Tuesday, February 23, 2016

ALPHABET WESTERNS SCRAMBLED IN RECENT YEARS by DARRYLE PURCELL



As a long-time fan of A- and B-westerns of the 1930s into the 1960s, I believe a current motion picture big boy may hold full responsibility for the film genre’s continued demise, or at least life-support existence.

In explaining my views, I’ll throw in a little history while champing at a bit of opinion that could cause one to see me as a man of my age cursing at children to get off my lawn. And perhaps I have listened to The Statler Brothers’ brilliant Whatever Happened to Randolph Scott far too many times.

Under the studio system of the first half of the 20th Century, B-westerns were cranked out to fill theater seats at Saturday matinees. Adults supported their children’s interest in the film adventures because of the Code of the West all-American values they embraced. Even at 10-cents per ticket, low-budget westerns were profitable, enough so that the larger studios could afford to invest in A-films – many of which were not profitable.

The great talking A-westerns, beginning with starring roles for Gary Cooper, Richard Dix, Preston Foster and Warner Baxter, kept the white-hatted value system espoused in the Bs while expanding storytelling and humanizing the subjects for an adult audience. John Ford and John Wayne, among others, polished the genre to an art form that, with The Searchers, focused a Rembrandt-level spotlight on what a western could be.

At that time, television took over the role of the Saturday matinee while B-westerns filled the small screen. Cooper, Wayne and Scott, who were joined by veterans (in more ways than one) James Stewart and Audie Murphy, kept western fans coming to the movie palaces. Then the 1960s happened.

Cooper died. Scott retired. Producers found it was less expensive to film a car chase on Los Angeles streets than it was to truck horses and actors farther and farther out of town. Youths were sent to Vietnam, with their hands tied, to fight communists – eventually leading to politicians negotiating a loss for America. Cynicism began to replace the Code of the West.

As the American film industry struggled, the B-western immigrated back from Spain and Italy. The producers and directors of those low-budget films decided to put a European slant of the genre. There were no good guys, only bad guys with supernaturally fast draws killing even worse guys. The so-called Spaghetti westerns were basically caricatures of America’s films. Yet, they were profitable, for a while.

Then former TV cowboy Clint Eastwood returned to the states and began to recreate the American western, using the quick action and ultimate revenge of the European films while bringing back a bad-assed version of the good guy taking out the bad guys for the right reasons. His films got better and better – climaxing with The Unforgiven.

Then nothing rode the silver screen west – until just recently. Bone Tomahawk, The Revenant and The Hateful Eight have been touted as the long-awaited revival of western films.

I don’t believe strangely non-empathetic characters spouting 21st Century views while engaging in scenes of agonizing torture and murder are going to inspire other filmmakers to make westerns or audiences to return to the theaters. Quentin Tarantino (The Hateful Eight) ignored the art that John Ford honed while embracing the worst of the European caricatures. In my opinion, his movies, especially his westerns, are, at their best, bad imitations of not very good films.

Following the release of his picture, the not-so-humble Tarantino spouted his anger at many theatergoers’ decision to see an upbeat space opera instead of his black-hatted bloodbath. That director has always been open about his personal views, so I doubt he cares if someone like me believes his cowboy-film efforts could be the final knife thrust in the murder of the western movie genre. And I have to call the murderer, the murderer.



24 comments:

  1. Darryle, what an interesting post! Of course, I was raised in the 60's during the heyday of the "spaghetti westerns" and loved them all. There were westerns on tv during weeknight television programming, and of course, the John Wayne movies of the day. What a great time to be a kid! LOL

    I really despise Quentin Tarantino movies. Lots of gratuitous "blood and guts"--and though some may say, "That's realistic!" there have been many, many movies made before and since his efforts that are realistic without all that.I doubt he will care about my thoughts, either, but it's good to know I'm not the only one who believes this way. As much as I'd love to see a good western, it doesn't matter what kind of a director he is if the subject matter is such a complete turnoff--to many movie-goers! Yeah, I know there are those who applaud him--he wouldn't be where he is today if he didn't have fans. I'm just not one of them.

    Thanks for a wonderful post. I hope we'll see more from you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Cheryl. I love the traditional western films with good guys and bad guys. Today's real good guys that keep us safe are law enforcement officers. I don't think Tarantino gets the concept.

      Delete
  2. You're dead on, the demise of the real Western movie is sad indeed.
    I recall a long ago interview with John Wayne in which he was asked about his B Westerns. He remarked with something like, "I don't think they were that high in the alphabet."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think there is a John Wayne, Randolph Scott or Gary Cooper western from any era that I haven't enjoyed. Lessons are always learned and good always triumphs.

      Delete
  3. Interesting stuff, Darryle, especially about the history of the B-Western genre, which has long been one of my favorites. I'm not much of a fan of Tarantino's movies, either, but I found DJANGO UNCHAINED especially frustrating because there were enough flashes of excellence in it that I found myself thinking, "This guy could make a really good Western . . . if he wanted to." Which is of course the key, he's not interested in making a good Western, he's interested in making what he considers a good Quentin Tarantino movie. I haven't seen THE HATEFUL EIGHT yet and it may be a while before I get around to it, if ever.

    I do hold out some hope for BONE TOMAHAWK, though I haven't seen it yet, either. I know it's supposed to be pretty violent. But the guy who wrote and directed it is a friend of mine and I know he's a huge fan of old-fashioned Westerns, both books and movies. Maybe there's a sense that movies have to be a certain way in order to get made these days, a feeling that you have to put in the extreme violence in order to be able to do the more traditional stuff. I don't know. But I have a hunch there are still some Westerns to be made, the sort of movie that we like, and that they will be made. I hope so, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I started Bone Tomahawk with a lot of hope. But there is one scene that I think went too far to allow families to enjoy the film. You'll know the scene when you see it. Then again, maybe I'm just too old fashioned.
      I hold out hope for new films. I just ordered Diablo and I also heard there is another mainstream western DVD coming out soon. Just maybe...

      Delete
  4. There was nothing like the excitement of watching a good western movie. It is sad that appears to be from days of yesteryear. Can you imagine what they could actually do with a western movie today if it was done right? I haven't given up hope, yet.

    I'm also not a fan of Tarantino.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right, Livia. Lucas and Spielberg took the 30s serials forward to create Indiana Jones and Star Wars. Someone who cares could do the same thing with a western, even if the company didn't have a Lucas budget.

      Delete
  5. Darryle, you make a convicing arguement. I won't say I totally agree with everything you said, but you have given folks some great meat to chew on. For that I thank you. As for me, I've always loved the B's and A's of that by-gone era. Doris McCraw/Angela Rains

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Doris/Angela.
      During my newspaper years, I wrote a lot of political and social issue columns. My opinion was always free and worth every penny. This was one of those two-beers-short-of-a-rant columns that is open to me changing my mind at any time - especially if a really good western hits the theaters.

      Delete
  6. Anybody seen JANE GOT A GUN? I've read mixed reviews on it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks to youtube we've seen most all the true "westerns"... some older than I am lol.. but you gotta love a good one with a real story to tell, not just blood and gore. Sure would love to see a new one done right...as you say it's been too long.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lisa-
      There may be a lot of strange clips on Youtube, but all the wonderful westerns make up for it.

      Delete
  8. I enjoyed your throwback to classic western movies and agree that 1800s culture was a lot kinder and gentler than modern scriptwriters would have us believe. I really like your caricature!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Vonn, Thanks. The caricature looks more like me than I do.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The last recent western I totally enjoyed was the Coen Brothers' remake of True Grit. They got it right - but everything else has disappointed me. Sad. We need a John Ford to come along. Forget QT.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm going to give Diablo and Forsaken a chance. The first is Scott Eastwood and the second is Donald and Kiefer Sutherland.

      Delete
  11. Darryle, a fascinating post with laser-like focus into the differences between this year and yesteryear when it comes to making westerns. I believe there is still an appetite for good western storytelling that doesn't require a blood-splattered landscape, but whether filmmakers ever dole out the cash to make it happen is questionable. To paraphrase Meg: there ain't any John Fords on the horizon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Tom. I'm hoping Clint Eastwood will, once again, show Hollywood how to direct a great western.

      Delete
  12. DARRYLE PURCELL,

    All around the world people are holding on to WESTERN books and movies. Many of these collections are handed down. These items are still being read and watched.

    The WESTERN in whatever form will NEVER die because it is part of our history.

    The fact that so few movies are being made is something to lament. We all have to agree that unnecessarily violent and poorly made films don't help.

    Still...we are writing and trying to leave a quality legacy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great westerns are alive and well on the written page. As for the movies, I just finished watching Diablo. Well, maybe I'll enjoy the next one.

      Delete
  13. I can't disagree in principle with anything written here, but must say that I'll always view the strictly anti-hero Peckinpah classic, The Wild Bunch, as one of my favorite films--and my favorite Western--of all time. I'm just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Peckinpah did favor more realistic exit wounds. And his characters were on the seedy side, heavily cynical. From Randolph Scott in the High Country to any William Holden character, they learned and, quite often, suffered for earlier mistakes. It sure sounds like I'm trying to justify why I like his films as well.

      Delete
  14. Discussions like this should have a fairer view of the different eras of westerns in order to be useful, otherwise it's just a bunch of old folks pining for the wholesome Wayne era and being dismissive toward everything else. Maybe the western frontier wasn't the dystopia that revisionist westerns make it out to be, but it wasn't the wholesome romp of the Wayne era, either.

    There are some points about Tarantino's self-indulgence and the merits of classic westerns, but almost everyone here seems to worship the classic western and refuse to acknowledge its shortcomings, which the Europeans -- who can probably look at our history more objectively than we -- improved upon. Classic westerns almost always clung to a black-and-white McCarthy era worldview, rarely gave women important roles, and almost never treated Mexicans and American Indians with any sort of respect, mostly using them as cardboard bad guys or comic relief. Yeah, spaghetti westerns were caricatures of the genre, but they also focused on the grittier gray areas that overly-conservative classic westerns rarely had the courage to even address (Budd Boetticher did, too, and I wonder how much his work influenced Leone and later revisionist westerns). The idea of everyone being morally gray should be a refreshing change -- and certainly more human, especially in such a harsh environment -- compared to the white-hat goodie-goodies who are always right and just, and the black hat Snidely Whiplashes with no human qualities whatsoever. Don't forget, too, that Clint came into westerns with those Europeans, and his westerns never strayed far from the essence of spaghetti westerns: they just gradually got less pulpy.

    And yeah, there are exceptions to all of the above.

    As far as Tarantino goes, he IS self-indulgent, and he DOES go overboard with violence, but those two things shouldn't automatically discount all of his good points. I heard Hateful Eight was crap, but Django Unchained had a really great western plot, and tried to focus on the black experience of living in that period, which has rarely been the central focus of a western of any era -- it's usually the backstory of a supporting character, not the meat of the movie. And as violent as Django is, he'd toned it down, believe it or not: worse things happened to slaves that he even HE couldn't bring himself to put to film.

    As for whether Quint is killing the western, I don't think it's really the case. We haven't gotten another Quigley Down Under or Tombstone to revive cinematic interest. TV still seems fond of a good western (Firefly and Justified, for example) when given the chance.

    ReplyDelete