Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Apr 16, 2019 - 2:29 PM   
 By:   DOGBELLE   (Member)

good read

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/the-searchers-john-ford-john-wayne-mediocre-western/

 
 Posted:   Apr 16, 2019 - 3:11 PM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

"Medioce?"
Hmmmm not so sure
But
It is vastly overrated.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 16, 2019 - 3:27 PM   
 By:   Rameau   (Member)

"As Ethan delivers Debbie “home” (not really; all he has done is brought her to the nearest white people), he remains outside the doorway, pauses, then turns and walks away alone."

I don't quite get that, it would make sense if she had a home, but it's been burned down & all her family killed.

The director Lindsay Anderson was a huge John Ford fan & made a brilliant two part documentary about him (BBC I think), & he didn't rate The Searchers at all, he thought My Darling Clementine was a much better film. I really like it & think it's a great fifties western, but I can't watch the Blu-ray, as the colours look so weird, so as far as I'm concerned it's like a lost film.

Maybe Warner don't rate it that much either.

 
 Posted:   Apr 16, 2019 - 5:32 PM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

CLEMENTINE is better imo.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 8:14 AM   
 By:   eriknelson   (Member)

I would have taken this review more seriously if it wasn't a political screed.

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 8:38 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

I love it when sixty-three-year-old films can trigger today's oversensitive, tender-nippled folk. Is there one unsore areola among the millions of Boomers and their younger but equally-hideous reflection, the Milennials?

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 9:36 AM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

I would have taken this review more seriously if it wasn't a political screed.

You actually clicked on?
Ben

Ps I never click that's links. The URL tells all we need to know

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 9:38 AM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

I love it when sixty-three-year-old films can trigger today's oversensitive, tender-nippled folk. Is there one unsore areola among the millions of Boomers and their younger but equally-hideous reflection, the Milennials?

" Glad to see your absence hasn't dulled your sharp mental edge"

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 9:40 AM   
 By:   eriknelson   (Member)

I would have taken this review more seriously if it wasn't a political screed.

You actually clicked on?


Yes. The review didn't need passages like this:

"The acclaim comes from obsessives who have seen the movie so many times that they see things that simply aren’t there, often motivated by a leftist loathing of American mythology that, to put it mildly, Ford and Wayne did not share. A conventional midcentury Western somehow became the Left’s favorite cowboys-and-Indians allegory, a metaphor for Vietnam, McCarthyism, and the civil-rights era."

As Alfred Hitchcock often said, "It's only a movie."

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 10:25 AM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

I would have taken this review more seriously if it wasn't a political screed.

You actually clicked on?


Yes. The review didn't need passages like this:

"The acclaim comes from obsessives who have seen the movie so many times that they see things that simply aren’t there, often motivated by a leftist loathing of American mythology that, to put it mildly, Ford and Wayne did not share. A conventional midcentury Western somehow became the Left’s favorite cowboys-and-Indians allegory, a metaphor for Vietnam, McCarthyism, and the civil-rights era."

As Alfred Hitchcock often said, "It's only a movie."


See? I'm right.not to click these idiotic threads.
Btw the revival of interest was mainly driven by the 70s generation of filmmakers who were also film buffs.
Very few of them were overtly political

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 2:26 PM   
 By:   MikeP   (Member)

Meh, the reviewer is one of those "listen to me, I'm much smarter than you" types.

Is the movie dated ? Yep, it does have some of that now-unfortunate vintage Hollywood melodrama. But it's still a darn good movie. I first saw it around the age of 18, Mom was a huge John Wayne fan, so we watched it one night. And yeah, it's a good movie.

That douchebag can go fly a kite. roll eyes

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 7:00 PM   
 By:   Mr. Marshall   (Member)

I would have taken this review more seriously if it wasn't a political screed.

You actually clicked on?


Yes. The review didn't need passages like this:

"The acclaim comes from obsessives who have seen the movie so many times that they see things that simply aren’t there, often motivated by a leftist loathing of American mythology that, to put it mildly, Ford and Wayne did not share. A conventional midcentury Western somehow became the Left’s favorite cowboys-and-Indians allegory, a metaphor for Vietnam, McCarthyism, and the civil-rights era."
- Jim Phelps

e."


Now we know what Phelpsie was doing on vacation.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 10:50 PM   
 By:   arthur grant   (Member)



The idea of taking on a highly praised cinematic work is, I feel, a valid one (I've tried it) if the writer is up to the formidable task: willing to be fair and considerate of the given film's strengths, addressing weaknesses without belaboring them, being repetitive, or nitpicky. The "critic" here makes too many false assumptions (inferred by his oxymoronic heading) on why others appreciate this film including some absurd politically based generalities. Perhaps that is because he feels the need to bolster his own weak and wrong-headed findings. I'd love to debate him regarding what I see as this film's real merits explained in my review here:

http://thecinemacafe.com/the-cinema-treasure-hunter/2014/4/14/opening-up-a-treasure-the-searchers

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2019 - 11:55 PM   
 By:   Mark   (Member)



An interesting piece. Thanks for posting it. I did not find it to be a political screed -instead it is a critique of the way the film has been politicised by the left, who have read things into it that are not there.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 20, 2019 - 5:35 AM   
 By:   Rozsaphile   (Member)

The piece a manifesto. Yes, it's a political screed but it has a legitimate purpose. It's akin to the kind of exaggerated claims that people like Godard and Sarris used to make -- e.g., that Lola Montes or that Nick Ray war flick with Richard Burton was the greatest movie of all time. Sometimes these saboteurs do manage to rebalance public taste. Welles and Hitchcock, for example, owe their present high reputations partly to the revisionism of the Cahiers crowd. I've struggled with The Searchers myself. Certainly an important film but perhaps just a tad overrated today? Vive la différance!

 
 Posted:   Apr 20, 2019 - 6:27 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

From the article:

"Of Ethan, Crowther says his “passion for revenge is magnificently uncontaminated by caution or sentiment.” So: the opposite of complicated."

No sentiment? Not complicated? The scene at film's start when Ethan and his sister-in-law, Martha, share a brief but deeply affectionate moment. Watch how she lovingly folds his coat and observe Ethan's tender, even awkward movements around her--they love one another deeply, but things turned out differently, as she married Ethan's brother. I love how Ward Bond is looking off into the distance while we full well know that he, Bond, is aware of their feelings for one another. Bond gives them as much privacy as those circumstances will allow.

Another moving scene is Ethan frantically searching the burning remnants of the house looking for Martha--he doesn't call for his brother, does he?

With those scenes in mind it is completely obvious why Ethan doesn't kill Debbie: she's the only family he's got AND she is the last remnant of the woman he loved but could never have.

There I go again: seeing things that just aren't there. wink

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 20, 2019 - 8:19 AM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

https://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=117957

The above thread was about the analysis of The Big Country. A book written about The Big Country claimed that Wyler was a pacifist and that the movie was a call for neutrality and pacifism. Peck's character embodied that value. (That was the author's point of view of the movie.)

Seems like the writer in this article about The Searchers read a lot into this movie. It would be interesting to see what the late director actually thought his movie was advocating or trying to show its audiences.

 
 Posted:   Apr 20, 2019 - 9:18 AM   
 By:   Jim Phelps   (Member)

It would be interesting to see what the late director actually thought his movie was advocating or trying to show its audiences.

You've obviously never watched Peter Bogdanovich's John Ford interviews; no one ever got anything out of John Ford, and even now with a Ouija Board, you STILL won't.

 
 Posted:   Apr 21, 2019 - 12:43 PM   
 By:   Dana Wilcox   (Member)

Highly recommended book by Glenn Frankel explains why the film was like it was (John Wayne's character in particular, and the sociocultural view of the times as regards white women held hostage by Indians and then re-integrated into white society), and also provides a fascinating making-of-the-movie and some intriguing glimpses into the peculiarities of John Ford:

https://www.amazon.com/Searchers-Making-American-Legend/dp/1608191052/ref=sr_1_1?crid=24MD2SZCWVP17&keywords=the+searchers+the+making+of+an+american+legend&qid=1555875051&s=books&sprefix=The+Searchers%2Caps%2C180&sr=1-1-catcorr

The author's book about HIGH NOON is also tremendous, and both should be on the bookshelf of every western film buff.

https://www.amazon.com/High-Noon-Hollywood-Blacklist-American/dp/1620409488/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2LBCNB12MX3P2&keywords=high+noon+frankel&qid=1555875747&s=books&sprefix=High+Noon%2Cstripbooks%2C173&sr=1-1-catcorr

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2019 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.