Appaloosa
Appaloosa (2008)
★ / ★★★★
Western is my least favorite genre so I’m probably not the best person to listen to when it comes to reviewing a western film. I’m most familiar with modern westerns like “Brokeback Mountain,” “No Country for Old Men,” and “There Will Be Blood.” However, I know how to ascertain and elucidate why I like or dislike a movie. “Appaloosa” did not work for me for two main reasons: it lacked focus to be thoroughly engaging and it did not have enough material to tell an insightful story. While Ed Harris (who also wrote and directed the film) and Viggo Mortensen did a good job in their respective roles, I felt like their relationship wasn’t explored enough. Were they merely friends or are they more like brothers? Although the tone of the film is masculine, most great westerns that I’ve seen leave room for softness and vulnerability (or otherwise, “feminine” qualities). If walls are consistently up, how are the audiences supposed to identify with and understand the characters? Renée Zellweger didn’t do a bad job but she sounds like she’s from a completely different film. The story focused on her a bit too much while sacrificing potentially rousing action scenes. However, I did like the occasional comedic moments because it shows that the actors and filmmakers are not afraid to have fun with the project. Still, it doesn’t change the fact that I did not like this film because I caught myself zoning out from time to time. Whatever happened to featuring vast landscapes and the poetry of brotherhood? Is Harris simply trying to offer something different to the genre or did he clearly miss the point? I have patience when it comes to certain pictures when most people do not. I’m guessing that a casual moviegoer, especially a person who is not partial to western films, will be bored out of his or her mind.
Western isn’t my cup of tea either, but ’3:10 to Yuma’, ‘Unforgiven’, ‘Brokeback’, ‘All The Pretty Horses’ (not purely western, I know), ‘The Hi-Lo Country’, ‘There Will Be Blood’ and even ‘The Quick and the Dead’ all had their moments (‘Brokeback’, off course, had plenty).
Oooh, it’s strange that you mentioned “Unforgiven” because four days in a row (since last Friday), a friend or a family member mentioned it to me or asked if I’ve seen it. I think this is a sign that I should watch it… =P
I haven’t seen it in about five years, but I remember I felt it had a sort of quiet grace to it, lacking the overly dour heavy-handedness (too) often characteristic of Eastwood’s movies as a director.