Best Westerns

I've heard the grumblings about the film's PC-influenced negative portrayal of whites in general and also its supposed romanticized portrayal of Natives as super-virtuous, yet most of these criticisms are hogwash. No kidding. The film rings of authenticity and the characters are anything but one-dimensional. Want proof?

• The Pawnee are the first Indians the viewer encounters in the film and they are portrayed as completely hostile to whites and other NA tribes, so hostile that they'll kill a white person on sight without mercy. I'd say this is a negative, stereotypical portrayal of Indians, wouldn't you agree?

• Also, Wind In His Hair (Rodney A. Grant) clearly states that the Sioux should kill Dunbar at the council meeting; I'm sure there were others who agreed with him but it was ultimately decided that killing Dunbar would likely cause more problems than solve.

• Not all white people are shown in a negative light; in fact, Dunbar himself -- the film's protagonist -- is white. What about the "foul" guy, Timmons, who escorts Dunbar to the abandoned fort? I've met people just like him. He's not portrayed as evil, but merely uncouth in dress and manners. When Timmons is savagely murdered by a band of Pawnee he begs over and over that the Indians not hurt his mules; his dying words are words of love (for his animals!). Also, when he says goodbye to Dunbar at the fort he says, "Good luck, Lieutenant" and you know he means it; the words show love and respect. Obviously this was a physically disgusting guy with a heart of gold. Again I know people just like him; it rings of authenticity.

• The story takes place during the Indian Wars where there's very little love & compassion of whites towards Natives and vice versa. The U.S. Army is there to do a job and, as usual, go by the book. Is this a negative portrayal or simply the way it was? The answer is obvious. Hence, most of the officers are not shown in a negative light but merely as military leaders carrying out their duty. While some of the main enlisted soldiers come off as clueless sheetheads, the characters ring of true life. I met people just like 'em in the military.

• Besides, I repeat, not all Natives are depicted as virtuous. The Pawnee are obviously ruthless villains and quite a few Indians are shown helping the U.S. Army and are, therefore, traitors to their people.

• Is the small tribe of Lakota Sioux really super-virtuous? Is their lifestyle really a paradise? No, they're merely portrayed as real people living, pursuing happiness, uncertain about the amassing whites, fighting and persevering through hardships (like the winter camp).

• Is the massive annihilation of Bison (leaving their skinless carcasses to rot in the sun) a negative depiction of whites or just the way it was? Such people would likely shoot a wolf for the "fun" of it. Again, it smacks of reality.

As to the accuracy of the story itself, the fact is that many whites have "gone injun" and many Natives have assimilated with whites. The story explores the possibility of what would happen IF a white man dropped his prejudices and tried to get along with some Sioux neighbors; and what if this small band of Natives was open and curious enough to accept him? Is it unlikely that this band would have an available white woman amongst them that Dunbar could fall in love with? Is there a bit of romanticization? Yes, but it IS a Hollywood movie, after all. Regardless, it's presented in a believable, compelling and captivating way.

Brando Stars and directs -- the only film he ever directed. Marlon's at his captivating best as Kid Rio, an outlaw in need of redemption and intent on evening the score with his ex-pardner who abandoned him to rot in a Mexican prison for five years.

The film addresses the clash of the misfit with conventional society. Since society is composed of a bunch of conformist misfits, the misfit must learn to conform if s/he wants to fit-in and succeed. In other words, if you want to 'make it' in society it's necessary to hide your problematic past & flaws and put on a front of respectability. Dad Longworth has figured this out and he's not about to allow Rio to ruin it for him.

The problem is that one's past always has a way of haunting us, which is another theme of the film; hence, Rio walks back into Dad's life 5 years later and his American dream is seriously threatened. Notice Dad's rage when he whips/beats Rio to an inch of his life; he's doing everything in his power to kill the ugly phantoms of his past, which is why he tries to get Rio hung on false charges later in the story.

Another theme is how love is tied to redemption. Both Dad and Rio are criminals, but both desire redemption and a better life. The love of Dad's wife and the Monterey general populace brings this out in Dad, whereas Louisa's love for Rio slowly changes him. In addition, Dad's love for Katie, his Mexican wife, is what delivered Katie and Louisa "from the beanfields," as Dad puts it.

Love goes hand-in-hand with loyalty or faithfulness. We see this in Rio's likable Mexican sidekick, Chico (Larry Duran).

Marlon Brando stars as Lee Clayton, an Irish sharp-shooting assassin, who's an intriguing nutjob: He's utterly fearless, eccentric and intimidating.

Why does Clayton (Brando) insist on finishing his job of assassinating each member of a gang of rustlers (led by Jack Nicholson) even after he's informed he's not going to get paid? Clayton says that he doesn't care about money. What then are his motivations? The simple thrill of killing? Or does he believe he's a some sort of righteous agent carrying out divine justice?

Lawrence Kasdan's "Wyatt Earp" got a raw deal in 1994 when it was released; the movie "Tombstone" -- essentially the same story -- came out six months earlier and stole its thunder. The difference in these two films can be observed in their names: "Tombstone" focuses on Earp's conflict with the 'Cowboys' gang in the Arizona town, whereas "Wyatt Earp" is an epic Western detailing Earp's life from youth to old age, although the Tombstone events are certainly the center piece.

"Wyatt Earp" runs 3 hours 11 minutes and "Tombstone" is an hour shorter. Both are top-of-the-line modern Westerns and whether you'll like one or the other depends on what you're in the mood for. If you want kinetic mythmaking "Tombstone" fills the bill, but if you want realistic storytelling with the details and mundaneness thereof then "Wyatt Earp" is the way to go. Regardless, both are noticeably superior to the talky 1957 version with Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas, "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral."

Shot in remote areas of California and running 2 hours and 46 minutes, "The Big Country" is engrossing from beginning to end. As with all great films, it has excellent character development. These people seem real. They have good points and bad. For instance, Patricia and her father are introduced as protagonists, but we slowly discover that they're selfish and immature in some ways. Rufus Hannessey starts out as somewhat of a villain but the viewer can't help but respect him as the story unfolds. Conners is excellent as the loathsome Buck Hannessey and Jean Simmons is perfect as the angelic owner of the watering hole.

I like how McKay refuses to take Leech's bait and handles him on his own terms. Also his refusal to try to prove his manhood to anyone other than himself. Despite his conditional pacifism (which is different than absolute pacifism), McKay proves he's ten times the man Major Terrill is. Note how he treats the Hispanic stableman and his family with respect and appreciation while Terrill speaks down to them like they're his slaves.

It's inexplicable why "The Big Country" isn't normally cited with the best Westerns.

The Civil War is over and the remaining rebels in Missouri are encouraged to turn over their weapons and pledge loyalty to the Union, but Josey Wales (Clint Eastwood) hold out and thus a generous reward is put on his head. Josey heads to West Texas and maybe Mexico to find sanctuary, but will he make it alive? The cast includes the likes of Bill McKinney, John Vernon, Sondra Locke, Chief Dan George, Sam Bottoms and Will Sampson.

This is Eastwood’s best Western and a standout of the genre. Everything clicks for a top-of-the-line drama/adventure. A critic said that Wales’ encounter with the Federals in the first act establishes him as invincible and thus destroys any sense of suspense. No, it just means that he caught the soldiers by surprise and he escaped the clash unscathed with a mixture of skill and luck. A later scene reveals he’s decidedly mortal.

The movie starts with the typical Bob Steele revenge plot and soon morphs into a trail movie (similar to a “road movie,” but with horses). As such, some interesting characters come-and-go (or, more accurately, come-and-die), but several stay on. It’s a string of memorable episodes on the long trail, like the river crossing and Josey’s well-done pow-wow with Ten Bears (Will Sampson). I like the emphasis on how an outcast can acquire an unconventional family, even if inadvertently.

This remake involves the capture of a notorious outlaw, Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), who is then escorted to the town of Contention to await the train to Yuma, where he'll be hanged. A desperate rancher, Dan Evans (Christian Bale), hires on for the escort job because he needs the $200 for his family to survive. Wade plays psychological games the entire time trying to corrupt Evans, but things turn out differently.

The cast is outstanding (which also features the beautiful Gretchen Mol and Peter Fonda), the New Mexican locations are great and the score ranks with the all-time best. Most importantly the picture is engaging throughout its 2 hour runtime, not to mention the story gives the viewer a lot to chew on.

The first hour of the film is realistic but the second morphs into a MYTHIC Western with an potent message. If you can't handle strong mythic elements in Westerns look elsewhere.

When I first saw the film I didn't get the ending and it turned me off. But it was clear that there was more to the picture than what first meets the eye so I decided to view it again. It DOES make sense, it's just that you might miss it on your initial viewing because the events flash by so quickly. When you DO see it, it'll blow you away. See my review for details.

Great 50's Western and character study about a sad sack sheriff and the charismatic gunfighter he tries to bring back from Mexico.

Plot-wise, the film is reminiscent of another B&W 1957 Western, "3:10 to Yuma," but "The Ride Back" was released about 4 months prior to "3:10" and was adapted from a "Gunsmoke" radio program episode. Conrad played Matt Dillon on the radio show in the 50s and early 60s but was too short and portly for the TV version that premiered in 1955 with James Arness starring as Marshal Dillon. Conrad produced "The Ride Back" in response.

Viewing "The Ride Back" for the first time, it is interesting to see William Conrad some 15 years before starring in "Cannon" and Anthony Quinn is as larger-than-life as ever, not to mention the stunningly beautiful Lita Milan as Quinn's Mexican girlfriend. Yet I discovered that the true appeal of "The Ride Back" transcends these surface attractions.

The first thing that happily struck me about the movie is that the filmmakers strove for realism in the manner of notable 50s Westerns like "The Last Wagon." This can be observed in the heavy use of Spanish in the early Mexican segments and the film's depiction of Indians. The Native Americans here are elusive wraiths more than anything else, but that's the best route to go at a time when more close-up portrayals of Indians typically came off artificial and even laughable, especially as seen through modern eyes.

After the first half-hour the film morphs into a moving character study.

The first 45 minutes involves the capture, attempted hanging, and escape of the Bishop Gang, and it's simply one of the most memorable sequences in Western film history. Some people complain about Stewart and Martin as brothers but I've seen many brothers in real life that look more different than they do.

Even though Martin plays an outlaw he's portrayed in a likable, sympathetic manner. He's weary of the outlaw lifestyle and desperately wants out. Stewart and Welch offer him succor by way of stolen money and true love respectively. They all dream of a new life in Montana. There are just two problems: Kennedy & his posse and a gang of wild Mexican bandits (bandoleros).

Although there are some fun elements, the film is essentially a serious Western adventure/drama. It potently explores themes of loyalty, temptation, pursuing/finding true love, the folly of the criminal path and dreams of a better life. Some complain that the ending is too downbeat, but I've always loved it. In fact, it wouldn't have been right to end it any other way.

The score by Jerry Goldsmith is great. Jerry obviously borrowed the basic melody from Neal Hefti's magnificent composition for "Duel at Diablo," which was released two years earlier.

This is an excellent American Western with Spaghetti Western elements featuring Tarantino’s typical artistic flourishes. It takes place in the West AND in the South, which is reminiscent of the underrated “Nevada Smith” (1966), one of my favorite Westerns. Waltz is magnetic as the nonchalant protagonist and he & Foxx have good chemistry. There’s a nice mix of interesting dialogues and over-the-top action.

Unfortunately, but to be expected, Tarantino goes overboard with the ‘n’ word and the blood-letting, the latter to the point of cartoonish-ness. Nevertheless, this is an original Western that is vibrant with creativity, including stunning locations, cinematography and a great amalgamated soundtrack/score, which includes cuts by Ennio Morricone, like the excellent “Hornets’ Nest,” the imaginative "The Braying Mule" and the moving “Ancora Qui.” Unlike the one-dimensional, intentionally offensive and absurdly overdone “The Hateful Eight” (2015), “Django Unchained” is an all-around great modern Western.

The success of "Shane" hinged on whether or not Ladd could pull of the key role. One critic criticized that he lacked the "charismatic stature" for the part. While he was only a little over 5'6" he made up for it with his laconic, but noble charisma and thus towers in the role. It was the same with his underrated 1948 Western "Whispering Smith." I knew a guy in High School who was a little shorter than Ladd, but he had this Fonzy-like charisma that attracted the hottest babes and no one dared mess with him because he was a genuinely badaxx dude, short or not. It's the same with Ladd in "Shane."

Speaking of attracting women, this is a somewhat subtle sub-theme of "Shane." Marian is naturally attracted to the drifter, but she's too wise to do something morally foolish. So she sticks faithfully to her (lesser) man and keeps the flames of her attraction to Shane down to loving admiration & respect, but it's obviously not easy at times.

There are numerous other highlights, like Ryker's fascinating and understandable explanation for WHY he does what he does and finds it justifiable. Then there's the knock-down-drag-out brawl at the end of the first act, which is totally serious and lacks the lame this-is-all-a-joke element of some Wayne Westerns (speaking as one who loves most of Wayne's Westerns). The magnificently shocking death of Stonewall Torrey (Cook Jr.) and the closing showdown are other standout sequences. Then there's the spectacular Grand Teton locations and Shane's notable refusal of filthy lucre. Not everyone can be bought at the expense of righteousness.

Yeah, it's a total rip-off of the "Shane," but it properly modernizes the story and adds a mysterious supernatural quality. Megan's love for The Preacher is understandable and touching. Best line: "If there was more love in the world there'd be a lot less dying."

It beat "Wyatt Earp" to the theater by six months and stole it's thunder because it is a well done modern Western. But "Wyatt Earp" is even better, at least in terms of epic realistic Westerns.

"Tombstone" is just as good, albeit in a mythmaking, kinetic way. The characters and drama are expertly meshed with increasing action, highlighted by the infamous 30-second gunfight.

As for the dramatic walk to the O.K. Corral and the gunfight itself I favor "Wyatt Earp," but "Tombstone" has a much better build-up to the confrontation. Unfortunately, "Tombstone" spins its wheels in the last 35 minutes with redundant gunfights between Wyatt & his men and the remaining Cowboys. "Wyatt Earp" maintains better momentum after the gunfight.

James Garner stars as the independent scout. Garner is, of course, the quintessential Westerner, and this is his best Western role, in my opinion, more serious than Maverick. Sidney Poitier plays a man contracted by the US Army to break-in horses. Although a black man, he's not at all out-of-place in this yarn. There's a lot of cavalry vs. Indians action.

The movie is highlighted by magnificent Southern Utah locations and a phenomenal score by Neal Hefti. The opening and ending sequences with Hefti's great score are memorable and moving.

One critic argued that the tone is "too light," but the film has the same air as "True Grit" and Wayne's other latter-day Westerns. It's an entertaining Western mix of serious drama with intermittent spurts of violence and occasional moments of amusement. Isn't that the way real life is? This is one of the things I like about the movie, it's not one-dimensional. Another beef is that Ms. Goodnight constantly spouts platitudes and homilies and it gets old after a while, but this ties-in to her character arc: She just lost her father and many Native friends and so when she meets Rooster she's grim and intent on justice. But, as she & Wolf get to know the Marshal, she increasingly lets her hair down, so to speak.

Speaking of which, the highlight of the movie is the relationship that develops between Cogburn and Eula, as well the father/son rapport that grows between Cogburn and Wolf. They develop into a family of sorts and it's heartwarming. The banter between Rooster and Ms. Goodnight is well-written and consistently amusing, particularly if you're familiar with the Bible. Another highlight is the Oregon locations, some of which are spectacular, like the river canyon in the final act. Not many Westerns were/are shot in Oregon and this makes for a unique Western ambiance.

"Ride with the Devil" realistically details Quantrill's raiders and their infamous attack on Lawrence, KS. It's not just a great Western, it's a great movie and one of my all-time favorites.

The story shines the spotlight on the son of a German immigrant (Tobey Maguire aka Spider-man), a beautiful woman (Jewel) and an ex-slave (Jeffrey Wright), all of whom take up the Southern cause. I enjoyed how Tobey and Wright slowly develop a close friendship, as well as Wright's growing sense of freedom as the story progresses. Jewel makes an impressive acting debut and should do more films, she's a natural.

Steve McQueen stars as Max Sand, a half-breed youngster who is driven to avenge the heinous murders of his mother and father. After a gun merchant mentors him in the ways of gunfighting and human nature (Brian Keith) he tracks down the three scumbags one by one (Martin Landau, Arthur Kennedy and Karl Malden).

This is an outstanding and realistic revenge Western reminiscent of 1958's "The Bravados" and pre-dating the similar "Hang 'em High" by two years, but superior to both. One of the best sequences is the long prison chapter that takes place in the Louisiana bayous, which is unique for a Western. Another highlight is the women, starting with Janet Margolin as Neesa, the Kiowa girl, followed by Thordis Brandt as the curiously uncredited saloon babe and, best of all, Susan Pleshette as the precious Cajun girl, Pilar.

BEST LINE: "Yer yella! You haven't got the guts; you haven't got the guts!!!"

The plot is simple: Chato, a half-breed Indian (Charles Bronson), shoots an arrogant, racist lawman in a saloon and a large posse is assembled where they chase Chato in his own element, which is why it's called "Chato's Land." The story focuses on the large posse rather than the half-breed they're chasing; it's an interesting and realistic character study.

The group dynamics of the posse and their interplay is where the film shines. Four or five of the men are good men, but they're too blinded by cultural bigotry toward a half-breed to realize the injustice of their cause. It never occurs to them that Chato has rights and that the slain lawman was in the wrong. All they focus on is that a sheriff is dead and a half-breed did it. Most of the rest of the posse are unlikable or repugnant, particularly a character played by Richard Jordan and his father, played by Simon Oakland.

Due to their differences, the loosely put-together posse lacks solidarity. Some are hell-bent on apprehending or killing Chato while others are rather half-hearted on the issue, pretty much just doing a favor for the former Confederate Captain, played by Palance. You have to listen closely because sometimes the dialogue isn't too clear, but the quality writing brings these characters to life.

Why does Chato become increasingly merciless as the story progresses? At first, he does things to simply deter the group and provoke them to give up, like destroy their water supply, but at a certain point some of the members of the posse cross the line and do something particularly heinous, not to mention utterly criminal, proving that they are the true criminals and not Chato. Some of the members object, which is respectable, but not enough to stop the atrocities and so they become guilty by association. It's called cowardly condoning.

Bronson is stunning at the end.

Richard Widmark is a great antihero in this memorable 50's Western, highlighted by a couple beautiful women (Felicia Farr and Susan Kohner). Widmark plays a white man raised by Comanches and under arrest for murder. Deep in hostile Apache territory he soon finds himself the leader of a small group of youthful survivors of an attacked wagon train.

The film successfully takes you back to the late 1800s and gives a good glimpse of what it must have been like to travel out West during that time.

Felicia Farr and Susan Kohner stand out in the supporting cast; both are incredibly beautiful. Each youth has his/her issue(s) and grows much as a result of their experiences with Comanche Todd and the dire situation. For instance, Susan (Jolie) is ashamed that she's half-Indian but Todd teaches her to be proud of who and what she is. Others hate Todd for being an "injun lover" but later see the error of their ways. Todd himself is lost in in a fog of bitterness & revenge but a new potential family is thrown in his lap. Can he get over his disillusionment to see the blessing in his current situation? This is just a taste of the character arcs addressed in the story.

Stop the presses! Christianity and Christians are actually portrayed in a positive light -- amazing! Yet so are the beliefs/practices of the Natives. The film does an outstanding job of taking the middle road with the settlers and the natives. Not to mention, the Indians are portrayed realistically, unlike many 50's Westerns where you just roll your eyes at their silly depiction.

It has a cartoony plot and delivery, but the all-star cast, great locations, memorable score & theme song ("Old Turkey Buzzard") and the suspense created around the "canyon of gold" win the day.

Omar Sharif as the head Mexican bandit "Colorado" is quite effective. It's sort of an atypical role for him, but he performs so well that it seems he was born to play the part. Ted Cassidy, well-known as "Lurch" on TV's "The Addam's Family," plays the intimidating, laconic Native warrior Hachita. He superbly fits the character (regardless of whether or not he has Indian blood running through his veins). And Julie Newmar is great as a crazy -- and I mean CRAZY -- squaw. Red-blooded males will be interested to know that she has a nude swimming scene, while fans of "Brokeback Mountain" will likely appreciate Omar Sharif during the same sequence.

John Wayne stars as an aging rancher who is forced to hire pubescent drovers for a 400-mile cattle drive from Bozeman, Montana, to Belle Fourche, South Dakota, after his ranch hands abandon him for a gold rush.

This is a realistic, almost epic Wayne Western focusing on the long cattle drive and the amateur boys learning to be men. It lacks the fun brawling and unrealistic elements of John's contemporary Westerns of the 60s-70s (e.g. the quick-draw nonsense in "El Dorado"). A Martinez stands out as the outcast Hispanic amongst the kids while Bruce Dern is notable as a menacing ne'er-do-well. The almost shocking confrontation that opens the final act is a highlight and the boys' just strategy is great: KILL 'EM ALL.

The movie's loosely based on the real-life Col. Grierson and his 1863 Cavalry raid behind Confederate lines, which includes the Battle of Newton's Station. The Duke stars as a Col. Marlowe, who leads a cavalry force deep into rebel territory to cut off supply lines to Vicksburg, Mississippi, which was being attacked by Gen. Grant.

Although the film has some expected dated aspects, like the dreadful opening song (almost on a par with "North to Alaska"), "The Horse Soldiers" holds up well, highlighted by authentic Southern locations -- filmed in Mississippi, Louisianna and Texas.

What works best is the story and characters. The conflict between Marlowe (Wayne) and the doctor (Holden) adds tension and is entertaining, but you just know they'll likely come out of this venture highly respecting one another. Needless to say, Wayne and Holden have great chemistry. Some complain about the Southern belle but she's a good touch and, really, there are no romantic dallyings to speak of (until the very end, that is). The sequence in the last act featuring the involvement of military school cadets was based on the Battle of New Market, which was fought on May 15, 1864, in Virginia.

Walter Hill's "The Long Riders" chronicles the escapades of the James/Younger Gang, former Confederate bushwhackers in Missouri during the Civil War who kept on fighting after the conflict, although they didn't officially become the notorious gang until 1868, at the earliest. The movie details the events over the next dozen or so years during which the gang robbed banks, trains, and stagecoaches in Missouri, Kentucky, Iowa, Texas, Arkansas, Kansas, West Virginia and, lastly, Minnesota. Speaking of which, to all intents and purposes the James-Younger Gang was destroyed with the ill-fated Northfield, Minnesota, bank robbery on the first day of hunting season on September 7, 1876, with only the James brothers escaping. Yet they resurfaced in Nashville, Tennessee, with restless Jesse recruiting a new gang by 1879.

The gimmick with this film is that they used real-life brothers to portray the outlaw brothers: James and Stacy Keach as Jesse and Frank; David, Keith and Robert Carradine as Cole, Jim and Bob Younger; Randy and Dennis Quaid as Clell and Ed Miller; and Christopher and Nicholas Guest as Charlie and Bob Ford. Pamela Reed and James Remar are also on hand as Belle and Sam Starr.

The bar knife fight between Cole Younger and Sam Starr is a highlight. Although this particular fight never happened, fights LIKE IT did. Heck, when I was a teen a friend of mine got stabbed in the gut in a bar knife fight in a small town in Ohio; so I personally KNOW it happens. Recently, in a larger Ohio town (where I currently live) there was a gunfight in the parking lot of a saloon, I mean bar, between two rival bike gangs -- Brothers Regime vs. The Outlaws -- and several died or were seriously injured.

One striking aspect of this film is that it's more-so an Eastern than a Western; the events of the film take place in the technically Eastern states noted above; not to mention that it was filmed largely in Georgia of all places (Parrott and Westville) and also in Rusk, Texas, which is in EAST Texas. These Eastern locations are nothing short of magnificent. It's just nice to see the East utilized in a Western storyline.

David Carradine is notable as Cole Younger. Remember him as humble Caine in "Kung Fu"? Well, his character here is the express opposite of that noble character. James Keach is also potent as Jesse James; James portrays Jesse as a grim, hard man. You can easily see him leading this tough band of outlaws. In addition, Stacy Keach is likable as always.

Although Pamela Reed plays her role of Belle Starr very well, Belle comes across as lifeless and sleazy (which is to be expected if you're a prostitute); I wouldn't touch her with a ten-foot pole. Lastly, James Remar is perfect and memorable as the half-Indian Sam Starr.

Both this version and the classic Wayne film from 1969 are great, but this one has more, well, grit.

Hailee Steinfeld is outstanding as the educated and headstrong 14 year-old Mattie Ross. Jeff Bridges is excellent as Rooster Cogburn, the one-eyed, overweight, hard-drinkin' Marshal with true grit. The former hires the latter to apprehend the scumbag (Josh Brolin) who murdered her father. Teaming up with a young Texas ranger (Matt Damon) who's also tracking down the owlhoot, the three go into the wilderness of the Choctaw Nation of Eastern Oklahoma to apprehend him, where they're also forced to contend with the outlaws with whom he's riding. Barry Pepper plays the leader.

It's interesting -- but fitting -- how Mattie's disposition remains intact as she grows older. You could say she's unlikable but Cogburn won her respect and you have to admire her life-long loyalty, especially since he's not the most savory individual.

The locations are less spectacular than Wayne's version (which was shot in Colorado and California) but they're closer to the actual locations of the book and therefore more realistic. Besides, they're awesome in their own mundane way.

I encourage potential viewers to watch both versions as each has its highlights.

Better than that comic booky Western with the same name. It may have a hackneyed plot, but it has great characters and mature (insightful) themes.

Highlights include the breathtaking cinematography, a believable and mature tone, Kate Capshaw's beauty, a banal plot redeemed by quality characters (like Tom Conti as the settler husband/father), insightful drama & plot surprises and, of course, Sam Elliott as the quintessential Westerner. Really, Elliott is as good or – more likely – better than any Western icon you care to name (Wayne, Eastwood, Cooper, Scott, Stewart, Costner, etc.).

There are mature and insightful themes, like the undeniable connection of Vallian (Sam) and Susanna (Kate). Most of us can relate: You stumble across someone of the opposite sex and instinctively sense a palpable connection, some kind of profound mutual fascination, yet—for whatever reason—pursuing an intimate relationship is not an option. In an entire lifetime you will only experience a handful such 'connections,' or less. These exchanges are permanent because they are so potent they are forever burned into one's psyche.