the herd, is a fascinating character to watch grow and develop. Her chemistry with Duvall is impeccable too. Anjelica Houston plays Clara, a past love (and maybe currently) of Gus', married and with children on a horse ranch in Nebraska. Frederic Forrest is frightening as Blue Duck, a half-breed bandit who's rampaged all over Texas for years, all the while out of the reach of our Rangers. I also especially liked Jorge Martinez de Hoyos as Po Campo, the cook traveling with the herd.
If there is a weak point in 'Lonesome,' it is a subplot involving an Arkansas sheriff, July Johnson (Chris Cooper), trailing Jake Spoon only to find out his wife (Glenne Headly) has left him. This subplot also features Barry Corbin, Steve Buscemi, and Frederick Coffin. I just don't find myself drawn to the characters here and as a result, their portions of the story tend to drag.
This is a movie that deserves a big old, long review full of in-depth analysis, more than I've got the space for here. I easily could write a college paper about this McMurtry novel! I also don't want to give away too much here with my review, recommending you go into the miniseries with a clean slate. I'll say this instead. There are moments that are absolutely heartbreaking, truly gut-wrenching, whether it be a surprising/shocking death to a face-to-face where you're begging something to happen. Both watching the miniseries and reading McMurtry's novel, I've cried and we're talking real, big crocodile tears. It's a classic movie -- screw the miniseries moniker -- and required viewing for anyone who loves good characters, story and scope regardless of your feelings on the western genre.
Interesting tidbit? McMurtry originally wrote the basic idea as a movie with John Wayne (Call), Jimmy Stewart (Gus) and Henry Fonda (Jake) leading the cast only to see it fall apart because of scheduling conflicts. Can you imagine that? If you're looking to kill a couple hours, see if you can fill out the rest of the cast with actors working in the late 1960's and early 1970's. I have, and let me tell you, it's tough. In the meantime, check Lonesome Dove out.
Lonesome Dove (1989): ****/****
The Sons of Katie Elder
"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Diane Lane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Diane Lane. Show all posts
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Friday, January 24, 2014
Man of Steel
First appearing in 1939 comic 'Action Comics 1,' Superman has become one of, if not the most recognizable superheroes around, right up there with Batman and Spiderman. He's come a long way in countless comics, even getting a 1950s TV show and ultimately feature films, starring Christopher Reeve, before disappearing for years (of sorts). Then, there was a 2006 reboot that the universe unanimously agreed was really, really bad. Well, it didn't take long for another reboot, 2013's Man of Steel.
The planet Krypton is quickly dying, a father, Jor-El (Russell Crowe), saving his infant son by sending him off the planet at the last minute with Krypton's incredible power hidden away in the capsule. The space capsule travels through the galaxy, ultimately crashing on Earth where the infant is cared for and raised by a middle-aged farm couple. He grows up knowing he isn't quite normal, the young boy showing incredible feats of strength as needed. The boy, Clark, grows up and into his 20s and 30s, Clark (Henry Cavill) is still struggling to find himself as an outsider in this similar but ultimately strange world. He drifts from job to job, his strength and powers usually forcing him to leave sooner rather than later. Clark begins to find out who he really is as the years go by, all in time for him to fully embrace his superpowers. A survivor of Krypton, General Zod (Michael Shannon), has finally tracked Clark down after 30-plus years of searching the galaxy. Can Clark embrace his true self and help save Earth in the process?
Growing up, I was a Batman fan above all else. I'm pretty sure as a kid I watched the Christopher Reeve movies with my folks, but it's been years, and I don't have a great recollection of them. When I saw the teaser trailer way back in summer 2012 though for this Superman reboot, I was more than psyched. The talent behind the film was evident, director Zack Snyder (of 300 and Watchmen fame) working with producer Christopher Nolan (of the recent Batman trilogy) and a script from David S. Goyer (who wrote the Batman trilogy) working together to bring this reboot together. And going in, I think a distinction should be made. This is a movie about how Superman came to be, not an established Superman saving the world. It is exactly what a reboot should be, an explanation of how an iconic character that most of the audience knows and how he came to be that icon.
The obvious place to start is with Superman himself, Henry Cavill, the 30-year old British actor cast in the part of Clark Kent. A relative unknown in terms of star power before this role, Cavill is ideal casting. I thought he did a great job putting a new spin on a familiar character. This isn't the jokey, smart-mouthed Superman. Instead, Clark is an introspective, intelligent and even tortured individual trying to find who he is in this strange world. He has some similarities to us, but he also knows there is something very different and potentially dangerous about him, his powers coming to light as he grows up and learns his true identity. Now I should say, I'm a sucker for tortured anti-heroes dealing with their own demons, but I really enjoyed a far more serious, more cerebral superhero movie. It's hard not to compare this film to the Batman trilogy in that sense, a look at a superhero but without that comedy and sense of humor to fall back on. Oh, and as for Cavill? He looks like Superman, like he could pick a skyscraper up, save a bus from sinking in a river. The physical goes a long way.
What surprised me some in the development of the character was the reliance on the father-son dynamic between Clark and his father, Jor-El (Crowe nailing the part, "huge surprise" there), and his adopted father on Earth, Jonathan Kent, similarly played to perfection by Kevin Costner. It's a surprising dynamic that develops, Clark learning through he is through conversations with Jonathan, but also talking with his long-dead father through Krypton technology. It's those little things that bring the movie up a notch or two, Goyer's script providing some emotional, effective moments that ring true, not false as Clark becomes what he must become. In a weird way in terms of that father-son dynamic, 'Man' reminded me some of 2013's The Place Beyond the Pines in how it deals with that tricky relationship. It works though, right from the start, adding a layer to the story. Yeah, we've seen a Dad helping his son out before in movies, but how does a Dad help out his son who also has superpowers that could save or destroy Earth? Surprisingly, it's not that different.
From top to bottom, the cast may not have the instantly recognizable huge names, but I think that works in the movie's favor. Along with Cavill, Crowe and Costner, look for Amy Adams as Lois Lane, intrepid reporter who may be onto Clark's real identity and ability, Diane Lane as Martha, Clark's adopted mother, Harry Lennix and Christopher Meloni as Army officers tasked with finding the truth about Superman, Laurence Fishburne as Lois' editor at the Daily Planet, an underused Richard Schiff as a scientist working with the military, and Ayelet Zurer as Lana, Clark's real mother on Krypton who must decide what sacrifice to make with her son. As the villain, General Zod, Shannon is great casting, his huge presence a big positive in this reboot, Antje Traue as his indestructible right-hand officer.
Reading reviews, listening to friends, what caught me off guard was the hate this movie received. I don't know why. If anything, I was pleasantly surprised. Maybe it's because I didn't go into the movie with any preconceived notions of what the movie should be, not being a diehard Superman fan. I came away very impressed from the get-go. The story is non-linear, bouncing around between flashbacks and the current time as Clark moves ever close to fulfilling his destiny. The storytelling device works, simple as that. Composer Hans Zimmer's score is big and booming and appropriate while the visual look of the movie -- polished, but slightly washed out, even faded -- similarly works very well. Even Superman's outfit is a darker, more pale blue, not that bright blue we've come to associate with the character. The action is solid, especially an epic showdown in Smallville, but I found myself more drawn to the story and the characters. Go figure.
In the months since the release of 'Man,' the franchise/series has been in the news because of where it's going. Instead of just continuing the Superman movies, the next movie will be Batman vs. Superman, scheduled for a 2015 release. I'm curious, even intrigued, but I can't say I'm excited. 'Man' leaves the story on such a good jumping off point that it seems almost a gimmick to revive Batman so quick and bring him into this series. That said, I'll probably go see it. If nothing else and not knowing where the franchise will go, 'Man' is a great jumping off point in itself. Lots of dissenters and haters out there, but make up your own mind. I for one, loved it.
Man of Steel (2013): *** 1/2 /****
The planet Krypton is quickly dying, a father, Jor-El (Russell Crowe), saving his infant son by sending him off the planet at the last minute with Krypton's incredible power hidden away in the capsule. The space capsule travels through the galaxy, ultimately crashing on Earth where the infant is cared for and raised by a middle-aged farm couple. He grows up knowing he isn't quite normal, the young boy showing incredible feats of strength as needed. The boy, Clark, grows up and into his 20s and 30s, Clark (Henry Cavill) is still struggling to find himself as an outsider in this similar but ultimately strange world. He drifts from job to job, his strength and powers usually forcing him to leave sooner rather than later. Clark begins to find out who he really is as the years go by, all in time for him to fully embrace his superpowers. A survivor of Krypton, General Zod (Michael Shannon), has finally tracked Clark down after 30-plus years of searching the galaxy. Can Clark embrace his true self and help save Earth in the process?
Growing up, I was a Batman fan above all else. I'm pretty sure as a kid I watched the Christopher Reeve movies with my folks, but it's been years, and I don't have a great recollection of them. When I saw the teaser trailer way back in summer 2012 though for this Superman reboot, I was more than psyched. The talent behind the film was evident, director Zack Snyder (of 300 and Watchmen fame) working with producer Christopher Nolan (of the recent Batman trilogy) and a script from David S. Goyer (who wrote the Batman trilogy) working together to bring this reboot together. And going in, I think a distinction should be made. This is a movie about how Superman came to be, not an established Superman saving the world. It is exactly what a reboot should be, an explanation of how an iconic character that most of the audience knows and how he came to be that icon.
The obvious place to start is with Superman himself, Henry Cavill, the 30-year old British actor cast in the part of Clark Kent. A relative unknown in terms of star power before this role, Cavill is ideal casting. I thought he did a great job putting a new spin on a familiar character. This isn't the jokey, smart-mouthed Superman. Instead, Clark is an introspective, intelligent and even tortured individual trying to find who he is in this strange world. He has some similarities to us, but he also knows there is something very different and potentially dangerous about him, his powers coming to light as he grows up and learns his true identity. Now I should say, I'm a sucker for tortured anti-heroes dealing with their own demons, but I really enjoyed a far more serious, more cerebral superhero movie. It's hard not to compare this film to the Batman trilogy in that sense, a look at a superhero but without that comedy and sense of humor to fall back on. Oh, and as for Cavill? He looks like Superman, like he could pick a skyscraper up, save a bus from sinking in a river. The physical goes a long way.
What surprised me some in the development of the character was the reliance on the father-son dynamic between Clark and his father, Jor-El (Crowe nailing the part, "huge surprise" there), and his adopted father on Earth, Jonathan Kent, similarly played to perfection by Kevin Costner. It's a surprising dynamic that develops, Clark learning through he is through conversations with Jonathan, but also talking with his long-dead father through Krypton technology. It's those little things that bring the movie up a notch or two, Goyer's script providing some emotional, effective moments that ring true, not false as Clark becomes what he must become. In a weird way in terms of that father-son dynamic, 'Man' reminded me some of 2013's The Place Beyond the Pines in how it deals with that tricky relationship. It works though, right from the start, adding a layer to the story. Yeah, we've seen a Dad helping his son out before in movies, but how does a Dad help out his son who also has superpowers that could save or destroy Earth? Surprisingly, it's not that different.
From top to bottom, the cast may not have the instantly recognizable huge names, but I think that works in the movie's favor. Along with Cavill, Crowe and Costner, look for Amy Adams as Lois Lane, intrepid reporter who may be onto Clark's real identity and ability, Diane Lane as Martha, Clark's adopted mother, Harry Lennix and Christopher Meloni as Army officers tasked with finding the truth about Superman, Laurence Fishburne as Lois' editor at the Daily Planet, an underused Richard Schiff as a scientist working with the military, and Ayelet Zurer as Lana, Clark's real mother on Krypton who must decide what sacrifice to make with her son. As the villain, General Zod, Shannon is great casting, his huge presence a big positive in this reboot, Antje Traue as his indestructible right-hand officer.
Reading reviews, listening to friends, what caught me off guard was the hate this movie received. I don't know why. If anything, I was pleasantly surprised. Maybe it's because I didn't go into the movie with any preconceived notions of what the movie should be, not being a diehard Superman fan. I came away very impressed from the get-go. The story is non-linear, bouncing around between flashbacks and the current time as Clark moves ever close to fulfilling his destiny. The storytelling device works, simple as that. Composer Hans Zimmer's score is big and booming and appropriate while the visual look of the movie -- polished, but slightly washed out, even faded -- similarly works very well. Even Superman's outfit is a darker, more pale blue, not that bright blue we've come to associate with the character. The action is solid, especially an epic showdown in Smallville, but I found myself more drawn to the story and the characters. Go figure.
In the months since the release of 'Man,' the franchise/series has been in the news because of where it's going. Instead of just continuing the Superman movies, the next movie will be Batman vs. Superman, scheduled for a 2015 release. I'm curious, even intrigued, but I can't say I'm excited. 'Man' leaves the story on such a good jumping off point that it seems almost a gimmick to revive Batman so quick and bring him into this series. That said, I'll probably go see it. If nothing else and not knowing where the franchise will go, 'Man' is a great jumping off point in itself. Lots of dissenters and haters out there, but make up your own mind. I for one, loved it.
Man of Steel (2013): *** 1/2 /****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

