I can't believe people actually liked this movie - Silverado (1985) Discussion

[–] startrekrules 20 years ago

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!!!!! Silverado is my all-time favorite western, and is a superbly made film. The acting is fantastic (especially Kline), and has fabulous camera work. Put all of this with an outstanding score by Bruce Broughton and you have one heck of a western movie (it sure beats the crap out of any John Wayne movie....period.)

reply

[–] PatrynXX 20 years ago

someone must be pulling out leg. This is like my favourite western period. Certainly not innovative. But it was attempting to bring the western back to the public arena. And it did that. :P

---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

And it did that. :P

No it didn't. It wasn't that popular when it came out, and even if it has gained a cult following since then (or for that matter, even if I'm wrong and it WAS popular when it came out), Silverado was trying to take the western back to the pre-revisionist days. But the few westerns since then to be released and achieve major popularity have been revisionist westerns, so Silverado didn't bring back jack. Which is a good thing. I love the traditional westerns as much as anybody, my favorite director being John Ford, but watching crap like Silverado and Open Range, one realizes why Peckinpah and Leone were necessary in the first place.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 19 years ago

Open Range was another pleasant surprise. Fantastic movie.
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

Open Range was a bunch of tired cliches, plus one amazing gunfight that saved it from being a total waste of time. It did nothing to breath new life into the (sadly) dormant genre, and was a huge dissapointment coming from the man who did Dances With Wolves.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 19 years ago

I can't totally say Dances with wolves was a western.

Open Range was a decent comeback. Hope he does more like it. Dad a big western fan himself like it before I did.

As for Silverado. I don't think it of a revisionistic film. It's a throwback to the old western. Which wasn't entirely accurate either. Silverado though probably isn't for people interested in the doom and gloom westerns like Unforgiven. Which was a disappointement for CLint Eastwood. Last good western he did was Pale Rider
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

I can't totally say Dances with wolves was a western.

It took place in the old west, and could not have taken place anywhere else. Therefore, it is a western. It's more of a true western than Silverado, since it uses a particular (albiet revisionist) take on the mythology of the old west to make a point, whereas Silverado uses the its notion of the west as an excuse to film a bunch of unremarkable gunfights and last minute rescues, ad nauseum.

As for Silverado. I don't think it of a revisionistic film. It's a throwback to the old western.

I know. I already said this, and it is crucial to the point that I was making.

Silverado though probably isn't for people interested in the doom and gloom westerns like Unforgiven.

This is ridiculous. There's no reason that you can't like fun, lightheared movies just as much as dark movies. I'm interested in all kinds of westerns, so long as they're good.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 19 years ago

well Silverado I thought was quite good. can't say Open Range is exactly light hearted, but certainly better than Unforgiven. I'm not saying Unforgiven was a bad film, I just don't like it.

As for Dances With Wolves being a western. It takes place during the civil war. Long before the decades normally considered for a western. Albeit Good The Bad The Ugly takes place during the civil war. Although even there I can't completely say it's a total western. But as it has to do with shoot em up's.... The old style western it is.
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

It takes place during the civil war. Long before the decades normally considered for a western.

Okay, this is total nonsense. It is not true at all that a movie must take place long after The Civil War to be considered a western by normal standards. This is so obvious that I'm not going to argue it. If you care, just investigate it yourself. Look up some movies that take place in the west or on the frontier in the civil war or before or shortly after. Jeez, according to you, The Searchers isn't even a western, since it's right after the Civil War.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 19 years ago

I'm just going back to your revisionist type opinion of Silverado.

Since most westerns weren't totally accurate either. :P all in good fun. Think I'll go back to Chocolat now. Another fine TALE :)
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

I didn't have a revisionist type opinion on Silverado. I said repeatedly that it isn't a revisionist western, but an attempt to take the genre back to pre-revisionist days. From an earlier post of mine:

Silverado was trying to take the western back to the pre-revisionist days. But the few westerns since then to be released and achieve major popularity have been revisionist westerns, so Silverado didn't bring back jack.

I'm not against people making traditional, pre-revisionist westerns in a modern setting. There just haven't, to my knowledge, been any that were particularly good in a long time.

And I never said that westerns had to be totally accurate. A totally accuarate western would probably be some boring as hell movie about cowboys roping and branding cows all day or something.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 19 years ago

I'm not particularly in an argument mood anyway. I've got this head cold and probably blowing things way out of proportion. I probably won't even remember this in the morning.

Now Renegade is the oddest Western/fantasy I ever saw. Vincent Casselle (sp?) does not play a cowboy very well. But it sure was original. Hopefully that won't catch on.
---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] Flame_Repellant 18 years ago

smith93,

I think that you really should try and get out more. You have made your point and it's now showning tendancies that would suggest the need for meication and some gel on the temples.

You don't like the film, we get that, now move on and trash some other movies.

I've done a rough calculation and would estimate that only 5% of posters agree with your views and then not as strongly.

I shall search the boards for your, very original, id and enjoy reading you posts.

Is there any truth in the rumour that you wanted to be in Brokeback Mountain???

Bottom line intentionally left blank........................

reply

[–] Bob_Zerunkel 12 years ago

I'll bet when they made Seven Samurai people were saying it could not have taken place anywhere else. But then they did it as the Magnificent Seven.

They could swap out the American Indians in Dances with Wolves for lots and lots of people who were forcibly moved from their lands. Thee are thousands of examples in history. The only plausible reason for saying that it had to be a Western is if it had to be about the treatment of American Indians in the West. You can pick any color, race, and nation. You'll find a story very similar.

reply

[–] berniemccool 18 years ago

Open Range is the worst movie ever. Kevin Costner deliver the stiffest performance ever. I'm pretty sure he says "I'm sweet on you" to Annette Benning at some point. No plot arc and no charcter development to speak of, even for a western. I will say though that it had nice landscapes and a good shoot-out.

reply

[–] PatrynXX 18 years ago

Can't see how. Unless your watching the movie on an Ipod speaker system. The sounds in the movie are very good. Crank the stereo up and you'll find it very different.

This movie just proves that Kevin should stick to westerns. Since thats what he's good at.

---------------------------------
Books are meant to be read, if not, they'll die and so will we!

reply

[–] lperkin1 18 years ago

>"It wasn't that popular when it came out"

It was not popular because a Clint Eastwood western (Pale Rider) came out at the same time so Silverado did not get much publicity.

reply

[–] Samoan Bob 19 years ago

"it sure beats the crap out of any John Wayne movie"

I will kindly point you to The Big Trail, Stagecoach, Red River, The Searchers, John Ford's Cavalry Trilogy, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, Rio Bravo, The Cowboys, The Shootist, etc. etc. etc.

I like pie.

reply

[–] KutWrite (1302) 4 years ago

I agree with you.

reply

[–] plarouche32 20 years ago

my fav western also 10/10

reply

[–] hanksta2 20 years ago

I'd say if the majority of people have voted it 7.0, your opinion would fall into the minority.

reply

[–] Drunken_Pumpkin 20 years ago

Silverado is an amazing Hollywood Action/Adventure Movie. It is set in the old west and is rightfully called a Western for that reason, but in my opinion, it should be compared more closely to Star Wars or Indiana Jones or any of the other mainstream thrill-rides that Kasdan has helped to bring to the screen over the years. In this light, I think the movie holds up to some of the biggest blockbusters of all time. It is obviously not meant to be viewed as a Western in the same sense as the "Dollars" trilogy or some of the darker Clint Eastwood fair.

If you think that it failed on the Action/Adventure level, I would disagree, but at least I could respect that opinion. To view a movie out of the context that it was obviously intended is just plain ignorant. Perhaps you would feel more comfortable viewing some other delightful westerns such as Back to the Future Part III or Wild, Wild West.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Deathstalker2 20 years ago

If you hate movies with great heroes and villains, a love of high adventure, a straightforward sense of humor, and a distinct lack of pretentiousness, then yeah--it sucks.

Seriously, I'm floored that people can watch Silverado and come away hating it. It's almost as though people think they can't watch a movie just to have a good time anymore.

---------------

"I know it's pretty damn weird to eat people." -Marv

reply

[–] The_Walking_Dude 20 years ago

Yeah. I mean, Leone's classics are better. No doubt.

But Silverado is, in my not-so-humble opinion, the best "fun" Western. It doesn't make you think, it doesn't make you question your morals, it just sets up some good guys and some bad guys and lets the story play from there.

_______________________________________

Get busy livin' or get busy dyin'.

reply

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] coine 19 years ago

Calling a film "stupid" because you completly missed the point - way to go!

I'm guessing you consider art to be velvet paintings of Elvis.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cengelm 19 years ago

Well, then watch MY DARLING CLEMENTINE or RIO GRANDE! SILVERADO is a good Western entry, particularly recommended to people who are new to the genre. I can hardly believe that anyone loves MY DARLING CLEMENTINE or RIO GRANDE.

reply

[–] ecarle 19 years ago

I believe that "Silverado" was explicitly intended as an attempt to go back in time BEFORE the violent, operatic and international looking "Spaghetti Westerns" of Leone (with their terrible dubbing) -- indeed before the ultra-violent Peckinpah "Wild Bunch" -- to a time when the Western featured a clear match-up of good vs. evil under sunny skies on the open prarie.

Kasdan had recently helped reinvent such genres as the film noir ("Body Heat") and the adventure movie ("Raiders of the Lost Ark"), and wanted to try to do the same for the Western.

But alas, the Western was still a dead genre for many audience members, especially women.

I thought it was a witty, exciting little movie.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] alvink 19 years ago

yeeeesssss.

silverado is shallow and pointless, and, when it tries to have mr. klein 'stare down the villian', eastwood-style, it's just pitiful, but it's ok for the people that do not know anything about westerns.

but for those who compare this movie with rio bravo or once upon a time, get a life, preferably watching old ricky martin re-runs.

reply

[–] Deathwombat 19 years ago

If you do not like the film why are you wasting time here? Are you so bored and lacking in anything else to do?

Keep church and government separate. They do enough damage by themselves.

reply

[–] lam33gb 19 years ago

I know more than my fair share about Westerns. I'm from West Texas. And yes, I did grow up with alot of land with a few horses and some cattle. A family friend is actually in the movie. Most of his career involved Westerns (Roy Mac).

Personally, I love the movie. It is in my Western collection that includes many John Wayne greats along with Desperado, Lonesome Dove, Open Range, and many more.

It's fine to not like a movie, but to question someone's intelligence concerning a subject because they actually do like a movie is rather shallow. What makes your opinion worth more than anyone elses? Nothing...Absolutely nothing.

reply

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cengelm 19 years ago

Anyone who prefers that film to Clementine and Rio Grande probably doesn't care very much about filmmaking or artistic content.

Whatever content there is. What's the point of MY DARLING CLEMENTINE?
Color films are more difficult to handle and require more skill.

reply

[–] smith93 19 years ago

The point of My Darling Clementine? John Ford used the mythology of the western to make movies about his understanding of America's national identity. My Darling Clementine is about the taming of the west and the values of civilization. And defending a movie by saying that it is "more difficult to handle" because it's in color is ridiculous. Aside from the fact that that isn't even necessarily true, are you arguing that a movie is better if it was more difficult to make? It could be more easily argued that a subtle and meaningful movie like Clementine or Rio Grand is "more difficult to handle" than a shallow, generic shoot-em-up like Silverado.

reply

[–] alvink 19 years ago

i agree soooooo much. people like it, and i don't understand, but i want to understand, but this movie is doggie-doo.

kline needs to comunicate with glover, so he shoots the rifle action of glover's rifle; glover says 'thanks' then continues to use the same rifle. duh.

this movie encompasses the same realism as does 'terror in tiny town', the western made with midgets riding shetland ponies.

however, if you would like to get goofed up and cheer, how about kline trying to make the same faces as eastwood, van cleef, and wallach.

more 'camp', in a ridiculous way' than this movie would be difficult to find.

this is one really stupid movie. just ridiculous.

alvin

reply

[–] Phantasm21 19 years ago

kline needs to comunicate with glover, so he shoots the rifle action of glover's rifle; glover says 'thanks' then continues to use the same rifle. duh.

Are you talking about when Glover was on top of the roof in the big shoot out near the end when that guy was sneaking up behind him? Cause it looked like to me that Kline just shot the stonework above Glover's head. That actually made me laugh since it was such an insane way to warn somebody.

reply

[–] lwarren777 19 years ago

Has anyone ever taught you how to use the shift button on your keyboard? But maybe they don't teach that until second grade?

Everyone has their own tastes. Sometimes, even I can't explain why I like one thing over another, let alone why I like something that someone else doesn't. All I know is that I love this movie. One of my favorites.

reply

[–] rizdek 19 years ago

Just got through watching Silverado for the first time...I know, better late than never. I thought it was well done. Certainly deserving of the 7:10 rating. I have to wonder if people claiming it is so bad actually watched it. I notice misstatements of scenes in criticisms.

EG: alvink says: "kline needs to comunicate with glover, so he shoots the rifle action of glover's rifle; glover says 'thanks' then continues to use the same rifle. duh."

alvink has two different scenes mixed up, watch it again.

"how about kline trying to make the same faces as eastwood, van cleef, and wallach."

I guess I didn't get that Kline was trying to mimic anyone...he was just being Paden, not eastwood etc. Now, I have to say that Eastwood is probably my favorite western star...his cold looks, gleam in the eye, and delivery of one-liners is classic. But again, I never felt like Kline or anyone else in this movie, was trying to imitate.

In another thread, someone berates Rosanna Arquette for saying about herself that she is so beautiful...over and over again. I didn't notice that she did that, and pointed it out in that thread.

reply

[–] tomcat69w 19 years ago

Where did all of these pre-pubescent pedantic punks,...spring from??? Although not the greatest Western ever made, it is offbeat, smart, memorable, fun and can only assume those who don't like it,...do not like the Western 'genre' much
at all. Some people prefer the 'Art House type Western OUATITW,...other's prefer their Western's a bit more hip and fun, like this one. I have been a fan
of the western genre for over 50 years,...(back when it WAS the old west) and am going to 'break' down the genre even a bit more.

The Standard Westerns:

Red River
Rio Grande
She Wore A Yellow Ribbon
Fort Apache

Offbeat Westerns:
Silverado
The Quick & The Dead
The Professionals
One-Eyed Jacks

Art House Westerns:

Good The Bad The Ugly
Once Upon A Time In The West
The Wild Bunch

The Smoker You Drink, The Player You Get!

reply

[–] Jetfire59 19 years ago

kline needs to comunicate with glover, so he shoots the rifle action of glover's rifle; glover says 'thanks' then continues to use the same rifle. duh.

You're mixxing up two different sequences. Paden doesn't shoot Mal's rifle, he shoots at the wall over his head. I'm watching the film as I type this. The rifle action getting hit is in the later fight between Emmett and Ethan.

"Funny how your feet, in dreams, never touch the Earth" -Nancy Wilson

reply