Open Range v. Tombstone - Open Range (2003) Discussion

[–] jcmcgee1969 17 years ago

You said it, Britania! :)

reply

[–] cabbageboy316 17 years ago

Open Range is a really good western but the whole last 15 mins. of it after the gunfight really gets boring. And to be honest, the heels in Open Range leave a lot to be desired outside of the main boss (Michael Gambon).

Both it and Tombstone suffer from the romance subplots, but at least with Tombstone it sorta had to be there since some variation of that actually happened. They could have cut out Annette Bening from Open Range entirely though and the movie would have worked better.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lostinaction 17 years ago

Both Movies are good western.

Tombstone has much more Action than Open Range. But Open Range is a perfectly made Western, nothing to complain about it. Never boring, not too long and every actor had a good performance.
Tomstone has more crappy moments and at least it is a little dissapointing that Tombstone is not accurate to what happened really. One of the most popular Western of the last 20 years but surely not the best.

So for me Open Range is the much better Movie. There should be no doubt about it.

reply

[–] m-slovak79 16 years ago

Open Range v. Tombstone

Open Range is flat out better in my opinion although i do like Tombstone. (i think a better comparison would be 'Open Range (2003) vs Unforgiven (1992)' as that would be a much better comparison and harder to choose which is better. but IF i had to choose i might give the slight edge to 'Open Range' mainly because of the heart pumping effect which i did not get from Unforgiven but Unforgiven gives me other feelings that i dont get from Open Range.... i gave both films a 9/10)

i seen Open Range many times and it's still great and on my first viewing it was one of the few films out there (especially semi-recently) that built up a good amount of suspense near the end quite well. the only other film that was better than this for me in terms of that (i.e. heart pumping/edge of seat wise) was 'Running Scared' (2006) (that film is the cream of the crop for me in terms of the 'edge of seat/heart pumping' stuff that i can remember that was not back in my teens (im going to be 30 years old later this year. i seen Open Range when it was new-ish for the first time) which it seemed easier to get that feeling back then, than it is now.

in fact, i consider Open Range to be one of the best westerns of all time. it stands up well against some of the best of the best films in the Western Genre. and come to think of it, as far as Westerns, i dont think there's a single film that i could CLEARLY choose over it even though there's a moderate amount that are on it's level like 'The Good, The Bad & The Ugly' , 'Once Upon A Time In The West' , 'For A Few Dollars More' , 'Unforgiven' etc. (as you can see im a big Eastwood fan ;) , as he's pretty much the best in the Western genre overall. because out of the old days westerns, he pretty much stars in ALL the OLD westerns (OLD, as in say 1970's-80's OR OLDER) i like alot besides 'Once Upon A Time In The West' (which is GREAT))

but what makes me really like Open Range is that it gives me a feeling i dont get from any other western ;) (the way it builds up that end shootout (which you know is bound to happen) is just great. Costner/Duvall are great and are a good part of the reason that it's so good)

Costner made something quite special here! ;) ... films like these don't come around to often either in general, western or not.

either way though... Open Range is i think is definitely the best Western since 1992's Unforgiven. '3 10 to Yuma' (2007) was good (8/10) but it just dont have the greatness that 'Open Range' (9-10/10) has.

the sad thing though is it seems like Open Range aint all that known as lower quality stuff like '3 10 to Yuma' seems to get all the praise as far as recent westerns go even though Open Range is a more entertaining film and it's just great, a near-masterpiece. where as '3 10 to Yuma' is not a masterpiece.... but if your comparing the IDEAS behind the films (Open Range vs '3 10 to Yuma') , in that sense Yuma would be the better of the two on paper because it's story seems better etc etc... but the way Open Range does a more basic Western is just great and has 'feeling' behind it which i don't see with Yuma.

p.s. as far as Kevin Costner films go... i would say this film (Open Range) and 'Mr Brooks' (2007) ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780571/ ) are his best films. they sorta both have that masterpiece-ish feel to them which i dont think any of his other films has (not saying his other films aint quite good because they are like 'Field of Dreams' , 'Tin Cup' , 'Wyatt Earp' etc etc they just dont have that masterpiece feel to them) ... Kevin Costner and William Hurt are great in Mr Brooks.

---
My Vote History ... http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=11026826
---

reply

[–] m-slovak79 11 years ago

a update to my above post...

Open Range (2003) is now in my Top 3 Westerns ever (and has been for a while now) as that movie stands the test of time and never gets old watching it.

i give it a 10/10 nowadays as i just finished re-watching it and it's honestly one of the best movies out there in general as it's most likely within my Top 30 or so movies ever out of the 1650+ total movies i have seen at this point. it's got solid emotion/feeling etc to it which not many movies have.

My Top 10 Westerns ever...

1.The Good The Bad & The Ugly (1966)
-.For A Few Dollars More (1965)
-.Open Range (2003)
4.Once Upon A Time In The West (1968)
5.Unforgiven (1992)

6.A Fistful of Dollars (1964)
-.The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976)

8.High Plains Drifter (1973)
9.True Grit (2010)
10.Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid (1969) (Newman/Redford carry it)

so my top 3 are pretty much tied and in some ways Open Range is better than the other two.

----------
My Vote History ... http://imdb.to/rb1gYH
----------

reply

[–] Freedom_of_Sin 15 years ago

Tombstone is way better than the Open Range. There is more action in Tombstone,cooler characters,better story and better directing. And Tombstone is a movie that I can watch all over again,Open Range didn't have that impact on me.Soundtrack sucks on both of the movies though.

reply

[–] m-slovak79 15 years ago

Tombstone is way better than the Open Range. There is more action in Tombstone,cooler characters,better story and better directing. And Tombstone is a movie that I can watch all over again,Open Range didn't have that impact on me.Soundtrack sucks on both of the movies though.

more action don't always mean a better film (action for the sake of action is pretty much always a bad thing. i am not saying that was the case with Tombstone but you get the idea ;) ). and i think 'Open Range' is a perfect example of a great western with not to much action. (a film that did really well in theaters this year but i felt was more or less just to show off the action/CGI (which was not bored (for the most part) but not really entertained either) was Transformers 2 (did around 800+ million dollars worldwide according to boxofficemojo's website) which was just a average film (i.e. 6/10 no higher for sure. the first film was clearly better) imho.

as far as the 'cooler characters', Tombstone vs Open Range... it mostly depends on how you view it. in the more 'cooler character' stuff dept, then yeah Tombstone wins. but to me Open Range feels MUCH MORE REAL which is why i think it's so great and it builds up the suspense near the end very well imho. i still get into it quite a bit at times even though i know what happens. now if that's not a great film, then i don't know what is ;). not many films in general can give me the 'feeling' i get from watching Open Range, especially later into the film just before what you inevitably know what's going to happen. Tombstone has none of this (suspense/realness to it) pretty much if you ask me. as you can sorta picture Costner/DuVall's characters as real people you might know and they did it so well where as Tombstone's, even though cool at times, seem more 'fantasy like'.

better directing on tombstone? , i think i am going to disagree... because i also feel that Open Range is well shot (especially in some scenes) as i consider it a near-masterpiece. tombstone don't come across as a masterpiece AT ALL to me (no offense) because it don't really have that 'art' type feel to it. (2 films (not Westerns though) i consider a masterpiece in the last 10 year or so are 'Road to Perdition' (2002) and 'Lord of War' (2005) as they got great direction/cinematography/music that fits the mood of the film well, especially Road to Perdition in the cinematography dept. because not only are they great entertaining films they have that ART side to them.)

p.s. i am not dissing 'Tombstone' as i liked it to but it's just not 'GREAT LEVEL' (i.e. 9/10 or higher) like Open Range is so that's why i feel fairly strongly it's just plain not as entertaining in my book as Open Range is. and i thought i would just put this in here.... i only gave roughly 30 films total higher than a 8/10 since 2000 to date. and 30 films (or so) over a 10 year period aint much so this atleast gives me more credibility vs some people on IMDB who hand out 9's and 10's semi-often.)

and to make it more clear... i am NOT insulting your opinion or meaning any form of disrespect to you (i just mention this since it seems like if you comment against some people's opinions on IMDB, they take it as a personal attack on them lol) . ;)

---
My Vote History ... http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=11026826
---

reply

[–] Emmet76 15 years ago

First off I just want to say that I love the western genre.

This one is a little to close to call. Although Open Range and Tombstone differ in it's style and approach, I say that both are equally entertaining, acted, and directed.

VIRTUAL TIE!

reply

[–] glpatton 14 years ago

Comparison is difficult. Both are based on historical fact and chronology, but one is a biography and the other is about a culture and lifestyle.

From a western genre point of view, Open Range is more realistic. Cowboys, even the Earp brothers, were seldom clean shaven or wearing clean clothes. Open Range recognizes this and uses that angle. Tombstone is too clean, too sanitized.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] rogcoley 14 years ago

"Open Range" is "Masterpiece Theater". "Tombstone" is MTV. I they they're both very good movies.Costner's head shot of the heavy is awesome. Russell telling Clanton's buddies he'll make a canoe out of Ike's head is classic. Almost everything Kilmer says is classic. "Open Range" has Duvall and he by his lonesome is classic (pun intended).

reply

[–] JoeJanuaryII 14 years ago

Seems like trying to compare Open Range to Tombstone is like trying to compare Sergio Leone westerns to John Ford's. I think both movies are very good. One thing I think people tend to forget or maybe they just weren't aware was how much historial accuracy Tombstone has. I'm not referring to the story, but compared to earlier films about the same subject it's quite close, but the background. Things like costumes and how pistols were worn. The interiors/ exteriors of the buildings like the saloons and the Bird Cage theatre. I am not suggesting Open Range is a huge departure from reality at all, I'm just defending the comment about Tombstone looking too sanitized.

reply

[–] darkavenger77 14 years ago

This thread will be 5 years old in about 4 months. :)

I've watched both & liked both. Kilmer's Holiday made Tombstone more enjoyable, especially the dialog with Ringo at & during the face off. As a detail observer, the gunfight in Open Range was pretty far-fetched (too many shots from a 6 shooter, shotgun blasts propelling a body several feet, Charlie missing a man-sized target but hitting the toe of a boot at about the same range) but overall still enjoyable.

Note to writers:
If you must kill off a character, make it the sunglasses dude on CSI Miami!

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TexasJack (12516) 7 years ago

Threads like this make me so glad Jim saved them from oblivion. Lots of great points here, and not much I can add. I think they are very different films and I enjoyed both pretty equally.

reply