good acting
The actors were good; awesome, even. But what is up with the story? Where did it go?
shareThe actors were good; awesome, even. But what is up with the story? Where did it go?
shareI know just what you mean! Culpepper (THE TITLE CHARACTER) and his men just ride off and leave the four drovers and "the kid" to their fate. What sort of a finale is that? A realistic one, sure, but not one that delivers any sense of closure.
I suppose we do get the climax of the kid "growing up" and realizing that "cowboying" isn't what he thought, but surely the first 24 hrs spent in the company of the CCC would have taught him that?
It's called integrity. You don't set up a certain set of characters then have them jump through hoops at the end to give a better Hollywood ending. I think the ending is perfect, and actually there is total closure - the dream is over, the end.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks
..and after the '42 movies, apparently the end of Gary Grimes also. I can find hide nor hair of him. I wonder where he is.
"Are you HIGH?!?"
I'll agree. The acting is good and the cinematography is downright amazing in parts. But the movie is just too episodic and rambling to be cohesive. It's a shame, because it has a pretty good ending as well.
What's the Spanish for drunken bum?
Northern New Mexico Southern Colorado = petho kabron, boracho desgraciado,