Josey Wales

I could never see the big fuss about Unforgiven or High Noon. I watched High Noon again recently and my impression, just like Unforgiven, is you have two brilliant performances in the lead roles but in halfway decent yet run of the mill films. Unforgiven was a revelation for many critics because they felt Eastwood was denouncing all the really great violence from his older westerns. The Man With No Name could shoot five guys before breakfast for insulting his mule, but Will Penny showed death wasn't entertaining in real life.

Disagree strongly about High Noon, but right there with you regarding Unforgiven. While I admire Eastwood, Unforgiven and Gran Torino were a white flag to the Hollywood powers that be. We won't even mention Bridges of Madison County, (pardon me while I yak). Here's a poll subject. Who was the better actor, Sondra Locke or Clyde the Orangutan?
 
High Noon was a plumb stupid movie.

Now, I wasn't upset with Will running around trying to get people to help him, like John Wayne supposedly was. What I was upset with was that nobody would.

"Oh no, Marshall. There's only fifty armed men in this town. There's four of them killers, so we'll just have to hide under the bed and let you face them by yourself. That's what you're paid for, ain't it?"

I can see that happening now. I could see that happening back East, to the namby-pambies that depended on the police.

But people that had the guts to pack up and go out west, and face Indians, blizzards, drought and grasshoppers? No. I ain't buying it that they are all a buncha lily-livered cowards.

The only thing about that movie that was any good at all was the end. Grace Kelly, a Quaker girl, who had been raised that violence was bad and guns were evil, picked up a pistol and shot the bad guy in the back to protect her husband.

THAT was good. Because, when it comes right down to it, no matter what else others think you should do, no matter what else you believe you SHOULD do, you protect your family.
 
I could never see the big fuss about Unforgiven or High Noon. I watched High Noon again recently and my impression, just like Unforgiven, is you have two brilliant performances in the lead roles but in halfway decent yet run of the mill films. Unforgiven was a revelation for many critics because they felt Eastwood was denouncing all the really great violence from his older westerns. The Man With No Name could shoot five guys before breakfast for insulting his mule, but Will Penny showed death wasn't entertaining in real life.

On: High Noon, first time I saw it--I hated it. Ive only seen it a hand-full of times and have the DvD, and im liking it but--I think its got too high a rating just like "Shane" has.
 
Disagree strongly about High Noon, but right there with you regarding Unforgiven. While I admire Eastwood, Unforgiven and Gran Torino were a white flag to the Hollywood powers that be. We won't even mention Bridges of Madison County, (pardon me while I yak). Here's a poll subject. Who was the better actor, Sondra Locke or Clyde the Orangutan?

Clyde hands down. :D I never saw "Bridges" so cant say anything against it but, ill most likely will never watch it like ill never watch the True Grit remake.
 
High Noon was a plumb stupid movie.

Now, I wasn't upset with Will running around trying to get people to help him, like John Wayne supposedly was. What I was upset with was that nobody would.

"Oh no, Marshall. There's only fifty armed men in this town. There's four of them killers, so we'll just have to hide under the bed and let you face them by yourself. That's what you're paid for, ain't it?"

I can see that happening now. I could see that happening back East, to the namby-pambies that depended on the police.

But people that had the guts to pack up and go out west, and face Indians, blizzards, drought and grasshoppers? No. I ain't buying it that they are all a buncha lily-livered cowards.

The only thing about that movie that was any good at all was the end. Grace Kelly, a Quaker girl, who had been raised that violence was bad and guns were evil, picked up a pistol and shot the bad guy in the back to protect her husband.

THAT was good. Because, when it comes right down to it, no matter what else others think you should do, no matter what else you believe you SHOULD do, you protect your family.

The reason John Wayne didnt care for High Noon was because of the negative way that Law Enforcement types was being portrayed. Years later he saw it again and had actually liked the movie watching with a different take on the story.
 
Disagree strongly about High Noon, but right there with you regarding Unforgiven. While I admire Eastwood, Unforgiven and Gran Torino were a white flag to the Hollywood powers that be. We won't even mention Bridges of Madison County, (pardon me while I yak). Here's a poll subject. Who was the better actor, Sondra Locke or Clyde the Orangutan?
Clyde was the much better actor. His multi layered performances in those two films rivaled the complexities of Peter O'Toole's wonderful performance in Lawrence Of Arabia. and Clyde was much better looking than Sondra Locke.
'Bridges..." was a touching love story of a married farm wife jumping in the sack with a roving photographer who happened to look a lot like Clint Eastwood, while her husband and kids were off the county fair with their prize hog.
 
I heard that the reason Duke didn't like High Noon was 'cause the sheriff, instead of being "strong and silent" and handling it, was running around hither and yon looking for help. That's why (again, so I heard) that Duke made Rio Bravo. To show the way it oughta be - that not only was the sheriff not LOOKING for help, but whenever it was offered, he turned it down. "I don't want to be responsible for you cowboys and storekeepers getting killed. Leave it to the PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS."
 
High Noon was a plumb stupid movie.

Now, I wasn't upset with Will running around trying to get people to help him, like John Wayne supposedly was. What I was upset with was that nobody would.

"Oh no, Marshall. There's only fifty armed men in this town. There's four of them killers, so we'll just have to hide under the bed and let you face them by yourself. That's what you're paid for, ain't it?"

I can see that happening now. I could see that happening back East, to the namby-pambies that depended on the police.

But people that had the guts to pack up and go out west, and face Indians, blizzards, drought and grasshoppers? No. I ain't buying it that they are all a buncha lily-livered cowards.

The only thing about that movie that was any good at all was the end. Grace Kelly, a Quaker girl, who had been raised that violence was bad and guns were evil, picked up a pistol and shot the bad guy in the back to protect her husband.

THAT was good. Because, when it comes right down to it, no matter what else others think you should do, no matter what else you believe you SHOULD do, you protect your family.
You are dead on. How did this guy get elected Marshall without at least a few guys with guts and guns ready to back him up voted for him. Just get a few guys to hide with shotguns and turn the gang into roast beef by ambush all at once. Will Kane only had two sixguns and no cartridge loops on his gunbelt. and he warned the gang before he fired first. When Matt Dillon would leave town, one bad guy always seemed to be able to take over the whole town.
 
According to Louis L'Amour there probably never was a case where a small band of outlaws treed a town. Consider that there was probably a gun within arm's reach of every able bodied man in town and they were pretty much all civil war veterans.

Also the Code of the West pretty much only said you didn't kill a man who was unarmed or who didn't know you were after him. If a man had a fighting beef with someone he would tell him to "go heel yourself". After that the folks pretty much considered you were warned. If you were told that, you could arm yourself with a 12 gauge and if you were lucky enough to get a shot at the fellow's back that was "fair game".

Stand up gunfights in the street were rare. Sometimes they were employed by professionals to "prove" it was a fair fight.
 
Northfield Minnesota. The James and Younger Gangs came to town and the locals came out and shot 'em to doll rags.

In Sixguns, Elmer tells about this crook from Chicago that came to town and robbed the bank. Storekeeper saw him come out of the bank with the money and a gun in his hand, and let fly with a rifle. Robber ducked and ran and took cover in the hotel. The whole town showed up outside the hotel and shot it, and the robber, plumb fulla holes. Then they throwed the bleeding Chi-badman on an east-bound for Illinois, and went back to what they had been doing when the shooting started.
 
You have to understand that banks deposits weren't insured then as they are now. Stealing from a bank was stealing from the town. Don't overlook the shootout in Coffeyville, KS when the Daltons were shot to doll rags

I just ordered Josey Wales on fleabay for $3.58 brand new, free shipping, and a vendor with 100% feedback.
 
The book Josey Wales is adapted from, as mentioned above, is "Gone to Texas" by Forrest Carter. The front cover flap has a word or two from Eastwood, as to his admiration for the book, so much so he states;"In fact, I liked the entire book so much that I have bought it for my next starring vehicle" -Clint Eastwood.

I casually searched our few used book stores for several years in order to read the book, which, as most of you would agree, typically will flesh out or add to a movie... In this case, whoever did the adaptation did better than the book, and I like books above movies.
 
One of my Grandfathers uncles was on a Coffeyville Kansas rooftop in 1892 with his neighbors when the Daltons tried to rob both banks. He had a 56 Spencer with him on the rooftop, which an uncle still has, along with the letter home telling of the event. He had served in an Illinois Calvary Troop during the Civil War and apparently had no qualms about shooting from cover when attacked. The family story is that he had brought the Spencer home from the war but in all reality he could have bought it from Bannermans for all we know. It’s easy for “This rifle is just LIKE the rifle I carried in the War.” to become “This IS the rifle I carried in the War.” Still in the family is the Spencer and a 44 Remington percussion revolver that belonged to him. Based on the one photograph I’ve seen he also had a Springfield that probably was converted into a shotgun as well. Nothing high tech but sufficient for a homesteading farmers needs.
 
I could never see the big fuss about Unforgiven or High Noon. I watched High Noon again recently and my impression, just like Unforgiven, is you have two brilliant performances in the lead roles but in halfway decent yet run of the mill films. Unforgiven was a revelation for many critics because they felt Eastwood was denouncing all the really great violence from his older westerns. The Man With No Name could shoot five guys before breakfast for insulting his mule, but Will Penny showed death wasn't entertaining in real life.

Will Penny is from a different movie, starring Charleton Heston, in a 1968 movie of the same name (Will Penny). Will Munny was played by Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven.
 
The book Josey Wales is adapted from, as mentioned above, is "Gone to Texas" by Forrest Carter. The front cover flap has a word or two from Eastwood, as to his admiration for the book, so much so he states;"In fact, I liked the entire book so much that I have bought it for my next starring vehicle" -Clint Eastwood.

I casually searched our few used book stores for several years in order to read the book, which, as most of you would agree, typically will flesh out or add to a movie... In this case, whoever did the adaptation did better than the book, and I

like books above movies.

Thanks for trying to keep the thread from drifting! ;)
 
Sondra Locke ruins every scene she is in.
Sondra Locke ruins every MOVIE she is in.

Grace Kelly on the other hand........

grace3.jpg

grace2.jpg

grace.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top