Counting Down the Zeroes 2003: Open Range
You know the drill. Ibetolis of Film for the Soul is onto 2003, and I submitted this piece for his continuous look at the films of the noughties.
Kevin Costner's western is the best modern entry into the genre since Unforgiven; I actually think it’s better than Unforgiven. It’s a call back to the kind of western that Raoul Walsh would have made; a film that is conventional in plot, but unconventional in its execution of the plots action. The acting is superb, especially by the veteran Robert Duvall who owns this movie from beginning to end. What's even more interesting about Open Range is the detail that Costner puts into the film. Every nuance seems true, every seemingly simple artistic touch hits the right note, and there’s something warm and comforting about the pacing of the film and the antiquity in its aesthetic.
Costner is most interested in the theme of displacement and men in power positions telling those “beneath” them what to do with their live. There’s a great speech by Boss (Duvall) at the beginning of the film that sets the plot in motion. He and Charley (Costner) are free grazers who are looking at some men who roughed up their buddies and scared their herd away. They’re looking out at the great expanse when Boos says: “It’s a beautiful country. A man can get lost out here. Man can forget that people and things aren’t as simple as all of this.” It’s a great moment that foreshadows their decision to get into a war with the evil Baxter (Michael Gambon in a great villainous performance), the owner of a nearby that doesn’t take kindly to free grazers.
In another great speech by Boss he informs the townsfolk that he and Charley have no intention of hurting them, and as Boss stares right at the towns corrupt Marshal, he gives another great speech: “Losing cattle is one thing, but a man telling another man where to go in this country…well that just aint right.” And so begins Boss and Charley’s time in the town. They meet some friendly people: a feed store owner (played by the late great Michael Jeter, in a great supporting role), a nice woman that Charley has a fondness for named Sue (Annette Bening in a throw away role, but she’s good when she’s on screen), Sue’s brother Doc Barlow (Dean McDermott), and the corrupt Marshal played by James Russo. But all of these characters take a back seat to the relationship between Boss and Charley.
What makes this film better than your average Western is the amount of time and attention that is paid to the relationship between Boss and Charley. Boss is obviously a father figure to Charley, and it’s interesting to watch the way he handles him, almost reining him in at times, during certain situations. Charley is an ex-hired gun, a man who saw a lot of bad things and did even worse things during the Civil War. There’s a great moment when Charley tell Boss not to stand behind him, which leads to a nice quiet moment at night as the two look up at the stars and Boss just listens as Charley calmly tells him about his history as a professional killer.
The final shootout is an amazingly constructed and masterful piece of mise-en-scene. However, before the shootout there’s a great moment with Boss and Charley as they load their guns and prepare for the battle that’s about to occur. Now watch as Boss cedes authority to Charley as he begins to lay out for them what will most likely occur. Charley can pretty much see how things are going to go, where people will be, and how people will react; and Boss is almost scared of this version of Charley. The shootout that follows begins abruptly with a loud bang, getting the message across that these shootouts from the old west weren’t always drawn out exercises. What follows is moment after moment of meticulous execution of the town’s logistics as the camera sweeps in and out of corridors and buildings. The camera looks through all kinds of perspectives: high angle, low angle, dutch angles, through windows, down low shots obstructed by onlookers (as if we ourselves have been dropped into the action). It’s an amazing piece of filmmaking, and Costner’s control and restraint of the moment, his ability to change perspectives and show a lot of the action through long shots, proves what a great director he can be (forget for a moment The Postman and Waterworld).
The big shootout aside this is just a fabulous western that raises some interesting themes of displacement, and how “lesser” civilians are being discriminated against by those “higher authorities”. It’s also an interesting look at the ugliness of gun violence. Like Clint Eastwood’s masterful Unforgiven, Costner’s film also is interested in how loud, brusque, and altogether unpleasant gun violence is – especially in the old west. Costner shows the town as people who are not just bystanders watching the violence unfold, but as people who retreat to the hills to get away from what they know will tear their town up. There's a great scene where Charley and Boss are riding into town as most of the town is retreating up the hill to the church and Charley calmly states "they know a fights commin'".
I have read interviews where he talks about how Costner was not just interested in the loudness and abruptness of the violence caused by guns, but also how the towns where these shootouts occurred had to deal with this fact and try to live a normal life. He mentions in the same interview that he saw pictures where there were bodies everywhere; obviously someone had to remove those bodies, and he was interested in not making a John Wayne type western where the bodies just seemed to disappear, and then the town rejoices with piano and whiskey. Costner was more interested in showing how a town has to deal with the aftermath of a shootout, and what kind of closure does it really bring anyway?
Open Range is a great reminder just how powerful and affective the western can be while simultaneously being a great entertainment. There is great scene after great scene of classic western tropes, but above everything is Robert Duvall's performance as Boss. The way he tries to rehabilitate Charley into a functioning member of society is one of the most interesting things about the movie, and the conversations they have with each other and with Sue are sometimes more interesting than the action scenes. Watch Duvall deliver that speech in the tavern the first night they go into the town, or the concern he has for a dog floating down the street due to a flash flood, or the disdain in his voice when he tells Sue that Baxter’s men killed his dog. He is just so fun to watch in this role, and it's a shame he was never properly recognized for it. Yes, it's true the ending may go on a tad too long, but I didn't mind the stay too much because to say it plainly (which seems apt for this film): Open Range is a great, great movie...easily one of the best of 2003.
Extra Stills (I went a little crazy capturing images):
I really like this film and I always felt that it was under-appreciated. What I like about it is that Costner keeps it simple. He doesn't try to re-invent the wheel, just tell a solid, compelling story. I also liked the chemistry between Costner and Annette Bening. It was overplayed, just right.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think that it isn't as good as UNFORGIVEN, which is a much more complex film in terms of themes and blurring the lines between good and evil wherea. OPEN RANGE is much more straightforward. Nothing wrong with that but just not as good, IMO>
The final shootout is the masterpiece moment of this film, no question. I can't put Open Range in Unforgiven's class because the latter has stronger performances that wind up evoking greater depth on the story. I'm not a Costner hater by any means, but he has his limits, and Duvall, like Pacino and De Niro, too often loses himself in big acting these days. But these are quibbles. My only strong disagreement is in relation to Gambon's villain, who I found silly. Still, a good film. Nice appreciation. And great screen grabs!
ReplyDeleteJ.D.:
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment. You're right about Costner keeping it simple...which is why I like the film so much. You're right, Unforgiven is a heavier film with more depth to it, but it's also the darker side of the western, which is great, but not I want to watch all the time. I think it's a masterpiece, don't get me wrong, but if I have a choice between the two, based on my mood most of the time I am going to go with Costner's film. There's just something so comfortable in its familiarity and execution of classic genre tropes.
Jason:
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by. I like what you say about Duvall losing himself in big scenes. He does tend to do that in a lot of his movies, but as Boss I thought he hit all the right notes. As I mentioned to J.D., there is no doubt that Unforgiven is a masterpiece, but I just like the simplicity of Costner's film more.
And I think if we were to do a straight comparison of the two then Unforgiven comes out on top in terms of theme and acting, but for the type of western that I like I usually opt for the less dark. Plus, Unforgiven had the iconic image of Eastwood going for one last ride into town, and you can't really compare that film to any other western because it carries the weight of all other Eastwood westerns (just like with Gran Torino this year...I film I didn't much care for, but you can't watch that movie without thinking about the Dirty Harry character).
I'm glad you liked the screen grabs. That part is always the most tedious, but rewarding because it gets you thinking about each shot.
Back in 2003 I picked Open Range as the best film of the year. I don't need to point out its excellence - you do that masterfully here. In addition, you display so much of that excellence in your stills. The camera is all over the place - taking advantage of multiple angles and compositions! I always loved the image of Charley reaching down from his horse to shake Boss's hand.
ReplyDeleteI also love how the rain storm builds tension and provides a number of interesting situations - the rescue of the dog and the accidental destruction of the new building. Yes, the shootout is masterful - especially the opening shots which come suddenly and haphazardly. It's one of the best Western shootouts in film history. Coster has it in him! Wish he'd make another Western!
Hokahey:
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by and thanks for the kind words! You're right-on about Costner using all of the angles to his advantage in dropping the viewer into the action. It's a beautiful, simplistic film, and certainly one of the best of 2003. I love your enthusiasm for this film, which I think unfairly regarded as being mediocre simply on the merits that people can't get over the "Costner hump". They see his name and they run without giving the man a chance. He has an eye for authenticity, here, and he wisely plays it patient with a lot of the big moments -- especially in regards towards the build to the big shootout -- which you so aptly point out is foreshadowed by the rainstorm and the great scenes that stem from that moment.
Thanks again for stopping by.
I have always found this film to be inflated, tedious, overblown and rather pretentious. But you know what? Nobody cares. You have written a review so enthusiastic that I feel like taking a gun from one of the characters and blowing my brains out for being such a lousy sport.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, Duvall is (agreed) excellent--the best thing about the film--and this kind of film does allow for exquisite on location work, and ravishing vistas. I really do not see it approachinh th elikes of UNFORGIVEN, nor it is withing range of th ebest western of the last 20 years, THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES, but heck many people who I respect (foremost yourself) do like it.
You make some excellent points throughout, and yes indeed the screen cap layout here is awesome! I like this:
"The big shootout aside this is just a fabulous western that raises some interesting themes of displacement, and how “lesser” civilians are being discriminated against by those “higher authorities”. It’s also an interesting look at the ugliness of gun violence."
and especially this, one of your great passages in any review:
"The final shootout is an amazingly constructed and masterful piece of mise-en-scene. However, before the shootout there’s a great moment with Boss and Charley as they load their guns and prepare for the battle that’s about to occur. Now watch as Boss cedes authority to Charley as he begins to lay out for them what will most likely occur. Charley can pretty much see how things are going to go, where people will be, and how people will react; and Boss is almost scared of this version of Charley. The shootout that follows begins abruptly with a loud bang, getting the message across that these shootouts from the old west weren’t always drawn out exercises. What follows is moment after moment of meticulous execution of the town’s logistics as the camera sweeps in and out of corridors and buildings. The camera looks through all kinds of perspectives: high angle, low angle, dutch angles, through windows, down low shots obstructed by onlookers (as if we ourselves have been dropped into the action). It’s an amazing piece of filmmaking...."
.....and an amazing review.
Sam:
ReplyDeleteYou are not alone in people I know and respect who think this film is hogwash. Sometimes a film just hits you in a way that you can't explain...and this is one of those movies. I remember going to see it one night by myself and just totally forgetting that I was alone in a movie theater. I had a similar experience with The Weather Man starring Nicolas Cage. A film I thought was the best of 2005, but a film many of friends found to be too pretentious and cutesy in its attempts to be arty (like this years Away We Go, which I have yet to see, but I have heard similar reactions).
Anyway...I am thrilled that you took the time to read through a review for a movie you loathed. That means a lot to me. Thanks. And as always...your praise is beyond flattering.
Oh, and I agree with you about the Assassination of Jesse James. Great film.
I see what you're getting at with this review. Open Range may not be better than Unforgiven, but there is a simplicity to it that is attractive and evokes classical filmmaking of the type found in pre-Leone Westerns.
ReplyDeleteIt was also a good move on Costner's part, going for a smaller scale project after the overblown misfire of The Postman (a movie which I still enjoy despite it's bad reputation). I was hoping Costner the director would follow it up with another film soon after, something equally good to rehabilitate his career. But sadly, he seems MIA in this regard.
Tony:
ReplyDeleteYes, it's the simplicity of it all that makes me adore this film. I love the modern western, but there's something about the less cynical, pre-Leone westerns that make me happier.
You're right-on about Costner's move to do something smaller. As for Costner not directing a follow up...I read an interview with him where he said he was content with his career and felt like he only needed to do something if he felt inspired to do it. He acted in a few films after this (I actually thought he was pretty funny in Mr. Brooks a horribly uneven film, but he was decent in it...Swing Vote was harmless fun, too), but mostly he's been touring with his band.
So...it may be awhile until Costner does anything behind the camera again because he sounds pretty happy just acting here and there and playing his music. Oh well. If Open Range was the last movie he's going to direct at least it was a great one.
Thanks for stopping by.