Silverado

Western production was still low in 1985, but the quality of the 2 films we most remember was head and shoulders over the year before. There were 54 titles including 16 Feature Films, about 5 of which were made in the USA. Features included "Pale Rider" starring Clint Eastwood in a sort of a mix between "High Plains Drifter" and "Shane" that if not for "Silverado" I would have gladly spotlighted. In my previous post on "High Plains Drifter" I noted how both of Eastwoods' films take what seems to be a Supernatural presence and inserts them into the storyline of a Western Classic. I wonder what his thinking was. It was actually the biggest Western Box Office draw of the year at $44 Million. There was also the comedy "Rustler's Rhapsody" with Tom Berenger and Patrick Wayne which was fair but as the critics wouldn't let anyone forget, no "Blazing Saddles". There were also a number of Western/Scifi mixes, including Richard Farnsworth, of all people, in "Space Rage" a 77 minute film set in 2185. On TV, a new series called "Wildside" premiered that tried a "Magnificent 7" style approach with 5 different men, all of whom had a weapons specialty, teaming up to fight crime in the West. I do vaguely remember that it was a quality production, but that outside of the "every man an expert" premise, there wasn't much to it. Kenny Rogers and Pam Dawber starred in the contemporary "Wild Horses". Australia had two TV Westerns of note, "Archer" about a horse trainer's apprentice transporting a horse 600 miles to take part in a race, and "Robbery Under Arms" starring Sam Neill, a TV adaptation of a classic Australian Bushranger novel. But I would imagine that out of all movies from 1985, most (but not all) of us would call Silverado our favorite. And it got quite a lot of praise from critics who liked it. Those who were less enthusiastic said it was one of the best looking Westerns they had ever seen, but that the story fell short. And audiences may have felt the same way. Financially, it did just OK, with at $33 million much less than had been hoped for, leaving Jake's "We'll be back!" at the end a sadly unfulfilled promise. I do love Silverado. It's endlessly rewatchable and quotable. Without question, the cast is top notch, with a remarkable lineup of Supporting Actors like Brian Dennehy, Linda Hunt, Rosanna Arquette, Jeff Goldblum, Joe Seneca, Jeff Fahey, Lynn Whitfield, James Gammon, Lynn Whitfield and Earl Hindman, all 100% delivering the goods. John Cleese's Englishman in the West works so well. It's beautiful, with both interiors and exteriors looking satisfyingly real, but vibrant. So many of the set pieces and action scenes work wonderfully. As I said, it's a "must see", one of the few made after 1980. But... but... It never completely comes together. I kind of love it more for what it tries to be than it actually achieves. Like "Draw!" the year before, there is the sense that we're watching a Western that knows it is a Western, at least to me. There's a great deal of respect for the material and for the genre, perhaps too much, and that seems to stifle some of it. Kasdan himself admitted that he was trying to make a Western for everyone that grew up loving Westerns, and he succeeded in many ways, but I think that perhaps he had the feeling that "this is my one chance to make a Western, so I'm going to tell as many Western stories as I can". As a result, we've got 4 different co-lead characters each with their own story arc and supporting characters. Glenn and Kostner have the "small rancher/big rancher" conflict. Glenn and Kostner play brothers, but their biggest scenes are separate. Danny Glover has his own "small rancher/big rancher" storyline plus Racism in the West plus his concerns with his Sister. Kevin Cline has the Good Outlaw/Bad Sheriff storyline mixed in with his management of the local Saloon and apparently a more robust love story with the widowed settler played by Rosanna Arquette than ulimately showed up in the movie. It was simply cut for time. That's a lot. And for some, that's probably part of Silverado's charm. It's a very full world with lots of different characters all of whom have their own motivations, played by incredibly talented actors. Kasdan is talented enough to manage to introduce all these stories, spin them out and pull them back in together for the ending, but any one of these stories could have been the centerpiece of their own movie, and they probably should have, because there is sometimes a sense of "checking boxes", like "Here's the Cavalry Fort" "Here's the Jail Break", "Here's the Wagon Train", "Here's the Big City Gambler", "Here's the Saloon", "Here's the big showdown" and so on. Kasdan knows what audience wants, because its the same thing he wants, and he tries to give us EVERYTHING, and that doesn't quite work. I'm sounding like a harsher critic of the movie than I want to be. I do love it. I just wish it had been slightly better to spark a full blown Western Revival, because so much of it works so well in so many ways. As I was thinking about Silverado, I remembered even at the time how there was a Siskel and Ebert show where both talked about movies that were coming later in the year and they were both clearly enthusiastic about the idea of Silverado bringing back the Western. Today as of this posting, "Silverado" is as distant from us in term of time - 35 years - as it was from "Winchester '73". Between 1950 and 1985 there were so many great Westerns. Between 1985 and now, a small fraction of that. "Silverado" deserves recognition and credit. It's a wonderful movie, and a Classic Western, if not quite a great film. What do you think? More on reddit.com

“Can’t you see this horse loves me?” More on reddit.com

John Cleese as possibly my favorite old west sheriff. "Today, my jurisdiction ends here." More on reddit.com

Good movie. It's an homage to old westerns as Indiana Jones is to pulp adventure, or as Star Wars is to raypunk space opera. Kasdan, Lucas, and Spielberg are good at that sort of thing. More on reddit.com