Westbound

Well, I did it. It may have taken me years, but I finally did it! Thanks to a recent airing on Turner Classic Movies (my go-to movie station), I was able to finally watch the only Budd Boetticher-Randolph Scott pairing I had not seen. That entry? From 1959, Westbound, actually the sixth of seven films the director and star worked together on. Where does it end up among the seven? Read on and find out!

It's late in the Civil War as the Union and Confederacy continue the bloody fighting, both sides looking for more gold to bankroll all the fighting. One of the keys? Getting that gold from California across the southwest to safety so it can be deposited in banks and mints. In steps John Hayes (Scott), an extremely capable Union cavalry officer who has a background in running a stagecoach line. He's now being sent to start up a line on the fly, one that will be running coaches full of gold being shipped as fast as humanly possible. The task is incredibly difficult, especially because Southerners in abundance are going to do their damnedest to stop him from succeeding. First up on that list is his former employee, Clay Putnam (Andrew Duggan), a Confederate sympathizer who's hijacked much of the already-established stage line. Into it all, Hayes steps in with little room for error and less time to get things right.

As a western fan, it is hard not to like these films, these seven pairings between Boetticher and Scott. Their reputation has grown over the years -- thankfully! -- to the point that western fans look to these films as some of the best of the genre, a canon to be recognized. Where does 'Westbound' fall? Right in the middle. I liked it a lot, but I can't put it on the same level as 7 Men from Now and Ride Lonesome, my two favorites of the bunch. It's better too than Decision at Sundown and Buchanan Rides Alone, putting it instead among Comanche Station and The Tall T as the 'good, but not great' entries. None of them are bad, just some better than others. 'Westbound' is one that grew on me during its 72-minute running time. Something clicked in about the 25-minute mark or so, and I was hooked.

I've made no bones about my dislike and worry over so many heavy, overdone adult westerns from the 1950's. The drama, the emotion, the betrayals, it was all laid on so thick. One of many beauties of the Boetticher/Scott films is their outlook on the west. There was good, bad and those caught in the middle, those who have to decide to do what's right (and possibly dangerous) or just go along with the easy payday, what's easy. Among westerns -- and films, stories in general -- there's nothing more direct than good vs. evil. Where will everyone fall in the end? Boetticher follows the similar formula, the same archetypes and at just 72-minutes, 'Westbound' is a fast-moving, often dark, adult western that flies by. An excellent, underrated final product.

Leading the way and navigating through the good and bad is star Randolph Scott, an ideal lead for these movies, a necessary front man. Movie-in and movie-out, Scott was what these movies needed. His John Hayes is no different, resolute in getting the job done no matter what odds are stacked against him. He doesn't see black or white or shades of grey. Hayes sees what is right and intends to get the job done. There's never a doubt of his intentions. These aren't anti-heroes, but instead, a last wave of true western heroes. Scott throws himself into those parts with abandon. He's believable. You buy it that he will never take the easy way out. But you ask, even when a lost love (Virginia Mayo) is waiting there to be swept away? NO! Our hero wouldn't dream of it! What about a lovely young bride (Karen Steele) who he's clearly attracted to? Double NO! It just ain't gonna happen, a true western hero, a dying breed by 1959 in the genre.

There's some good parts all around in this Boetticher western. I liked Duggan a lot as Putnam, the Confederate sympathizer determined to stop Hayes but even he has limits. His enforcer, Mace (Michael Pate), has no such limits, providing some tense moments as their plan is put into action. Mayo is Putnam's wife, a woman torn by her past feelings of Scott's Hayes and her genuine feelings for her current husband. Steele is a bright spot also as Jeanie Miller, a young bride to Rod (Michael Dante), a Union soldier who lost an arm in the fighting and was sent home. There's an interesting dynamic among Hayes, Jeanie and Rod as the stage plan comes together that takes some surprising turns as the story develops. Wally Brown provides some comic relief as Stubbs, the stagecoach driver, with John Daheim memorable as the sneering henchman of Mace's...Russ.

Nothing flashy, nothing too out of the ordinary. It wouldn't fit with Boetticher's straightforward, no-nonsense smile. This is a western at its finest with a story that doesn't pull any punches, a hero who it's easy to root for, villains you can't wait to see get their due, and all of it wrapped tightly in a nice 72-minute package. If you're a fan of the other Boetticher/Scott pairings, you'll definitely enjoy this one too.

Westbound (1959): ***/****

Heist (2015)

I've realized something these last few years as I've headed head first into old age. Yep, I'm 30 now. It's all downhill, huh? I went through a long phase where I was always looking for critical darlings, movies -- check that, films -- that were blah blah blah. I want to be entertained. Plain and simple. Therefore....2015's Heist is pretty dumb and even pretty bad, but 30-year old me was entertained and enjoyed it from beginning to end, dumb twists and all.

A dealer at a riverboat casino in the South, Luke Vaughn (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is in trouble. His young daughter is sick and wasting away in a hospital, desperately waiting a surgery he can't afford. He has nowhere to turn other than his brutally efficient boss, Frank Pope (Robert De Niro), the owner of the casino, he has a history with...but is turned down. With nowhere left to turn, Luke agrees to work with a pit boss, Jason Cox (Dave Bautista), to take down the casino and remove some of its dirty money. It's a desperate plan that comes together quickly, but Luke has no other options and Cox wants and needs that cash (because he's greedy...nothing more sinister). The job itself goes awry almost immediately after they get their hands on the money, forcing Luke, Cox and two men Cox is working with to improvise under heavy gunfire. What to do? Where to go?

I love going to the movies. I love watching movies. What I'm still getting used to with that love? There are a lot of movies out there that never got a theatrical release and went straight to DVD/Blu-Ray, like this action thriller from director Scott Mann. Were they meant to be released in theaters only to see a studio back out? I'm still working on it. Seriously, check out Redbox or Netflix and see all these like-minded flicks. Usually some cool casts, interesting premises and...a dud of a movie!

This movie has a lot of potential, much of it coming from a very cool cast. The premise is pretty cool even if it doesn't always take advantage of that premise. There are plotholes so freaking big you could probably drive a semi-truck through them without any collateral damage. It's fairly predictable though it tries to reveal its big twists as HUGE REVEALS. The status quo for these straight-to-DVD flicks seems to be stories that fall apart in the finale, but hopefully by then you're at least partially invested enough that you don't audibly groan. Okay, I did a little bit here but that's my twist with the big reveal. Yes, 'Heist' is cliched, predictable and quite familiar if you've seen any -- ANY -- previous heist thrillers, but I did enjoy it. All those above descriptions aren't necessarily a movie killer as long as things stay entertaining.

Most of my enjoyment came from the casting. I wish Jeffrey Dean Morgan did more action movies that let him play these kinda roguish anti-heroes. I loved him in The Losers, liked him a lot back in '15 in Texas Rising, and he's good here as an unlikely crook who turns to a casino robbery to save his daughter. A little hammy (okay, very hammy, aiming right at the heartstrings), but it works with all the other craziness. As for that De Niro fella, maybe you've heard of him. He's a decent actor. Even when the script is nothing crazy and does him no favors, De Niro looks to be having fun, especially with the villainous Pope, a casino owner who watches over his money like a murdering mama bear. Likable stars can make just about anything worthwhile, and that's the case here. Well, at least the start of something.

There's a fun cast overall here, most of them playing characters that are either cliched stereotypes or cardboard cutouts, but it's fun to see the parts just the same. A former wrestler who's burst onto the movie scene with roles in Guardians of the Galaxy and Spectre, Bautista is quite an intimidating presences as the brutal co-conspirator. Also look for former MMA fighter Gina Carano as a police officer thrust into the situation, Mark-Paul Gosselaar as a fast-talking, no-nonsense detective, Kate Bosworth appearing in one scene as Pope's estranged daughter, and then D.B. Sweeney and Lydia Hull as unwilling participants in the post-heist aftermath. And last but not least, having some fun as a sadistic enforcer of Pope's and his casino heir, Morris Chestnut plays Derrick 'The Dog' Prince.' A fun cast with some cool faces to see pop up.

Not an especially good movie, but definitely an entertaining one. Don't go in with too high of expectations, and I think you'll get a kick out of it too.

Heist (2015): ** 1/2 /****

Hail, Caesar!

Have you heard the name Eddie Mannix? I hadn't. He worked in the film industry for years as a "fixer," making problems go away for Hollywood studios with its stars, productions and films so everything ran as smoothly as possible. A natural idea for a feature flick, right? You bet. Here's the latest from the Coen brothers, 2016's Hail, Caesar!

Working for a major Hollywood film studio in the early 1950's, fixer Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin) is good at what he does. No, he's great. If a problem comes up with a movie in production or the studio's stable of stars, Eddie pulls some strings, pays off this guy, massages this situation...and poof, it's gone! Well, there's a pretty big problem. One of the biggest stars on the lot, Baird Whitlock (George Clooney), has gone missing with no trace. Baird is starring in the studio's blockbuster biblical epic in the lead role and every hour he's missing is costing oodles of money. No one's quite sure what happened until Eddie receives a ransom note demanding $100,000 for a group called 'The Future.' What to do? Eddie gets the money from the studio to pay them off, but that's just the start of his problems as all sorts of drama appears around the studio lots.

The idea for this film dates back to the early 2000's when the brother director duo, Joel and Ethan Coen, originally intended to do a like-minded film set in the 1920's about a play based in biblical times. It sat around for years before the brothers finally tackled it again and here's the finished product. The Coen brothers and their films can be an acquired, oddball taste so here's a quick moral of the story. If you like their previous movies (especially their comedies), you'll like/love 'Hail.' If not, it's probably more of a mixed bag.

What appealed to me most about this film was the absolute love the Coen brothers have for film and movie history. 'Hail' is set in Hollywood's Golden Age of Film when studios ran things with an iron fist, where stars were owned by said studios, and America was still (well, mostly so) innocent and naive. Even when they're having fun in quasi-spoof form, there is evident love of the history of film everywhere. Much of it -- as the Coens are known for -- is snappy, knowing dialogue throughout, brief asides, seemingly throwaway lines, underplayed deliveries that pay huge dividends. It's also the look of the film with cinematographer Roger Deakins (he's kinda good) giving the story a distinct visual look that changes from scene-to-scene in a good way. The same for Carter Burwell's score (another Coen favorite) that is able to delicately bounce among genres from epic to western, heavy drama to musicals.

In basically a complete departure from his previous pairing with the Coens, No Country for Old Men (he also worked with them in True Grit), Josh Brolin gets to play the straight man through all the lunacy and craziness as studio fixer Eddie Mannix. Oh, and he still manages to get some laughs along the way. He's the heart of the movie, the baseline it always comes back to. It's fun watching him navigate one perilous situation after another seamlessly, always knowing what to do, how to fix it and most importantly, how to spin it. The most important part of the character? It is something that reflects the general tone of the movie. Through all the craziness thrown his way, Eddie loves movies and what they represent to audiences. Maybe all the drama and long hours he goes through wouldn't be worth it to many people, but Eddie Mannix loves films and the feelings they can produce in its audiences. A bit of a thankless part but one Brolin manages to make his own.

The movie as a whole is more of an ensemble though. Brolin's Eddie is the point man, navigating us through one studio situation after another. The biggest focus goes to that actor named George Clooney who you may have heard of. His Baird Whitlock is a great character, a bit of a doof, a pretty actor, and a tad on the naive side. I don't want to give away who/what kidnapped him, but it provides some truly funny moments as Baird gets duped into the plan. As for the rest of the ensemble, there's Scarlett Johansson in Esther Williams mode, Ralph Fiennes as an English director of spectacle films, Channing Tatum in Gene Kelly mode, Tilda Swinton in dueling roles as twin sister gossip columnists, Frances McDormand as a mousy film editor, and Jonah Hill as an accountant of sorts who helps the studio get themselves out of a variety of different jams. These are all smaller parts though so don't expect it to be a Channing Tatum movie or Scarlett Johansson movie. These are the definition of supporting parts.

By far though, the best performance here goes to Alden Ehrenreich as Hobie Doyle, a star of B-westerns in the vein of Gene Autry/Hopalong Cassidy/Roy Rogers. A man of few words on-screen, Hobie is forced to take part in a very distinguished, high-class film -- directed by Fiennes -- that...well, makes him talk. What a hilarious character, and it works so well because Hobie seems like such a genuinely nice young actor, especially on his date with a Carmen Miranda-inspired actress (Veronica Osorio). There's not much meanness in Hobie, just a nice guy thrust into some Hollywood dramatics. His enunciation scene with Fiennes is sublimely perfect and perfectly underplayed. No matter who he's on-screen with, Ehrenreich steals those scenes and makes it look easy as he does it.

The ensemble leans toward a story with more moments than a linear plot. 'Hail' has all these great singular moments that work exceptionally well. Mannix sitting down with representatives of different churches to see if their prestige biblical epic is God-approved is priceless. Tatum's "On the Town" dance scene is ripe with innuendos and judged solely as a choreographed dance scene, a treat to watch. Johansson's swim scene looks ripped out of an Esther Williams movie, albeit with a great twist as a capper. The movie is full of these memorable moments from one scene to another that makes it fun to see where things will go next, regardless of a less than pointed, linear story. The Coen brothers script and a remarkably talented cast holds it all together and then some.

Fair warning, it will probably help your enjoyment here if you have some knowledge of Hollywood and film history. 'Hail' isn't necessarily a laugh out loud comedy. It gets its laughs from a sly line here, a clever reference there, a line inflection that brings that line to life. If you're a fan of film and movies in general, the guts and business of making those movies, Hail, Caesar! is for you. It isn't doing so hot in theaters, but I absolutely loved it. Highly recommended!

Hail, Caesar! (2016): *** 1/2 /****

Torque

You probably know the face if not the name. I first was aware of Martin Henderson in 2006's Flyboys with his scene-stealing part as a veteran World War pilot. He's been working regularly since the early 2000's but never became a bigger star despite some strong appearances. He's a welcome face whenever he pops up in a movie for me! The reason for that lack of stardom? Maybe it's the choices of roles, like 2004's Torque, an awful but highly entertaining action flick.

After six months of hiding out in Thailand, a biker named Ford (Henderson) has returned to the United States with a mission; he wants to clear his name of an unsolved crime concerning drug possession. There's a problem though. A lot more unsavory folks than the police and authorities are interesting in tracking him down, including two brutal biker gangs, the Hellions, led by Henry Davis (Matt Schulze), and the Reapers, led by Trey (Ice Cube). While threading the needle among all those in pursuit, Ford tracks down his ex-girlfriend, Shane (Monet Mazur), who he left with so much unresolved when he hightailed it out of the states six months prior. Time is running out though so Ford teams up with two old friends of his -- wouldn't you know...they're both bikers too! -- in hopes of clearing his name and getting out of it alive at the same time. Can he pull it off?

What a profoundly dumb, truly stupid movie. So....yeah, it's entertaining though. Really entertaining. So bad it's so freakishly good entertaining. From director Joseph Kahn, 'Torque' is in the vein of the Fast and Furious series, especially the first two entries in the series before it got legitimately good, not guilty pleasure good. There is the thinnest, almost see-through impression of a cliched story to hold things together. Those things? Cool anti-hero, wisecracking sidekicks, beautiful, sexy and scorned ex-girlfriend, horrifically cliched bad guys (* Check that. Horrifically cliched everything), and then throw in liberal doses of crazy action, stupid stunts and good-looking women. Every once in a while you need an entertaining dud like this.

As for Mr. Henderson, he's solid as the likable anti-hero who you just know can't be a bad guy. Right? Right?!? The cliched script does no favors for anyone, but the rebellious but oh so dreamy anti-hero is pretty straightforward. Look cool, stand up for the little kid, and have long, pretty hair, and you've got it made. As for his crew of sorts, there's Dalton (Jay Hernandez) and Val (Will Yun-Lee), and the ex-girlfriend who doesn't seem too genuinely upset he's back but...Mazur is gorgeous so yeah, who cares? As a slutty biker girl who likes Val, Christina Milian plays a slutty biker girl who likes Val.

There's plenty of familiar faces around, most of them here to look 1. Cool 2. Tough and/or 3. Sexy. Some are more successful than others. Ice Cube hams it up like a crazy person as Trey, hardass leader of the Reapers with Faizon Love as his much-maligned SUV driver. Schulze actually passes Mr. Cube in the ham department as Henry, but he's not nearly as over-the-top as he was in the awful and far-less entertaining The Transporter. Look for Max Beesley as his right-hand man/enforcer and Jaime Pressly as his tatted-up, piercing obsessed sexpot girlfriend. Adam Scott has some fun as an FBI agent on the case with Justina Machado as his partner. Oh, and Dane Cook makes an odd appearance as comic relief that doesn't quite work.

The weird thing? For the most part, I enjoyed this action-heavy, style-trip through the roguish biker world as it embraces all the craziness that's on display. It's only in the last 20 minutes as our action-packed finale comes along that things truly fall apart. All those separate ingredients mix together in a horrific explosion that's too much for a movie that's entirely too much. The editing is so quick with absolutely no transitions that it is impossible to actually see what's going on. Not to understand what's going on. To see it. It's that fast. And there's product placement. Seriously...there's Product Placement as Mazur's Shane and Pressly's China face off with Pepsi and Mountain Drew posters displayed behind them. They pose and let the camera linger on those posters. SEVERAL FREAKING TIMES. Come on, that's a little much even for a dud like this.

Still, it is blindingly, stupidly fun. There are some cool biker stunts in a story that's just 80 minutes long. It's 84 minutes with the credits. One chase between Ford and Trey is the best as a high-speed train cutting across the desert becomes a prop to their motorcycle craziness. That's where this movie works, in the old "Turn Off Your Brain" department. Watch the pretty people do impossible stunts on cool bikes. Oh so awful but a hell of an entertaining trainwreck.

Oh, and it's hilarious that Torque actually makes fun of the Fast and Furious movies. Nothing this bad -- however entertaining -- should have the balls to criticize any other movie.

Torque (2004): */****

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Oh, remakes...we meet again. And a western at that?!? Oh, the horrors! As for my rule though, if you're going to do a remake, you'd better be ready to do something different, something with a twist. Here's a perfect case in point with 2007's 3:10 to Yuma, a remake of a 1957 western of the same name. The original is a good if not great western that with some tweaks could be great. Does the remake capitalize on that potential?

A rancher in New Mexico with a wife and two kids, Dan Evans (Christian Bale) is struggling. A drought has left his land barely getting by, and he's running out of money to pay off some significant debts. What can he do to save his family and their land? A highly lucrative, highly dangerous option has presented itself. An infamous outlaw and killer, Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), has been captured in the town of Bisbee following a successful payroll robbery. The railroad wants Wade brought to justice, hoping to send him to Yuma Prison where he will be tried and prosecuted, hopefully ending up in a noose. For $200, Dan agrees to go along in transporting Wade to the town of Contention where the outlaw can be put on a train to Yuma. With a small, not too capable posse helping, Dan and Wade hit the trail. Not far behind? Wade's murdering, bloodthirsty gang, looking to free their boss and not caring if they've gotta kill a few people in the process.

The 1957 3:10 to Yuma from director Delmer Daves stars Glenn Ford (as Wade) and Van Heflin (as Dan) in a pretty good but not great western. It's solid. It's entertaining. A remake isn't necessarily needed, but if you're gonna do it right...do it like this.

From director James Mangold, 2007 'Yuma' injects some energy into the western genre. Some of the DVD special features address that aspect, the love of the western, the general death of the western in theatres, and without getting preachy...the need for westerns in theaters. The original is a talkative movie, but the 2007 version is talkative, action-packed, highly entertaining, and features some great performances. Filmed on-location in New Mexico with an Oscar-nominated score from Marco Beltrami, 'Yuma' feels and looks authentic. It's dirty, dusty and grimy with gunplay and death hanging in the air. There's nothing glamorous or romantic about the late 19th Century in the American southwest. Throw it all together though, and we've got a western with a ton of energy that is just fun. It's entertaining. 'Yuma' shows you can be a so-called "adult western" while still having fun.

Who better to inject that energy into a decidedly-American genre? Lead actors from New Zealand and England of course! Crowe and Bale are perfectly cast in their respective roles. Crowe's Ben Wade is a killer, a bandit, brutal, ruthless....but damn, he's charming when he wants to be. Lightning-fast with a gun, he's also freakishly quick with a disarming line. Wade can play mind games with few equals, providing some fun as he messes with his captors. Crowe is clearly reveling in the part, clearly having a ton of fun with the amiable but brutally efficient outlaw. As farmer/rancher Dan Evans, Bale gets the more straight role but similarly throws himself into the part. His Civil War past still weighs on him, and he desperately wants to provide for his family, including his wife (Gretchen Mol) and two sons. While few men would take the risks associated with transporting a notorious outlaw, Dan has no other options. Two fascinating characters.

Crowe and Bale are excellent together, featuring some great banter throughout. The most memorable part though, that goes to Ben Foster as Charlie Prince, Wade's right-hand man, a lightning-fast gunslinger who's also just a touch unhinged. Foster is terrifyingly good here from his wardrobe, to his evil smile to ability with a gun. A great supporting part. Also look for Logan Lerman as Dan's oldest son, Dallas Roberts as Butterfield, the railroad representative, Peter Fonda (who's always welcome) as McElroy, a grizzled Pinkerton agent, Alan Tudyk as Doc Potter, Kevin Durand as the maniacal Tucker, Vinessa Shaw as a madam who meets Wade's liking, and in the odd, out-of-left-field department, Luke Wilson in a random part as a gunslinging miner.

A couple things bugged me on the recent viewing. Trying to stay ahead of the vengeful Prince and Wade's gang, Dan, Butterfield and Co. seem to be in absolutely no rush to get to Contention. They set down and camp....a lot. We're talking long, restful sleeps each night it seems like! Before that, they stop and have a nice dinner at the Evans ranch. Eh, time isn't of the essence or anything, right?

Some plot holes and discrepancies aside, this was a great western. There isn't a ton of action, but what's there is excellent. The opening stagecoach robbery -- featuring a gatling gun! -- is a quality scene-setter and some gunplay is sprinkled throughout until the finale, an exciting, bullet-riddled chase through Contention to the train depot. Where the remake differentiates itself from the original is the mix of drama and action. Mangold knows what he's working with in Crowe and Bale and lets the camera and story stick with his star duo. Their chemistry is without doubt throughout, two pros in a heavyweight fight just waiting to deliver the knockout punch.

As for my general complaint about remakes, do something different if you're gonna remake a movie that didn't need it. The 2007 version does plenty different, including quite a different ending. Some critics took issue with the ending and Wade's reasoning for what he does, but if you're paying attention, clues are dropped throughout as to his intentions. An excellent all-around western that's highly recommended!

3:10 to Yuma (2007): *** 1/2 /****

Stagecoach (1986)

Released in 1939, John Ford's Stagecoach is one of the all-time great westerns. It was hugely influential in countless westerns that followed, and of course, is famous for helping make John Wayne a huge star, one of the biggest movie stars of all-time. So what's the biggest form of flattery? A remake! And unnecessary ones! Ford's western has been remade twice, first in 1966, and with today's review, a 1986 TV western, Stagecoach.

In the small town of Tonto, a stagecoach is set to leave and keeps its schedule in making it to its next stop in Lordsburg. It is far from an easy ride though across the desert, especially when reports of Geronimo and his Apache warriors being on the warpath start to hit the town. An already dangerous ride is that much worse. The driver, Buck (John Schneider), intends to do his job though, taking the coach through, Apaches be damned. So with a full coach of passengers, Buck leaves Tonto with a cavalry escort hoping to avoid Geronimo and his warriors. His passengers, all of them, have reasons to undertake such a dangerous trip. Some are trying to get somewhere while others are simply trying to get away, but to a person, they believe they're right. Are they? Can they get to Lordsburg safely without coming under attack?

Okay, No. 1. Something that needs to be said. There's no reason to remake Ford's film. NO reason. It's about as perfect a western as you'll find out there. So to remake it in different formats twice? Unnecessary to say the least. I haven't seen the 1966 version -- I'd like to, the cast is pretty crazy -- but I feel safe saying the original is better. The same here. Why bother remaking a movie that didn't need to be remade? Well, the answer isn't one you might easily come up with.

Any ideas? This TV western actually puts a country music spin on the original formula! Didn't see that one coming now, did you?!? The cast includes Johnny Cash, Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings and Kris Kristofferson in major roles. Now even as a non-country music fan, that's an impressive pairing of talent! The biggest difference between the '86 TV flick and the '39 original is the re-working of certain characters so the Big 4 Country Stars are actually given something to do. Cash is Marshal Curly Wilcox, on the hunt for Kristofferson's Ringo Kid, with Nelson as the Doc Holliday (quite the change!), and Jennings as Hatfield, a talented gambler (some would say cheater) looking for some redemption. Take the original characters/story, add country stars, lather, rinse and repeat and you definitely get some tweaked stories! That's not a bad thing, giving a refreshing new look at a familiar story.

Of the four, I thought Cash and Nelson come out the best. Cash isn't the greatest actor, but he's very natural, and his scenes with John Schneider's Buck are excellent, two experienced trailhands discussing what their best plan is and should be. Nelson too is excellent as maybe the most famous dentist ever, Doc Holliday (not any old Doc like the Ford version), philosophizing and smoking a cigar and generally having a good time. Obviously he's having some fun with the part. Jennings is okay as Hatfield but nothing crazy. I'm a big Kristofferson fan, but it's a bit of bad casting here. Maybe it's because John Wayne's take on Ringo is so iconic, but Kristofferson is too old for the part and his scenes with Dallas (Elizabeth Ashley), an aging, disillusioned prostitute, lack some chemistry. It kinda feels like a western Last Vegas or Grumpy Old Men, four aging stars getting together and having some fun. Nothing wrong with that, right?

Who else to look for on the crowded stagecoach? Also look for the always welcome Tony Franciosa as Gatewood, a corrupt banker getting out of town with his bank's latest deposit (some $30,000), Anthony Newley as Peacock, a traveling whiskey salesman, and Mary Crosby as Lucy Mallory, a very pregnant young woman traveling west to meet up with her husband, a cavalry officer.

So while there are some changes along the way -- some major, some not as significant -- mostly this TV western sticks with the original's story. The soundtrack isn't entirely country (featuring some solid uses of guitar), and the locations are solid but don't register like Monument Valley does -- I know! Go figure in that department. The biggest changes are saved for the end in a finale that feels somewhat disjointed and/or rushed. It's not an especially good flick, but it is entertaining from beginning to end. The novelty of the country casting is just enough to give it a recommendation. It ain't on par with the 1939 original, but few are. Still....it's not bad.

Stagecoach (1986): ** 1/2 /****

Jane Got a Gun

I'm a western nut. I feel right at home with them. And unfortunately for me and other western fans, the genre hasn't had a prominent theatrical presence since...well, since before I was born. As for today's review, I imagine a lot of people haven't even heard of it. Released in theaters this past Friday, it's had a dramatic production and is basically being released in theaters because....I don't know, it takes millions of dollars to make a movie. So what's the verdict on the little-advertised Jane Got a Gun?

It's 1871 in the New Mexico territory, and Jane Ballard (Natalie Portman) lives on a small spread with her husband, Bill (Noah Emmerich), and their young daughter. Bill staggers home one day, falling off his horse with his back riddled with bullets. As Jane digs the bullets out of his back, Bill mumbles that "The Bishop boys are coming." Their past has caught up to them and with her husband recovering and unable to help, Jane is on her own. With time running out and desperately in need of help, Jane seeks help with a man from her past, Dan Frost (Joel Edgerton), an accomplished gunhand, who at first wants nothing to do with her. After a change of heart though, Dan follows her on the trail, agreeing to help. Riding back to the spread, they have to decide what their plan of both attack and defense will be against John Bishop (Ewan McGregor) and his gang. The odds are already stacked against them though, and that's without considering if they can work through through their checkered past.

Haven't heard of it? Few have. This western has received little to no advertising in recent weeks. After a checkered production, it seems the studio backing the film simply wants to get it off the books. If it's a financial bomb? Eh, it's not sitting on the shelf. 'Jane' was actually filmed back in 2013 and has been sitting on that shelf ever since because of its original studio going bankrupt with the Weinstein Company buying it. The production itself seemed like a revolving door of directors and actors as well. Easy-peasy, right? Well, let's make the best of a lousy situation.

Moral of the story? It's a pretty decent little western. I liked it a lot. Director Gavin O'Connor stepped in after some drama with previously-attached directors and does a solid job with an old school western that would have been comfortable if it had been released in the 1960's/1970's. While it isn't cut and dry black and white, it is a pretty straightforward good guys vs. bad guys. More importantly, it's clear that those involved are fans of the genre, know how to do a western right. Filmed on location in New Mexico, 'Jane' looks authentic, the wide expanses of the desert serving as a backdrop. It's a big, lonely place. O'Connor and cinematographer Mandy Walker have fun with some genre conventions, riders sprinting at the camera in a sun-soaked, vision that looks like a mirage, riders silhouetted against a setting sun. Throw in a good if not flashy score from Lisa Gerrard and Marcello De Francisci, and you've got some positives across the board.

What isn't exactly abundant in the western genre? For one, female leads. For two, strong female leads. In steps Natalie Portman, one of the best actresses currently working in Hollywood (wish she'd work more!). Her Jane Ballard is a welcome character, a real character. She's a good shot with a rifle but far from a killer. She makes tough choices for the sake of her family and will do just about anything to protect them. Her backstory is especially interesting which we see in some well-handled flashbacks featuring some genuinely surprising revelations. So while she seeks help from a man, her Jane is far from a damsel in distress. This is a lead female character that is a welcome addition to the genre, not a side character who's brushed aside at the slightest sign of trouble. There's been far too many of those so welcome to the club, Natalie Portman/Jane Ballard!

Having worked together on 2011's Warrior (an excellent movie, one of my favorites), Edgerton teams up with director O'Connor and again, doesn't disappoint. His Dan Frost is the archetypal western hero, capable, stubborn and even when the odds indicate he shouldn't, he does the right thing, in this case agreeing to help Portman's Jane. Edgerton is fast becoming one of my favorite actors, and he shows why here. It's a fascinating character, one dealing with his own past demons and with his own reasons for helping Jane out. He also has one of the best lines in the movie as he dispatches one of Bishop's henchmen. Playing Bishop, the again always reliable Ewan McGregor is a scene-stealer as the steely-eyed John Bishop, a notorious bandit but a well-dressed, well-coiffed gentleman bandit at that. Just wish there was some more of him!

With a small cast, Emmerich isn't given much to do as the wounded, laid-up husband, but some revelations about his past help flesh out the character. Also, look for Rodrigo Santoro as Fitchum, a slimy member of Bishop's gang, and Boyd Holbrook as Vic, John Bishop's younger, sadistic brother. A smaller cast definitely leaves the focus on Portman and Edgerton once things get moving.

This isn't an action-packed western so don't expect shootouts every minute. The action -- like the story -- is about setting the scene, building the tension to nearly unbearable levels. When the firing starts, it's lightning-quick. Most of the action is saved for the finale when Bishop's gang descends on the Ballard house, a violent mix of Home Alone meets Straw Dogs. The story itself has some surprises up its sleeve, much of it revealed in the well-handled flashbacks going back to the later years of the Civil War. If the ending is a tad too tidy, so be it. It's a good ending to an above average western that deserves better. I can't imagine it will stay in theaters too long so get your butts out to theaters quickly or wait for it on DVD/Blu-Ray. It's well worth it!

Jane Got a Gun (2016): ***/****

Anzio

Over the 1950's and 1960's, World War II movies were a dime a dozen hitting theaters. Even with the abundance of movies though, some theaters of war were often ignored, or at least covered less. Case in point? The Italian Campaign as Allied forces took Sicily and then Italy in horrific fighting that claimed thousands and thousands of lives in what some said/say was a waste of manpower. So while 1968's Anzio may not be a good movie, I can't help it. I'm a fan so sue me.

It's early 1944 and the fighting has dragged to a stalemate between Allied and Axis forces along the Monte Cassino line. The Allied forces are planning an invasion in Italy above the fighting as Cassino, intending to land some 70,000 troops north of the fighting at the port of Anzio. Among those landing is a war correspondent, Dick Ennis (Robert Mitchum), who will tag along with an American Ranger battalion (specially-trained infantry) as they hit the beaches. An expected hot landing is anything but...the troops hit the beaches with little to no resistance. There's no German forces for miles. On a patrol into the Italian countryside, Ennis and a corporal from the First Special Service Force, Jack Rabinoff (Peter Falk), discover just how open the countryside is. Back at the Allied beachhead though, no one on the general staff believes them. While the Allies dig in and establish a strong beachhead, the Germans take advantage, assembling a line as deadly as anything the war has seen.

If you're looking for a more detailed description of the Battle of Anzio, check out the Wikipedia page. I'm currently reading Alex Kershaw's The Liberator, an excellent read that explores the fighting in Italy in some detail. What's here in this 1968 war film is a condensed version with some embellishments and names changed. The actual battle of Anzio was a horrific miscalculation on the parts of the Allied commanders who made cautious decisions that ended up costing thousands of lives needlessly in fighting that could have been easily avoided. See? We learned something today!

'Anzio' itself is an interesting mess of a movie. It's from the 1960's, the age of the big, epic war films like The Great Escape, Battle of the Bulge, The Guns of Navarone, a trend that would continue into the 1970's. From director Edward Dmytryk (and Duilio Coletti in whatever the "Italian version" is), 'Anzio' is part of a trend of flicks dubbed Macaroni war movies (instead of spaghetti, get it?!?), films made with mostly Italian backing albeit with smaller budgets. Dino De Laurentiis produced the war film, bringing a respectable budget that's seen in landing shots where landing crafts empty of hundreds of soldiers hitting the beaches. There is a big budget feel (some of the time) as this story develops about one of the most costly battles of WWII. More detail later, but there's also truly odd moments sprinkled throughout, giving Dmytryk's film an off-balanced feel to the proceedings. More later!

Two performances here have always appealed to me, Robert Mitchum as war correspondent Dick Ennis, a character very loosely based on famed writer Ernie Pyle. Interesting tidbit? Mitchum earned an Oscar nomination for his performance in 1945's The Story of G.I. Joe, the story of Ernie Pyle in Italy! Ennis is a frontline guy, always sticking with the troops at the front even when he doesn't have to be. Mitchum treads that fine line between looking worn out and being interested, but that laconic, tired look favors Ennis well. He's sick of war, sick of stupid orders and commands that costs unnecessary lives. A good performance for Mitchum. As for Falk, it is an...interesting performance. His Jack Rabinoff is a SOLDIER. He loves fighting. He's good at it (maybe too good), and his backstory of how he ended up in the First Special Service Force is quite revealing. Again, there's some odd moments, but Falk brings a ton of energy, some humor to the part that's hard not to like.

This quasi-epic war film resorts to more familiar territory in the second half. Following a horrific German ambush, a small group of Rangers, including Ennis and Rabinoff, must get back to their own lines to report what the Allies are about to march into. If it's familiar, so be it. It's more at home. It's more comfortable. Among the survivors, look for Earl Holliman as the capable Sergeant Abe Stimmler, Reni Santoni as Pvt. Movie (always ready with an impression), an underused Mark Damon, Thomas Hunter, Giancarlo Giannini, and Joseph Walsh. In the epic vein, we also get unnecessary cameos from Robert Ryan and Arthur Kennedy with Kennedy at least getting something to do. Ryan is in two scenes, and he only speaks in one! Also look for ever the German, Wolfgang Preiss as Field Marshal Kesselring, the Allies' opposition across the line.

Where 'Anzio' falls in parts is its odd tone and general lack of epic qualities, even though it thinks it is an epic. It is NOT. It's a good, old-fashioned war flick. Simply put, it tries to cover too much ground in 117 minutes. The song that plays over the opening credits, This World is Yours (listen HERE), is awful. Truly out of place. The score itself is hit-and-miss, but when it works, I liked it a lot. As for the tone, this is a story that just refuses to pick one tone and go with it. Is it dark? Is it a light war film? While things are somewhat ironed out (not really), we get a painful scene of Falk's Rabinoff sitting in an ambulance with three prostitutes as he sings "Bye, Bye Blackbird" with them. There's another scene later where he does the same thing. What the hell is going on?!? Don't even get me started about the general combat tactics here either, highly-trained American troops charging into machine gun fire without even raising their weapons or trying to throw a grenade at the nest. Meh, run!!!

Now all that said, I've always liked this movie and held it up on my most recent reviewing. I love the Italian filming locations, especially the shots of Rome. I've always been a big fan of Mitchum and Falk, and even considering some script idiosyncrasies, they're both pretty good here, as is the whole supporting cast. Through all the general craziness and oddness, there's some...oddly charming. The action is harsh, including a late battle between our survivors and four German snipers, and from beginning to end, it is entertaining. It ain't a classic. So be it. It's very entertaining.

Anzio (1968): ***/****
Rewrite of May 2009 review

We Are Marshall

So what's better than a sports movie? A sports movie with underdogs! As a movie lover, there are few things better than rooting for the underdog against some behemoth favorite. And wouldn't you know it? Most of the best underdogs are the real ones. Take the true story of the 1971 season for the Marshall Thundering Herd football team. A remarkable story, one that was turned into one of the most underrated sports movies around, 2006's We Are Marshall.

It's November 14, 1970 and the Marshall football team has just lost a late-season game to East Carolina. Flying back to campus in Huntington, the plane crashes just a mile short of the runway, killing all 75 people on-board including the coaching staff and most of the team. It is a tragedy that rocks the campus and college town, leaving the administration to decide if the next football season should be suspended. Following raucous, loyal support from the fans, Marshall decides to go forward with the upcoming season, hiring a little-known but energetic coach, Jack Lengyel (Matthew McConaughey), to build the program up from nothing. With just a trio of players remaining from the team, Lengyel has his work cut out for him as one barrier and roadblock after another awaits. As Jack says though, sometimes it's more than just about winning. It's about giving it your all.

What a crazy, incredible true story. Director McG turns in a gem, an excellent sports story that hits all the right notes. It's difficult watching this in 2016 without thinking "How would a tragic incident like this play out in '16?" Like so many other sports movies tend to do, 'Marshall' actually does a good job of sticking to the truth, to the real-life people and events that developed following the plane crash. Maybe some smaller, quieter moments are tweaked and twisted, but the history and guts of the story are spot-on. That really appeals to me because McG and Co. aren't pandering to the audience for emotional responses. It's a heartfelt story about how the people, the students, the families, the football players coped with such a horrific. life-taking incident.

This is an interesting leading part for star Matthew McConaughey, featuring some of the best of his work. He plays Jack Lengyel, a coach who takes on the gargantuan task of starting a program from the ground-up with just three returning players, no coaching staff and lingering doubts about if they should do this. McConaughey brings a ton of energy to the part, and that's what Marshall needs. Quirky, funny, and very real, it is an excellent performance. He's taking on this difficult job for all the right reasons, which we see in a couple of the movie's most effective scenes. In the football scenes, he throws himself into the action with reckless abandon and it shows, adding something necessary to the proceedings. This isn't a part that will go down as one of McConaughey's best, but I certainly think it should. He's rarely been better.

Watching the new coach arrive, we see how he interacts with so many different people in so many different ways. In a movie featuring several very strong performances, Matthew Fox is a scene-stealer as Red Dawson, a coach who was supposed to be on the doomed plane but changed plans last second. Now, he's dealing with horrific amounts of survivor's guilt. His scenes with McConaughey are heart-breaking, funny, and like two brothers getting to know each other. Next up, Anthony Mackie (a favorite here) as Nate Ruffin, a star player who wasn't on the plane and now feels he must start up the team again as if it is his calling. He pushes and pushes himself through injury and the pain of losing his teammates. And last but not least, David Strathairn as Marshall President Donald Dedmon, tasked with making the decision to not suspend the football team and then back Jack in his crazy plan to get the team going again. Three excellent supporting parts.

Because this isn't a movie just about football, also look for Ian McShane as the father of one of the players who died in the accident. His son was engaged to a cheerleader, Annie (Kate Mara), who similarly struggles with what to do in the wake of the crash. January Jones and Kimberly Williams-Paisley have thankless roles as the coaches' wives.

Running 131-minutes, 'Marshall' covers a ton of ground with a lot of characters, but things never feel too rushed. We go from the crash to the aftermath to the coaching hire to building the team, practice through the first two games. The football -- from the practices to the games -- has a great energy, especially the movie's last game as Marshall looks to do the impossible. The soundtrack? A drum-heavy college marching band playing as the different plays develop, drumming in step with the on-screen action. It's a cool, stylish moment that anyone who's ever been to a college sport event with a marching band will definitely appreciate. The soundtrack itself is heavy with some classic 1970's rock, adding another welcome, nostalgic layer to the story.

A gem, one that as I read some critics' reviews, I see I may be on an island with my love of 'Marshall'! I'm a sucker for sports movies across the board, but this one is really, really good. Highly recommended.

We Are Marshall (2006): *** 1/2 /****