I will probably catch a lot of hell for this posting.
I did not like High Noon.
The theme song, "Do not forsake me oh my darling"
can be heard all through the film....TEDIOUS.
The fist-fight between Gary Cooper and Lloyd
Bridges in the livery stable: CONTRIVED (artificial).
I found the "madame" Mrs. Ramirez unconvincing
and annoying.
Any thoughts?
I suspect the reason a lot of people these days don't like this movie is because there are no high-speed car chases, lame computer-generated explosions, and people defying the laws of physics.
shareYou're just another twit who starts threads on classics like this with titles like "overrated" to get some attention. Always the same. Get lost.
shareVery overrated.
share[deleted]
yeah I was very disappointed considering the hype it has always gotten. The only scene that had any tension was when the gang and the marshal were coming down different streets headed straight for each other, and then one of the idiot gang members breaks a window to steal something and blows their cover. Seriously? Pretty weak film.
share[deleted]
Kubrick once told a friend, "You know, this isn't a very good film" while watching it in a theater.
I think the movie is uneven (acting, pacing) but I still look upon it favorably as a whole. I actually find Grace Kelly ineffective here, and there are a couple scenes that cannot escape hokiness.
But I still think it's a unique and fine effort and has one of my favorite opening credits to any Western I've seen.
The only thing I liked about this movie, is that contsant suspence feeling. Every character was referring to the villain as if he was the devil himself, didn't even need any explanations... "You know how he is..." they all said. A great western/thriller could come out of this + a nicely done action part for the end. Instead, it's spoiled with the tedious theme song, terrible acting by Gary Cooper, really, from the first scene I couldn't get rid of an impression, that the guy is drunk or something, and he can't wait for the filming day to be over. That weading scene, just look at him, he's not happy, he's not thinking about his new wife, his thinking "Yeah-yeah, weading blah-blah, try to look natural or whatever". His deputy, the one that wanted to become the new marshal - same thing. Like he's forcing the role upon himself. And what's up with his hair? 0_o
Besides the budget was obviously pretty small. I can't picture the movie's authors saying "to film this scene we need to find an alley/yard/road that will represent it's spirit and atmosphere exectly as it should...", I can see them going "OK, the closest alley will be good enough". The only thing that kept me watching were glimpses of this thriller atmosphere. I wanted to get to the climax, to see the villain in action, the reason of the peoples' fear. And the guys, who played the 3 bandits at the station helped to hold my attention. And the final shoot-out brings nothing but disappointment.
I thought, maybe I was being too harsh, the movie has been filmed 60 years ago, right? One can't expect it to keep up with some of todays film industry canons. But right after that I watched Bergman's "Virgin Springs" (1960) and hell, that's what I call acting, that's what I call filmmaking.
just saw it, while i do think it's a very good film, i don't think it's great. i definite understand why some would like it, for me personally, it was a very good film, just don't feel it great.
share