Reviews by PvtCaboose91

THIS IS A REVIEW OF THE UNCUT VERSION

"All you gotta do is go pick up a kid down in New Jersey, and drive him down to D.C. How hard can that be, huh? Can't be that hard, now, can it? No, gotta be a senior detective. Think like a traffic jam, throwing a car at me's gonna stop me? Huh?"

I'll be frank: my disappointment with the watering down of Live Free or Die Hard was the equivalent of being depressed following a death in the family. The latest plague affecting contemporary action films is the acquisition of the PG-13 rating from the MPAA to secure as much money at the box office as possible. I was unreservedly devastated when I learnt that the long-awaited Die Hard sequel would have the proverbial hardcore violence and foul language diluted for the attainment of a PG-13 rating. Understandably, I was therefore extraordinarily excited when I learnt of the uncut version. I never thought I'd ever say this...but give me the theatrical version any day!

This uncut version merely includes about twenty obviously dubbed swear words and a few shots being touched up with terribly fake CGI blood. There are a few instances when the swear words were genuinely spoken on set, but too often were there occasions when it's painfully obvious Bruce was just thrown into a dubbing booth and asked to swear as frequently as he could. Had the filmmakers lensed a reasonable quantity of practical blood effects and alternate takes that included profanity, this film could be damn close to rivalling the first Die Hard. As it is, this uncut version is a colossal disappointment.

The editor could have at least just inserted all the genuine f-bombs, leaving out both the dubbed f-bombs and the CGI blood, as that would have been the best edit. Furthermore, while I watched behind-the-scenes footage I realised Bruce Willis did a number of alternate takes. These extra lines never made it into this uncut version when they'd fit perfectly. It's infuriating that this uncut version also removed two of the greatest lines from the theatrical cut. One of these lines was replaced with something inferior; the other line was replaced with nothing at all. And the theatrical version suffered from numerous obvious moments of shoddy ADR. It seemed to me these shots were probably originally laced with profanity and would be restored for this cut...but these moments all remain exactly the same. It looks like the editor spent 10 minutes putting together this hack-job. It occasionally looks like a dodgy TV edit!

This is a wasted opportunity...pure and simple. If Fox gave me the entire cast, a few sets and a camera crew for a few days, I could definitely produce a worthy R-rated version. Heck, if I was given access to all the raw footage and an expert editor to give me a helping hand, I'd also be able to produce a more worthy version. Fox deserves a letter bomb for this!
As an uncut version, this deserves a dismal 1.5/5 rating. It isn't a total disaster as it's great hearing John McClane using the term "motherfucker" again (when it was spoken on the set, that is). As a standalone pic it warrants a 3.5 star rating simply because the suspense and tension is still there, as is the awesome action and the clever scenarios. All in all, this is a missed opportunity.

"Fuck being a hero. You know what you get for being a hero? Nothin'. You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy. You get divorced. Your wife can't remember your last name. Your kids don't want to talk to you. You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me, kid, nobody wants to be that guy."

4.9/10

"Hot in here, or am I just scared to death?"

The first Die Hard instalment hit cinemas back in summer 1988. Produced by Joel Silver (whose name is also attached to the Lethal Weapon series and The Last Boy Scout, just to name a few), Die Hard set a new paradigm for action films. Gone was the indestructible hero capable of shooting his enemies with infallible precision while bullets magically skirted around him. In its place was an ordinary bloke who gets involuntarily entangled in circumstances that necessitate his heroics. Die Hard was also set in a claustrophobic location. This formula proved popular as it was soon applied to incalculable other action films including Air Force One, Passenger 57, Under Siege, and so on. Fox enjoyed the critical and commercial success of Die Hard, and within two years a sequel found its way into worldwide cinemas. Die Hard 2: Die Harder was an abundantly entertaining action film undermined by its utter implausibility and the exasperating affinity to the original film.

Die Hard: With a Vengeance is the third entry in the Die Hard series. There was a gap of five years between this third film and the earlier second film. These five years facilitated numerous things. For starters, the clichéd formula was modified and given a substantial spruce-up. The creative team realised yet another Die Hard facsimile would produce a mediocre sequel. So they adapted, and the plot was expanded into a buddy cop movie similar to the Lethal Weapon series.

John McTiernan (the man responsible for directing the original Die Hard) was brought back onboard as well. Naturally, Bruce Willis also agreed to reprise the role that made him a star. This third film also opted to eliminate much of the nostalgia aspect. The film's plot may have relevance to the preceding films, but returning characters are kept to a minimum. Die Hard: With a Vengeance is consequently a radically different addition to the Die Hard canon - but it's a good different and a change for the better. The claustrophobic setting is replaced with the far more expansive location of the city of New York.

In the opening scenes of the movie, a bomb is detonated in downtown New York City on a seemingly regular day. The mastermind behind this bombing identifies himself only as Simon (Irons). He contacts the police and informs them of his intentions to set off another bomb. He explains that another big bang will occur unless Detective John McClane (Willis) completes a number of set tasks. This instalment finds McClane on the booze, on suspension from the police force, and with his marriage in tatters. But he still dons his trademark vest, he's still handy with a gun and he's still wholly vulnerable. Anyway, McClane's first task takes him to Harlem where he meets Negro electrician Zeus Carver (Jackson). After Zeus becomes involuntarily intertwined in the state of affairs, he's forced to partner with McClane as Simon appoints them a number of tasks that take them around the city. The remainder of the plot is a series of contrivances to propel the terrible twosome of McClane and Zeus from one end of New York to the other (stopping in Canada of all places for the climax).

Die Hard: With a Vengeance is more destructive, more exhilarating and far more intense than the previous instalments. Yet it's still grounded in more reality than the second Die Hard entry. With a wider space for plot gestation, there are a wider range of possibilities for stunts and action sequences. Generic action film elements are added such as car chases, interesting arenas for shootouts, and general vehicle mayhem. Entire streets are blown up in sequences that stretch credulity almost past the point of breaking.

It should probably be noted that this is the most graphic Die Hard film in terms of language (about 90-10 f-bombs are dropped), violence, gory deaths (one guy is even sliced in half!) and even a brief sex scene. John McTiernan is of course at ease with the screenplay. He formerly helmed Predator and The Last Action Hero, as well as the first Die Hard film. He knows his way around an action scene, and he knows how to orchestrate this kind of action. Cinematographer Peter Menzies captures the action with consummate skill, making the action thrilling in its own right. As a result it's imbued with great energy. The definitive layers were added in post-production: John Wright's competent editing, Michael Kamen's impeccable music and the booming sound mix. Explosions and gunshots will give a speaker system one heck of a workout! And, of course, special effects are absolutely top-notch. As the digital age was slowly developing, there are a few CGI instances but they're not too noticeable. For the most part the special effects are quite seamless.

The original screenplay written by Jonathan Hensleigh wasn't meant to be a Die Hard film from the outset. When it was discovered that it could easily be moulded into the third Die Hard movie, re-writes commenced. Thankfully, there are plenty of wisecracks and amusing witticisms courtesy of John McClane's badass attitude. Bruce Willis plays the role with such ease that he improvised one-liners while the cameras rolled. The laughs are reasonably frequent and moderately droll. The searing chemistry of Willis and Samuel L. Jackson is off the chart. Their volatile attitudes generate very interesting scenarios. The film moves at an invigorating pace. It encompasses sufficient character development mixed with satisfying amounts of pure adrenaline-charged action: bombings, subway crashes, car chases and helicopter pursuits altogether creating the ultimate roller-coaster ride. While this description would usually fit any generic Van Damme or Steven Seagal action vehicle, Die Hard: With a Vengeance is cut above the pack. The intelligence of the first movie has made a welcome return. There are great unpredictable plot twists and clever set-ups. For an action movie it's fairly subversive.

Bruce Willis gives further weight to the argument that no-one can portray an action hero better than he can. The reason why we love John McClane so much is due to his attitude towards the situations he finds himself entangled in. Here's an interesting fact: the part of John McClane was originally offered to all the conventional 80s action stars. Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, Seagal - they all had a shot. The beauty of casting Bruce Willis is that it avoids the clichés. Had it been one of these abovementioned names, Die Hard would have been a clichéd action ride that fell dead in the water after the first instalment. But they stayed away from conventions, and Willis immersed himself into the role perfectly.

Samuel L. Jackson is the ideal companion for Willis' John McClane. Jackson is a scene stealer and he rises above the material. Bruce Willis was reportedly unhappy about sharing the spotlight with Jackson. It's also been reported that Willis disliked the focus shift from lone ranger to buddy flick. Only really die-hard Willis purists (pun truly and absolutely intended) side with the actor.
Jeremy Irons is evil and sadistic and above all memorable as the villain. When it comes to Die Hard, a memorable villain is essential. His crisp European accent and interesting screen persona elevates him above the one-dimensional villain present in Die Hard 2: Die Harder. Even so, Alan Rickman remains unthreatened.
This time the cast is accompanied by such names as Graham Greene, Colleen Camp, Larry Bryggman, Anthony Peck, Nick Wyman, Sam Phillips and Kevin Chamberlin. These precise performances keep us engaged from the remarkable first frame to the last.

Die Hard: With a Vengeance opened a short time following a bombing in Oklahoma City. Needless to say, both critics and audiences were still shaken up from the bombings, and the film (although scripted, filmed and edited before the bombings took place) was treading on sensitive territory. It would be justified to state that viewers were unfairly harsh while watching the film for two reasons. Firstly, the Oklahoma City bombings affected them greatly. Secondly, this was a radically different Die Hard movie, exercising a different formula and a new batch of characters. Personally, I think this third Die Hard film is damn close to equalling the original. It only falls short due to its mildly sluggish pace at times. From time to time, logic is also the film's enemy (falling about 20 feet onto metal without a broken bone? I don't think so). Nevertheless this is excellent entertainment and a worthy film to sit under the Die Hard banner. It provides the rush of adrenalin, the witty one-liners, the exhilarating action and the outlandish stunt-work. It's an endearing, thrilling ride guaranteed to keep an audience on the edge of their seat.

Followed in 2007 by Live Free or Die Hard

"Listen, we got a report of a guy coming through here with, uh, eight reindeer." [shoots terrorists] "Yeah, they said he was a jolly, old, fat guy with a snowy, white beard. Cute little red and white suit. I'm surprised you didn't see him."

9.1/10

"Just once, I'd like a regular, normal Christmas. Eggnog, a fuckin' Christmas tree, a little turkey. But, no. I gotta crawl around in this motherfuckin' tin can."

The original Die Hard is an action blockbuster that rapidly became both a critical and commercial success. The prevailing philosophy of Hollywood movie studios is fairly straightforward: if there's an unexpected hit on their back catalogue, they should capitalise on its success by making a sequel. Sequels are an intriguing breed. Very rarely are these follow-ups capable of replicating the quality of its predecessor. These sequels usually adhere to the same formula of its forerunner while additionally retaining a number of the original characters for heightened nostalgia.

Die Hard 2: Die Harder brings back the popular character of John McClane (Willis): his quip-laden, terse style made him an ideal vehicle to be transplanted into just about any situation as long as it included lots of guns, lots of bad guys, and lots of violence. It'd be fair to state that the screenwriters for Die Hard 2 relied on the original far too excessively. The same formula is exercised (as in the main character finding himself in a situation requiring his heroics) and bouts of déjà vu will occur frequently. For instance: it's Christmas Eve again, McClane is forced to crawl through ventilation shafts again (McClane even states his familiarity with the situation), McClane is out to save hostages, his wife is one of these hostages, and the police are as useless as tits on a bull. It may be looked upon as a blatant and unimaginative facsimile of the original Die Hard to some...but, despite the panning this sequel took, it works!

Die Hard 2 is a straightforward, action-packed, thrill-a-minute, violent, extremely entertaining action romp and an endearing return of everyone's favourite action hero. The seminal rule of sequels is that they should be bigger...and everything is bigger. Unfortunately, due to everything being so much bigger, the size of your suspension of disbelief must also be bigger to compensate for it all. Unfortunately, too, this allows slightly less time for characters to flourish and a plot to be developed. This is still an action film, though, so we watch it to see some action of which there is plenty. It may be over-the-top, but it's charming and utterly exhilarating.
To me, Christmas is never complete without at least one screening of Die Hard and Die Hard 2: Die Harder back-to-back. They are imbued with the Christmas spirit and provide a very enjoyable evening of entertainment.

Anyway, onto the plot: it's a snowy Christmas Eve, and it's exactly one year following the events that transpired at Nakatomi Plaza. John McClane is waiting at Dulles International Airport in Washington for a plane carrying his wife Holly (Bedelia). Also scheduled for arrival that evening is a drug baron known as General Ramon Esperanza (Nero). Esperanza is being extradited to the United States to face drug charges. As a large snowstorm rages outside, a group of renegade terrorists led by a certain Colonel Stuart (Sadler) attack the airport. They disable all the capabilities of the control tower. Now the terrorists are in command of the landing lights and communication with the planes, essentially holding hostage all the planes endlessly circling above, and all the passengers on-board. Unless the demands of these terrorists are met, the planes will run out of fuel and begin plummeting to the ground. The terrorists are loyal to Esperanza and wish to secure the freedom of the General. Needless to say, McClane steps into the equation with plans to disrupt the intentions of the terrorists. Mayhem is what ensues. Also toss in the arrogant, egotistical TV reporter Richard Thornberg (Atherton), a bumbling airport police chief (Franz), Reginald VelJohnson in a brief cameo, and plenty of baddies for McClane to kill.

Grant: "You're the wrong guy in the wrong place at the wrong time."
John McClane: "Story of my life."

Even at a running time of two hours, Die Hard 2: Die Harder is a pulse-pounding action film featuring Bruce Willis as Bruce Willis in spades. Finnish director Renny Harlin was handed the reigns for this sequel. Harlin has had his good days (Cliffhanger) and bad days (Deep Blue Sea). Thankfully, this is one of his better days.
The film must be lauded for its outstanding special effects. Reminiscent of the first film, all the major explosions are done for real. There's green screen and miniatures with very little computer imagery in between. For the planes, the effects are close to unbeatable. Once again, this film serves as a good reminder of the dying art now being replaced in this current digital age. Harlin appears right at home with the action scenes. The director once described this movie as being during his "squib period" when referring to the abundance of blood being spilt when characters are gunned down. At times, though, the action is more pedestrian than stylish. The film also establishes more of a "shoot now, ask questions later" attitude for John McClane. Instead of a warning before pulling the trigger, he disperses bullets without a second of hesitation. With all the action and an extra dollop of gore, director Harlin has taken a literal reading of the subtitle, Die Harder.

Screenwriters Doug Richardson and Steven E. de Souza adequately recapture a number of the strengths of the original film. John McClane is still John McClane. He's tired, pissed off, and is thrown into a situation he doesn't like. While a few of the film's aspects borrow heavily from its predecessor, McClane's wisecracks and witticisms are new material and they're as sharp as a knife. On top of this, his "why me?" attitude remains the same and he spends a lot of his time talking to himself. He's the John McClane we've come to know and love. If you watch a Die Hard sequel, you're obviously looking to see exhilarating action, big explosions, and John McClane doing what he does best. Die Hard 2: Die Harder ticks all these boxes. The villain is one-dimensional, at times it's utterly absurd, plot holes are easier to notice and it's undeniably overproduced - but the film is entertaining nonsense and you can't be too picky when it comes to the action genre. However, with some well-written characters and a moderate amount of character development, it rises above the usual standard of Van Damme or Chuck Norris rubbish. Although Die Hard 2 is occasionally just an unimaginative remake of the original film, there are still a handful of creative ideas incorporated into this sequel.

Bruce Willis supplies yet another masterful performance as John McClane. His sardonic wit is in tact, and he has great chemistry with the actors surrounding him. By the 1990s, Willis had become the essential embodiment of the realistic action hero. He was the John Wayne of the contemporary action genre. Like The Duke (i.e. John Wayne), Bruce Willis has his trademark characters. In fact the 1990s and beyond bore the releases of several Bruce Willis action vehicles. Out of this selection my personal favourites are The Last Boy Scout, Mercury Rising, Hostage and 16 Blocks. An honourable mention to Striking Distance as well. At heart, John McClane is a lone Western hero, much like the characters The Duke played during his golden years. Similar to John Wayne, Willis easily got stereotyped and very rarely stepped out of his comfort zone. But Willis knew what his strengths were, and he played to them.

Also returning from the original film is Bonnie Bedelia as McClane's wife. Bedelia plays the part wonderfully. She is also given the opportunity to deliver amusing wisecracks. William Sadler is very one-dimensional as the villain. This fact lies in both Sadler's performance and in the way the character is written. His proper motivations are never made clear, therefore he's never anything more than a typical action movie villain. He's not nearly as compelling, charismatic or interesting as Alan Rickman's performance in the first film. Rounding out the cast are William Atherton, Reginald VelJohnson, Franco Nero, John Amos, Dennis Franz, Fred Dalton Thompson, and even Robert Patrick who appears very briefly (Robert Patrick will probably be most widely known as the T-1000 from Terminator 2: Judgement Day).

All things considered, Die Hard 2: Die Harder is a solid entry to the Die Hard canon. John McClane is the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time once again, and we're all happier for it. Die Hard 2 isn't nearly of the quality of its predecessor, but it never tried to be. Occasionally one will have to accept McClane's superhuman powers and indestructibility, and the film is very derivative of its forerunner in addition to being preposterous and absurdly over-the-top - but hey, it's never boring. The realism of the first entry is sorely missed, yet there is a sufficient offering to keep any action fan happy. You'll be entertained, you'll root for the good guys, you'll love watching the bad guys get their just deserts, and you'll have the immortal words of John McClane in your heart - "Yippee-ki-yay Motherfucker!"

Followed by Die Hard: With A Vengeance.

"Oh man, I can't fucking believe this. Another basement, another elevator. How can the same shit happen to the same guy twice?"

7.8/10

"Welcome to the party, pal."

Die Hard is considered to be the seminal action movie of the 1980s. Produced in 1988, this is the archetypal blueprint for the contemporary action thriller. It has been decades since this crackling action flick first hit cinemas in summer 1988, yet in the 21st century its influence on the action genre is still overwhelming. Die Hard is the smart-mouthed, high-rise thriller which launched Bruce Willis as an action icon. To this day, the world's greatest action hero (in my opinion) is Willis' John McClane. Willis portraying the New York Cop was a career-defining turn: he mixed comical repartee, action heroics and a grubby white vest to astonishing effect. Die Hard also vastly reinvented the action film formula. It introduced a hero that bleeds when shot, panics when people he's trying to protect are endangered, and conveys uncertainties about his ability to survive. McClane is a vulnerable Everyman as opposed to an unstoppable machine. Instead of dispersing bullets non-stop and regularly raising the body count, this hero prefers to employ his brain more frequently as an alternative. McClane was the lone Western hero transposed to a setting subjugated by skyscrapers rather than rock formations.

On top of this, Die Hard proved that action films could be genuinely original and break new boundaries whilst still awarding a mainstream audience the entertaining action they desired. By contemporary standards, the action in the film superficially emerges as fairly tame. Most films of late, such as The Matrix, depict over-the-top martial arts in irritating slow motion. The fight scenes in Die Hard are far more cramped and sweaty; saturated with a higher level of realism and brutality. These fights depict the way real men would do battle: with hard-hitting punches, struggles and a constant inkling of vulnerability.

The plot is as simple as it is involving. As the film opens, it's Christmas Eve and we are introduced to Officer John McClane (Willis): he's a New York City cop disembarking from a plane to Los Angeles. McClane's business in LA is to visit his estranged wife Holly (Bedelia) who had moved there several months beforehand with their children. Holly is in attendance at a Christmas function hosted in a high-rise LA skyscraper owned by the successful Nakatomi Corporation. Unfortunately for John McClane, the Christmas party is abruptly interrupted when a group of terrorists led by Hans Gruber (Rickman) seize control of the building and hold the guests hostage. McClane is, however, fortunate enough to be in a separate room when the terrorists make their presence known, therefore able to slip away. This consequently inaugurates an excruciating few hours as McClane works to evade the terrorists while also working to conquer them from the inside.

The film embodies all the customary action movie stereotypes: the hero, the nefarious bad guys, the trademark black guy (VelJohnson), the self-absorbed yet incredibly stupid police chief (Gleason), the despondently brainless federal agents (Bush and Davi) and the ex-wife who's still in love with the hero. However, all is fine as Die Hard spawned the majority of these clichés.

For an action movie made in 1988, the special effects (which secured an Oscar nomination) are still utterly mind-blowing. These special effects are still as effective today as their digital equivalent. The high level of practicality in these special effects is extraordinary, and they supply a valuable reminder about the dying art that's being rapidly replaced by CGI technology.
Prior to John McTiernan helming this 1988 masterpiece, he was only recognised for Predator and Nomads. I immensely adore Predator, however McTiernan's supreme cinematic creation will forever be the classic action romp known as Die Hard. The sense of claustrophobia is overwhelming, and we feel more riveted as the tension steadily increases with each passing second. His demolition-heavy vision - astoundingly captured with cinematographer Jan de Bont's lens - guarantees that the film is pure awesome mayhem...ensuring that it's fun no matter how many times one has watched it.

Die Hard also never conforms to the mediocre quality of a pure action fest. That said, there's still a decent dosage of gun battles, explosions and violent shootings. Decades on, and the gunshot wounds are still hard-hitting. Kneecaps being shredded by bullets, glass jammed into bare feet, bloody executions and fierce close combat are among the highlights. Like I said before, the violence probably appears quite tame when compared to contemporary action films, but it's stylish and used realistically. Despite all this action and violence, much of the 130-minute running time is dedicated to establishing the story and developing the fantastic characters. The script is impeccable. There's a great assortment of enjoyable scenarios punctuated with smart and fascinating dialogue. Die Hard also has the advantage of being largely unpredictable. We expect the hero to prevail, but there's a lack of sentimentality towards the characters, hence lending a hint of uncertainty.

The sound effects (which also earned an Oscar nomination) are ear-shattering and realistic. There are booming gunshots, brutal punches and deafening explosions. It'd be difficult to top even by today's standards. The film editing cannot be faulted either. The work of editors John F. Link and Frank J. Urioste holds up under close scrutiny. The directing/editing collaboration is terrific, resulting in minimal continuity issues. The remarkable definitive touch was eventually applied during the post-production period: Michael Kamen's score. There is no distinct Die Hard theme, yet there are countless segments of exciting, pulse-pounding music exclusive to the series. Kamen's musical composition for the film is perfect by action film standards. The intensity gradually elevates thanks to the amazing music. The film's key action sequences are even better with the inclusion of Kamen's efforts. The work behind the scenes is simply terrific!

Director McTiernan also ensured that no faulty performances would slip under the radar. As a result, the entire cast is amazing. Bruce Willis as John McClane cannot be faulted. The smart screenwriting provides Willis with a host of wisecracks and one-liners that are legendary, memorable and quotable. Willis also displays great versatility as an emotional side is expressed towards the climax. As he doubts he will survive the situation, McClane breaks down and lends a hint of vulnerability. The same cannot be said for Stallone, Van Damme, Chuck Norris or any other 80s action genre luminary. Prior to Die Hard, Bruce Willis was primarily known only for starring in the television show Moonlighting and the Blake Edwards comedy Blind Date. For the initial theatrical Die Hard posters, Bruce Willis' unfamiliar likeness wasn't featured because it was feared that this could be a major turn-off for cinemagoers. In hindsight, naturally, there is no doubt that the perennially smirking Willis contributed mightily to the film's enormous success as he traded blows and quips with equal assurance.
John McClane is essentially a Western hero like John Wayne or Roy Rogers. This similarity is referenced on several occasions. When McClane provides an alias, he asks to be called Roy. Alan Rickman's Hans Gruber even talks to McClane at one stage, and asks: "Who are you? Just another American who saw too many movies as a child? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he's John Wayne? Rambo? Marshal Dillon?" To which McClane retorts with "I was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually". At the climax Gruber then says "Still the cowboy, Mr. McClane? Americans, all alike. Well this time John Wayne does not walk off into the sunset with Grace Kelly". "That's Gary Cooper, asshole" is McClane's response.

Alan Rickman surpasses perfection as the terrorist leader Hans Gruber. Die Hard already had the pleasure of featuring the greatest action hero of all time, but the film also boasts Rickman as the greatest action villain in cinematic history. Rickman's Hans Gruber is polite, witty and sinister. His character is well-written, and Rickman was the perfect man for the job.
But the screenwriter also develops a surplus of other characters as warm as toast. Reginald VelJohnson is highly likeable as the policeman inadvertently pulled into the situation. VelJohnson magnificently bounces off Willis' terrific dialogue. Although VelJohnson and Willis predominantly exchange dialogue via radio, their chemistry is solid.
Then there's Bonnie Bedelia as McClane's estranged wife. Bedelia develops a feisty character not afraid to make snappy remarks - even if a gun is pointed at her.
De'voreaux White contributes yet another terrific character. He provides comic relief and an easily likeable screen persona. I could keep going, but needless to say the supporting cast are devoid of flaws.

At the time of writing this review, Die Hard is two decades old. Even after those 20 years the film is a phenomenal action thrill ride of extraordinary proportions. It offers believable characters, staggering special effects, satisfyingly brutal action, as well as non-stop adventure and tension. Its success at the box office prompted studios to begin green-lighting a slew of knock-offs featuring other 80s action heroes: Die Hard on a ship (Under Siege with Steven Seagal), Die Hard in a sports stadium (Sudden Death with Jean-Claude Van Damme), Die Hard on a train (Under Siege II: Dark Territory with Seagal) and even Die Hard on a bloody big snowy mountain (Cliffhanger with Sylvester Stallone). All these younger siblings of this classic action film follow the same formula of the protagonist finding themself inadvertently entangled in a dangerous situation, and their daring-do is required. This is a testament to how brilliant, engrossing and influential this action masterpiece truly is. Furthermore, I've seen the film at least 60 times in the last few years (including a customary viewing on every Christmas Eve)...and I already want to watch it again. Films like these are simply too few and far between these days.

If you're a self-respecting action fan, Die Hard cannot be missed. If you enjoy watching smart, competent thrillers then this is an essential purchase. Or if you just like being entertained...Die Hard cannot be passed up. I'll be perfectly frank: Die Hard is damn close to being the zenith of filmic perfection. Even a five-star rating isn't sufficient. If this isn't the greatest action film of all time, then it's too close for words. This masterpiece ushered in a new era of action movies, bringing a human quality to the plethora of unbelievable situations in preceding incarnations whereby one man would take on an army himself.

"Yippee-ki-yay Motherfucker!"

Followed by three sequels, beginning with Die Hard 2: Die Harder.

"I wanted this to be professional, efficient, adult, cooperative. Not a lot to ask. Alas, your Mr. Takagi did not see it that way... so he won't be joining us for the rest of his life. We can go any way you want it. You can walk out of here or be carried out. But have no illusions. We are in charge. So, decide now, each of you. And please remember: we have left nothing to chance."

10/10

"I saw your face. It was the face of a depraved, murderous beast. Only two things ever meant anything to you: power and cruelty. You can't feel pity. You can't even feel guilt. You knew they were innocent, but you were crazy to see them hanged. And to make me watch it. I could've stopped you with a gun, just as any other animal can be stopped. But I couldn't do it because I'm a coward. Aren't you glad you made me go? Weren't you proud of me? How does it feel to have begot a weakling, Major? Does it make you afraid there may be some weakness in you, too? That other men might discover and whisper about?"

Director William A. Wellman's The Ox-Bow Incident, adapted from the novel by Walter Van Tilburg Clark, was so far ahead of its time that audiences were turned off upon its theatrical release. However critics of all stripes were smitten, and over the decades the film's reputation steadily grew. The film preceded the Gary Cooper/Grace Kelly Western classic High Noon by almost a decade. This aforementioned Gary Cooper Western is typically considered the benchmark of its genre; the first of a new brand of Westerns that was lean, incisive, and unflinching in its representation of the uglier facets of humanity. High Noon was also responsible for numerous John Wayne escapades, the Sergio Leone spaghetti Westerns, etc.

But The Ox-Bow Incident came first, and it shares the same psychological density and raw simplicity, not to mention a similarly concise running time as the later film. The Ox-Bow Incident was, in many ways, High Noon before the world was ready for High Noon. It's an astonishing tale delivering an uncompromising message about mob mentality. This is no mere museum piece or ancient artefact solely for cinema enthusiasts...it's a remarkably poignant, powerful and entertaining picture that more than holds its own all these decades later. This sombre, somewhat simplistically liberal Western is also one of the first films to condemn frontier machismo. This taut little film eschews Hollywood sensationalism to centre on America's violent core, which is still relevant even today.

As the movie opens, two itinerant ranch hands named Gil Carver (Fonda) and Art Croft (Morgan) ride into a small town in 1800s Nevada. Stopping off at the local saloon for a drink, the two are soon informed that the local ranchers have been plagued by cattle rustlers. A young cowboy soon enters the picture, spreading news that a popular rancher has been brutally gunned down and cattle stolen. The enraged townspeople, joined by a few drifters (including the reluctant Gil and Art), immediately congregate to form a posse to catch the perpetrators. The posse is nothing more than a lawless lynching mob, led by a surly deputy who abuses his power in the sheriff's absence. In the dead of night the mob stumble upon three men (Andrews, Quinn and Ford) embarking on a cattle drive. On the basis of flimsy, circumstantial evidence the mob assumes these three are their prey. A majority of the mob appear determined to see that justice is done on the spot, whereas only a few wish to see the case taken to court before any hangings occur. As it becomes apparent that blood-lust may win out over rationality, the tension mounts in this uncompromising study of mob violence.

The weight of having to make a life-and-death decision weighs on the soul of each man in the posse, and we're therefore compelled to share their burden. The Ox-Bow Incident builds to a shattering and admirably unconventional conclusion. This conclusion is unrelenting in its determination to be both realistic and faithful to the book. It postulates that each man should stand up, stand apart and be counted as a man of individual opinion, even if it means not following the will of the majority. The movie becomes a treatise on the dynamics of mob rule and vengeance for the sake of vengeance. For the film's final half it's utterly gripping and transfixing.

William A. Wellman directed the picture with stark realism that is as sharp as a knife from a script by Lamar Trotti which is beautifully brief with situations and words. Wellman blesses the film with tersely economic pacing and a tense atmosphere. At a brief 75 minutes, the film is brisk in delivering its message with only minor digressions into cheese territory, such as Carver's ex-girlfriend briefly entering the picture. This aforesaid sub-plot is planted but not adequately nurtured. It's slightly detrimental to the otherwise brisk pacing, unfortunately, and it's the most unnecessary scene in the film. Aside from that slight plot deviation, it remains quite on track. Taking its cue from its title, the film is succinct and brief, primarily concerning the one "incident" without wasting energy on superfluous characterisations or extraneous action. It's all for the best, and is all the more effective for it.

To cut costs (the film was made in the grim early days of WWII, thus budgets needed to be as small as possible) the movie was shot on sets. For the most part this technique works extraordinarily well, increasing the tone of claustrophobia. At other times, such as the aftermath of the incident, it feels a tad artificial and phoney.

The Ox-Bow Incident bears an unmistakable affinity to film noir, not only due to the moody shadowy photography as there's also a gallery of grotesques that inhabit this decidedly uncelebratory depiction of the frontier spirit. After a gloomy climax that refuses to let anyone off the hook, The Ox-Bow Incident concludes in a very non-Hollywood fashion. Gil and the wounded Art limp out of town, passing the same draggy dog that was visible when they initially rode in. William A. Wellman also adds a masterly wrinkle to the sentimental scene of Fonda reading a letter by obscuring Fonda's eyes with a hat brim. The director did this habitually when he wanted an audience to concentrate on a message as opposed to a personality. Wellman's direction also circumvents the typical Western clichés. He keeps the action enclosed in a small setting where most directors would broaden the horizons in favour of scope and scale. A subtle yet effective melancholy tune accompanies the visuals.

Leading the cast is recognised actor Henry Fonda who turns in a superlative performance. His lackadaisical persona melds interestingly with his character's ornery temperament to generate a moral ambiguity. This ambiguity clouds his character's allegiances in the "vengeance vs. justice" debate in mystery until the moment when he's strained to overtly choose sides. Fonda's Gil Carver is no solid, gallant, upright citizen. He's an errant cuss who gets himself entangled in a bar fight moments after arrival at the small town. Yet he's one of the few characters in the story who has a conscience and uses it. In a way, this is a peculiar foreboding of his role in the 1957 film 12 Angry Men.

Lamar Trotti's screenplay torments us with hints of mystery about the three men who stand accused; it is only through the heart-wringing performance of Dana Andrews, who admirably outshines his co-stars, that there's a definite sense of the trio's innocence. Andrews as the bewildered and helpless leader of the doomed trio exudes character and integrity, and does much to make the film an overpoweringly distressing tragedy. It's impossible not to feel for Andrews' character: heartbroken over the probability of his wife and young children being left to fend for themselves in a rough frontier if he is hanged.

An excellent complementary performance by Anthony Quinn as one of the suspected murderers is another highlight. Quinn's brash confidence and fearlessness as a Mexican outlaw (operating under an alias) undermines any faith we have in the trio's innocence. Francis Ford (who got his son John into the industry) is amazing as a disorientated old man unable to comprehend what's actually happening. Frank Conroy's performance of the demagogue (donning a Confederate officer's uniform) is authoritative and utterly stunning. Harry Davenport and Leigh Whipper are more emotionally affecting as champions of the right. Mary Beth Hughes was pulled in for one brief, ironic scene with Fonda which gives a justification for his mood. The rest of the cast can take bows for their small but impressive roles. All these actors have their moments to shine towards the climax when something tragic is revealed. There are emotive expressions of guilt in each man, effectively conveying the lightning bolt they've all be hit with. These precise performances, coupled with a brilliant, tightly-written script, keep our hearts and minds at constant war with one another.

There's something extraordinary about the way in which The Ox-Bow Incident places joint emphasis on its characters and storytelling, as opposed to the simple genre norms John Wayne films adhere to. This is an ugly study in mob violence, unrelieved by any human clemency save the vain reproach of a small minority and mild post-lynching remorse. In 75 minutes, the film exhibits most of the baser inadequacies of men - cruelty, blood-lust, ruffianism, pusillanimity and sordid conceit. It offers a catastrophic infringement of justice with little repercussion to sweeten the bitter draught. The Ox-Bow Incident is a top-tier Western as powerful, unsentimental and thought-provoking as it was decades ago. The film won't brighten your day...but for sheer stark realism it's hard to beat. The film is a quietly compelling argument against the human tendency towards irrational behaviour. This is a true landmark movie, one that delivers a worthwhile message: betray your conscience and it will haunt you forever.

"My dear Wife, Mr. Davies will tell you what's happening here tonight. He's a good man and has done everything he can for me. I suppose there are some other good men here, too, only they don't seem to realize what they're doing. They're the ones I feel sorry for. 'Cause it'll be over for me in a little while, but they'll have to go on remembering for the rest of their lives. A man just naturally can't take the law into his own hands and hang people without hurtin' everybody in the world, 'cause then he's just not breaking one law but all laws. Law is a lot more than words you put in a book, or judges or lawyers or sheriffs you hire to carry it out. It's everything people ever have found out about justice and what's right and wrong. It's the very conscience of humanity. There can't be any such thing as civilization unless people have a conscience, because if people touch God anywhere, where is it except through their conscience? And what is anybody's conscience except a little piece of the conscience of all men that ever lived? I guess that's all I've got to say except kiss the babies for me and God bless you. Your husband, Donald."

9.1/10

General Broulard: "Colonel Dax, you're a disappointment to me. You've spoiled the keenness of your mind by wallowing in sentimentality. You really did want to save those men, and you were not angling for Mireau's command. You are an idealist - and I pity you as I would the village idiot. We're fighting a war, Dax, a war that we've got to win. Those men didn't fight, so they were shot. You bring charges against General Mireau, so I insist that he answer them. Wherein have I done wrong?"
Colonel Dax: "Because you don't know the answer to that question, I pity you."

The bitter, numbing inanity of war and the exploitation of military ranks is made brazenly obvious in Stanley Kubrick's Paths of Glory. Vehemently an anti-war feature, this compelling masterpiece is a piercing attack on the military hierarchy, and a film that proved so controversial it was banned in France until 1975 and unreleased in Spain under Franco's rule.

This was Kubrick's fourth feature film (previously he'd directed 1953's Fear and Desire, 1955's Killer Kiss, and 1956's The Killing), but this blistering indictment of military politics made a name for the young director. What's so startling - and impressive - about Kubrick's storytelling in Paths of Glory is the cold, matter-of-fact manner in which the film unfolds. As the anti-war statement develops, all rage and dismay becomes targeted at war itself instead of individuals. The product is an unforgettable, enthralling landmark war movie; a significant lesson in humanity and social incompetence. Decades later the power and intensity of the film still resonates.

Paths of Glory explores the whole spectrum of misguided personalities at times of war. The setting is 1916, during the latter period of World War II. The French and German armies are dug into trenches in a hopeless stalemate. The impatient French General Staff pass an order to take a strategic German hill known as the "Anthill". This would be an obvious suicidal charge, yet the Generals are all-too-willing to risk the lives of their soldiers. A reluctant Colonel Dax (Douglas) is handed the assignment. Despite the knowledge that possibly 60% of his soldiers will die, he has little choice. As Dax leads his men, the chaos and mayhem results in the soldiers becoming pinned down in dangerous territory. The mission is an utter failure. The furious generals are embarrassed about the defeat, and cover up their abject blunder by selecting scapegoats: three soldiers from Dax's regiment who'll be court marshalled for cowardice under fire and made an example of.

Inspired by Humphrey Cobb's book as well as a string of real newspaper articles, Stanley Kubrick's 87-minute Paths of Glory briskly moves from a misconceived attack to the courtroom trial following it. The powerful Generals depicted in the film are merely corrupt, self-centred marionettes strung up to participate in a game of profligacy and opportunism at the most inappropriate of times. In the somewhat short but gripping attack sequence, Kubrick manages to portray the carnage and the horrors of war in a succession of remarkable images that set the stage for the events to follow. The film views war in terms of power. Those higher up in the ranks have the power to simply court marshal any random soldier. How can any man who isn't standing side-by-side with these men at the front lines possess the arrogance to accuse them of cowardice? As the story unfolds, this question is literally screaming at the viewer. The truth of the matter is on the screen for all to see, yet the Generals play the ignorance card. All we can hope is that sanity will somehow prevail. The underlying subtext concerns the abuse of power and the consequences of not standing against it.

Paths of Glory is astonishingly photographed. The captivating black and white imagery makes this one of the most memorable and authentic-looking anti-war films in the history of cinema. Even during the early days of his career, Stanley Kubrick's camera movements are graceful and masterful. The courtroom scene is particularly stunning and admirably unconventional. Whenever we expect Kirk Douglas to deliver an amazing, long, inspirational speech, the Generals counter these possibilities. At 87 minutes, the film is extremely concise and to the point. By circumventing the clichés and challenging an audience's expectation of a happy ending, the film is all the more devastating and compelling.

There's an assortment of top-notch performances from head to toe. Kirk Douglas is brilliant as Colonel Dax. He's the only high-ranking character in the film with a hint of veracity. As the Generals defy respect for human life with their orders, Dax stands up to them. Even when offered a promotion he bluntly refuses in a series of insults. Douglas is energetic and charismatic. It is his wisdom, sincerity and determination that make the intolerable injustice we witness so despicable. In Douglas' Dax we see all the qualities of a true hero without glorifying the character in any way.
George Macready is outstanding as the pompous, twisted, fictional French commander General Paul Mireau who possesses not an ounce of sympathy for his embattled troops. In the face of a shell-shocked soldier he offers nothing but blunt insults and orders to have the man removed from the regiment. His character also wilfully orders a suicide mission, and then in embarrassment he perversely finds a scapegoat to use in order to direct the blame away from him. Macready is authoritative and, frankly, quite terrifying.
There is only one single flaw in the film which unfortunately reverberates to other areas: lack of French accents. Soldiers are of different accents, such as American. It destroys one aspect of the film's authenticity. The fact that the soldiers are supposedly French is therefore only evident in the dialogue mentioning it.

Overall, Paths of Glory is a timeless and compelling masterpiece, and certainly one of Stanley Kubrick's best movies. Anti-war films of this calibre are few and far between in this current age of cinema. Unfortunately, this is a film seen by relatively few. It even missed out on a spot on the AFI Top 100! Classics are far too unfairly overlooked in this day and age. With a brilliant ensemble cast, enthralling cinematography and an effective script, Paths of Glory is an outstanding essay on the madness of conflict, both in war and in politics. The terse and remorseless final flourish is one of the most emotionally devastating endings in Kubrick's career. You won't soon forget it.

"I apologize... for not being entirely honest with you. I apologize for not revealing my true feelings. I apologize, sir, for not telling you sooner that you're a degenerate, sadistic old man. And you can go to hell before I apologize to you now or ever again!"

8.9/10

"Make no mistake, it's not revenge he's after. It's a reckonin'."

Tombstone is an invigorating, riveting, action-packed big-budget Hollywood Western focusing on the legendary gunfight at the O.K. Corral. Over the decades, numerous films have been produced about this aforementioned gunfight, such as My Darling Clementine, Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, and even 1994's Wyatt Earp with Kevin Costner and Dennis Quaid in the lead roles.

Tombstone is certainly the most violent and exciting retelling of the event. The script mixes moments of historical accuracy with some mythology, as well as a dash of fiction for good measure. Where other films on the subject matter limit their focus, Kevin Jarre's screenplay for Tombstone investigates the lead-up to the notorious gunfight in addition to the aftermath. There's greater depth and historical detail to the characters. As a matter of fact, the O.K. Corral shootout in this movie was filmed exactly as the court transcripts indicated. Jarre's script also contains unforgettable dialogue. On top of this, there isn't a single fault in the entire cast. Look at the actors we've been offered: Kurt Russell, Val Kilmer, Sam Elliott, Bill Paxton, Michael Biehn, Charlton Heston, Billy Bob Thornton, Thomas Haden Church, Frank Stallone and even narration by Robert Mitchum! (Mitchum starred in the Howard Hawks Western El Dorado, thus is no stranger to the genre) Granted, it's problematic keeping tabs on the characters and for the most part it's brazen overkill, yet there's a sufficient amount of star-power to keep you mesmerised for the film's full two-hour duration.

"Look at all the stars. You look up and you think, "God made all this and He remembered to make a little speck like me." It's kind of flattering, really."

Wyatt Earp (Russell) is a stalwart and brave lawman located in Dodge City, Kansas. Beside Wyatt are a trio of loyal men: best friend Doc Holliday (Kilmer), as well as Wyatt's brothers Virgil (Elliot) and Morgan (Paxton). The story commences around 1880: Wyatt and his Immortals (and their respective women) retire as lawmen and relocate to Tombstone, Arizona to live a "normal" life. They wish for peace and quiet...perhaps eventually run a saloon together and spend their twilight years as wealthy men. However, their plans are disrupted by the ubiquitous presence of a vicious gang known as the Cowboys. According to the narrator, the Cowboys are the earliest example of organised crime in America. How evil, I hear you ask? These boys gun down an entire wedding party in cold blood before helping themselves to all the food. The Cowboys gang pose a threat to the way of life in Tombstone as people are becoming increasingly afraid to leave their homes. It isn't long before Wyatt Earp and his loyal companions are back in the marshalling business.

Early into the production of Tombstone, the original director (Kevin Jarre, who also wrote the script) was fired from the project. While searching for a replacement, Kurt Russell stepped in and acted as an unofficial director to keep the cameras rolling. It has been reported that when George P. Cosmatos was hired as the new director, he simply kept everything together while Russell directed a majority of the picture.

If you're seeking a predominantly action-oriented Western, you cannot do better than Tombstone. The action sequences are flawlessly orchestrated and unreservedly enthralling. In the 50s and 60s, John Wayne and Gary Cooper Westerns were all the rage. These films were more dialogue than action. And when shootouts did erupt, people simply fell down in a cloud of smoke without sporting a wound (for the most part...there were a few exceptions). Enter Sergio Leone who created the Spaghetti Western genre. Again, more dialogue and adventure than action. It wasn't until Sam Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch that Westerns suddenly became more violent and action-packed. Tombstone disregards the complex narrative and frequent red herrings that so plagued and marred Westerns in past decades. The plot complexities are replaced with action, action and more action. There is a lot of dialogue and the characterisations are satisfying deep, but there's still room for lots of exhilarating action. At two hours the moderately thin story does seem a tad stretched out, in the end becoming nothing more than shootouts followed by more shootouts. I'm not complaining at all, but this fact makes the film slightly inferior to all the greatest cinematic Westerns that offer meatier stories.

"You die first, get it? Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before I make your head into a canoe, you understand me?"

Kurt Russell turns in an electric performance as the infamous Wyatt Earp. Debate has been sparked regarding the definitive cinematic embodiment of the lawman, so I'll allow you to draw your own conclusions. Russell delivers his outstanding dialogue with admirable conviction.
Val Kilmer is the undeniable star of the show. He's an absolute hoot as the lurid, foppish tuberculosis-ridden Doc Holliday. Kilmer is truly a scene stealer. He presents a sincerely sensitive portrait of a man with nothing to lose, whose last stake in life is preserving the dignity of his friendship with Wyatt. It's a flamboyant yet poignant performance, and it transforms an ostensible action film into a story of stirring comradeship as well. This could be Kilmer's finest moment on film. Why he never won any awards for this performance is simply beyond me.
Sam Elliott and Bill Paxton are credible and engaging as Wyatt's brothers. Both look the part with their genuine moustaches and commanding screen presence.
There are simply too many members of the supporting cast to mention. Suffice to say, this is how you're supposed to cast a movie! If Tombstone doesn't have the greatest cast of all time, it's certainly close to obtaining that honour.

In tradition with Hollywood Westerns, the period depiction in Tombstone is gorgeous. The town is fittingly atmospheric, with a number of utterly stunning vistas on display in the background. It's a beautifully photographed movie from top to bottom. This is an all-embracing staple in the Western genre. Director Cosmatos apparently claimed all the lightning in the film is real (the actual bolts, that is).
Costumes and props light up the frame to great effect. The guns and high-fitted holsters are also very accurate. The sound mix is another compelling aspect begging to be mentioned. The sound effects are definitely suitable. The music adds yet another indelible layer to the excellent film. It's almost criminal that this film never received an ounce of recognition from the Oscar committee.

How can I not recommend Tombstone? It's a great ride and there's a lot of fun to be had by all. It exhibits a rough-and-tumble vigour that's hard for a die-hard Western fan to resist. It's an excellent way to spend a few hours. Certainly, this is a beer-and-pizza event that makes effortless viewing on a boring afternoon. Witty dialogue, lots of shooting, lots of blood, lots of horse-riding...what's not to like? If you're looking for more bang for your buck, rent Tombstone. If you're looking for a film slightly deeper and more drama-oriented, rent 3:10 to Yuma or The Proposition or any John Wayne Western. The choice is yours.

Wyatt Earp's fifth cousin (the aptly named Wyatt Earp) makes an appearance as Billy Claiborne.

"I spent my whole life not knowing what I want out of it, just chasing my tail. Now for the first time I know exactly what I want and who... that's the damnable misery of it.

8.3/10

"You should have let 'em kill me, 'cause I'm gonna kill you. I'll catch up with ya. I don't know when, but I'll catch up. Every time you turn around, expect to see me, 'cause one time you'll turn around and I'll be there. I'm gonna kill ya, Matt."

Howard Hawks' Red River is fundamentally a Western appropriation of Mutiny on the Bounty. This superlative 1948 Western united director Hawks and star John Wayne for the first time (in the ensuing decades they collaborated on such films as Rio Bravo, El Dorado and Rio Lobo), and it's extensively considered the finest product of the Hawks/Wayne partnership.

Red River is a monumental, sweeping, and powerful masterpiece infused with top-notch performances, stunning cinematography and adventure on a grand scale. John "The Duke" Wayne turns in one of the greatest performances of his entire career. For a majority of his acting career, The Duke generally appeared on autopilot (he did star in over 100 Westerns). Red River is a rare exception...John Wayne is passionate and convincing, with an authoritative screen persona that's difficult to overlook. Director John Ford (who directed The Duke for numerous Westerns like Stagecoach, The Searchers and Rio Grande) reportedly saw Red River and said "I didn't know the big lug could act". This is a truly stand-out addition to the Western genre: it's a majestic, exquisite adventure that captures the grandeur, splendour and danger of the wild American West. It's a grand epic about earning respect, loyalty, love and money.

Similar to most cinematic Westerns, the plot is deceptively simple. Tom Dunson (Wayne) has turned the barren Texas land across the Red River into thriving cattle territory. The story begins years earlier as Tom acquires this land...shooting a few rivals in the process. Tom also meets a young teenage orphan named Matthew who was the only survivor of a wagon train massacre. Fast forward fourteen years, and Matthew (Clift, in his film debut) is returning from his military duties. Due to economic changes brought about by the Civil War, the bottom falls out of beef market in the Southern States. Unfortunately, this renders Tom's cattle quite worthless. But the self-made cattle baron owns about 9,000 cows and is utterly poor. With little option, he decides to organise a cattle drive to Missouri. This will be a long, dangerous trek. As Tom drives his herd and employees through the treacherous Chisholm Trail, he proves that he'll risk anything to reach his destination...even his own sanity. As the days pass by, Tom turns into more of a tyrant and the men begin to turn against him.

Red River is a glorious, leisurely-paced adaptation of the story The Chisholm Trail. Director Howard Hawks should be familiar to anyone who loves classic movies. He's a man capable of staging slick action and interesting dialogue. Hawks infuses this film with striking, expressive, exciting sequences of stampeding, rough weather, general cowboy-ing and Indian skirmishes. Red River is a Western of epic proportions. Thousands of cows and hundreds of horses were used for the film's production. The river crossing is particularly breathtaking. Horses, wagons, cowboys and cattle cross rushing waters in real time from every angle, conveying the danger of such a feat and therefore the valour of the American cowboy. The film even emulates the custom of employing title cards to distinguish the various chapters of the tale.

The splendid locations are marvellously photographed by Russell Harlan. There are rugged landscapes clouded by diminutive dust bowls kicked up by the cattle. There's also a 360° panorama comprised of three individual shots, and an atmospheric sequence illuminated by a swinging lantern. Red River depicts American West ideals - self-interest, eccentricity and capitalism - in action. Earning and spending money is virtually celebrated, from an Indian seeking maximum value to a stuttering young cowboy who aims to buy a gift for his wife.

Bordon Chase (author of the original story) and Charles Schnee's script (the uncredited Howard Hawks also made contributions) contains intriguing characters and underlying messages, moving at a careful pace as the story steadily unfolds. The script is hampered by a few problems, however. For a start the Indians are once again shown as people who endlessly slaughter for the sake of killing. The screenwriters also have a tendency to write speeches where conversations or physical behaviour would be more appropriate. Being a 40s movie, there's a desperate attempt to evade prostitution references when the men encounter a wagon of women who are obviously prostitutes. It derails the drama of the first scene shared by Montgomery Clift and Joanna Dru. There are occasional lapses into self-conscious artiness throughout the film as well. In addition to this, the drama builds to an atrocious ending that belies the emotion of the rest of the picture. The climax seems overly rushed and too "feel good". It also weakens the characters. On the plus side, production values are a wonder to behold. There are authentic costumes and props to replicate the period. Traditional wagons and horses are utilised as well. Then there's Dmitri Tiomkin's stirring score, adding another layer of pure heroism to the portrayal of the American cowboy.

A sterling John Wayne is at a high standard in this picture. As quoted before, The Duke's frequent collaborator John Ford has been quoted as saying he never knew the guy could act. This is definitely one of Wayne's absolute best performances. His fits the character of Dunson like a pair of gloves. Seeing John Wayne put in such a performance as a tortured man with two sides to him is mesmerising. His character also functions as a hero and a villain.
Montgomery Clift makes his stunning feature film debut in this film. Even with a screen legend beside him, Clift more than holds his own; tempering Wayne's swagger with a quieter nature of confidence and allegiance. He acts as a counterbalance to the screen presence of Wayne.
Walter Brennan offers one of his greatest screen performances to date.
John Ireland is the cocky, overeager young gunslinger who accompanies the crew for their cattle drive. The remaining supporting cast carry out their duties admirably.

Red River abides by the quintessential Western conventions: lots of cows, a bit of shooting, murderous Indians, extensive landscapes, big heroic men, lots of yahooing and little women. It's ultimately a tad clichéd, but as an early Western it was made when the clichés were still being established. Red River is reportedly an accurate portrayal about the life of a cattle herder during the post-Civil War days.

This film is a sheer delight that succeeds on multiple levels. Firstly: it's an examination of John Wayne's heroic likeness, here shown as unnecessarily authoritarian and stubborn as he comes into conflict with his more liberal surrogate son. Wayne's Tom Dunson progressively receives further criticism from the garrulous Groot (Brennan) for his habitual execution of deserters. Secondly: this performs as an additional variation on director Hawks' perennial trepidation with the theme of self-respect and professionalism. And finally, Red River is an intimate epic commemorating the passion of the institution of civilisation in the rough American West, with Matthew's common refusal to resort to the gun that is viewed as essential by the trigger-happy Wayne. If you're looking for an orientation into the John Wayne craze, this is a recommended title to do so (also recommended is the later Hawks/Wayne collaboration Rio Bravo).

"We brought nothing into this world and it's certain we can carry nothing out."

8.0/10

"You caused me a lot of embarrassment! You're the only man I shot, that I didn't kill."

John Wayne (commonly referred to more affectionately as The Duke) developed into a much-loved American icon during his sprawling career that spanned over multiple decades. The War Wagon is one of those forgotten gems. It wasn't as critically acclaimed as The Searchers or Rio Bravo, thus to some it's "just another John Wayne movie". Be that as it may, this is an extraordinarily fun and engaging little flick. The War Wagon performed as a Western precursor to the buddy action movies of the 80s and 90s, offering an adequate quantity of exciting action and amusing comic relief. This is an enjoyable revenge Western, featuring clichéd cowboys and standard gunslingers of all stripes playing out in an intriguing premise. Screenwriter Clair Huffaker also wrote the novel on which the film is based. Clair has a decidedly keen understanding on the expectancies of a John Wayne Western, as he once reportedly said: "John Wayne plays the strong, silent man, with a certain sense of humour and an inner feeling of justice."

The straightforward story is one that's been exploited in various other genres. A man is wrongfully accused, and this man seeks revenge on the wrongdoers. In this case, the protagonist is Taw Jackson (Wayne). Years ago Jackson was framed and sent to prison. After being released on parole, he returns to his old stomping ground to find his estate in possession of the man who framed him: powerful mine owner Frank Pierce (Cabot). You see, Pierce realised there was gold on Jackson's land and wanted to get his greedy hands on it. Due to Pierce's connections and power, he could successfully have Taw Jackson framed and Jackson could do nothing to prove his innocence. In order for Jackson to settle the score with Pierce, he becomes dead-set on capturing an iron-clad stagecoach transporting half a million dollars worth of gold (mined from his land, that is). He enlists the help of an old enemy of his known as Lomax (Douglas).

An extremely similar story was utilised for the 1969 heist film The Italian Job, be it purposeful or otherwise. The War Wagon is the Western version of the story, whereas The Italian Job is a modern appropriation. This is a testament to the clever little plot assembled for the film.

Despite never being widely acclaimed, The War Wagon holds its own all these years later. It's a good fun old-fashioned action/adventure ride created for providing Saturday afternoon entertainment at the movies. The cinematography looks utterly beautiful. In tradition with all the greatest American Westerns of the 50s and 60s, there are wonderful locations that have been captured suitably. It has been perceived that the message of this Western is to nourish the ideology of vigilante committees aiming to safeguard their rights and possessions. Clair Huffaker's screenplay is fairly adequate. As a straightforward, enjoyable romp it succeeds but by no means does it break new ground. The heroes are clichéd: depicted as being infinitely smarter than their opponents, and are capable of many amazing feats. Meanwhile the villains can't shoot straight and aren't smart enough to rival the heroes. There are also no surprises at all along the way. It plays out exactly how we expect it to. The conclusion is fairly predictable. Still, it's a thoroughly fun ride to take. It isn't the greatest Western of all time, nor is it one of John Wayne's best, but you could do a whole lot worse. In fact, modern Hollywood blockbuster fluff is inferior to this kind of exciting John Wayne material.

The interplay between John Wayne and Kirk Douglas is sardonic and sharp. It's the chemistry between these two leads that places this above the commonplace standard. Rumour has it that The Duke grew annoyed with Douglas during the production, and this would explain why there were no other features starring the two legends. That's a pity, because on-screen the two stars appear to work well together, providing a solid backbone for the rest of the characters to work off. There are several wonderful moments to be witnessed featuring Douglas and Wayne bouncing off each other. After they simultaneously out-draw two opponents, Douglas remarks "Mine hit the ground first". "Mine was taller" Wayne replies laconically.
John Wayne is at his usual standard here. Not his best performance to date, though. Same can be said for Kirk Douglas. He's appealing enough, but far from Oscar-worthy. Also in the cast are such names as Bruce Cabot, Keenan Wynn, Howard Keel, Robert Walker, Valora Nolan, and there's a brief appearance of Bruce Dern. A few years later Bruce Dern would feature in a John Wayne film entitled The Cowboys. Dern became one of the only actors in history to shoot a John Wayne character dead. Interestingly, Wayne kills Dern's character in The War Wagon.

If you're on the lookout for an enjoyable old-fashioned Western, this is the one for you. In tradition with censorship of the time, villains are dispatched without any blood. Plenty of blokes are gunned down alright, yet none sports an injury. Whilst being a fairly typical John Wayne vehicle, The War Wagon is loads of fun with Wayne and Douglas sharing a terrific on-screen camaraderie. There's plenty of horse-riding, lots of guns, a few girls, a dash of romance, and a lot of excitement. What's not to like? By no means is this the greatest Western of its decade, but it's engaging enough to hold your interest for 100 minutes.

6.9/10

"Watch yourself, sister! Everything in these woods'll either bite ya, stab ya or stick ya!"

John "The Duke" Wayne earned his first (and only) Oscar in 1970 for his performance as Rooster Cogburn in 1969's True Grit. Rooster Cogburn denotes the continuing adventures of the US Marshall whose name was used for the film's title. Although a sequel, Rooster Cogburn is almost entirely not connected to its predecessor. The only connection can be found in the few returning characters, namely the title character from which the title is derived from. Whilst True Grit was arguably John Wayne's finest performance committed to celluloid, it was the character he created that was the icon. It was therefore logical to bring Rooster Cogburn back to run riot in the Indian Territories once again, this time paired with the always delightful Katharine Hepburn. Rooster Cogburn may seem like little more than a mere star vehicle and an excuse to get the two acting legends together on screen, but the result is actually a moderately enjoyable Western romp. It's virtually a carbon copy of The African Queen with inarguable similarities, and the script is rather on the banal side...but it's at least entertaining.

In this sequel to True Grit, US Marshall Rooster Cogburn (Wayne) is up to his usual tricks: he's a hard drinker, a guiltless killer, and he still resides in the backroom of a shop with a Chinaman and a tabby cat known as General Sterling Price. Following his latest assignment during which he gunned down four men, he returns to Ford Smith and faces the wrath of Judge Parker (McIntire). The judge has had enough of Rooster's complete disregard for the law. Thus, Rooster is stripped of his status as a Marshall and is forced into retirement. Meanwhile in the Indian Territories, a band of outlaws ambush an army column and hijack a wagon of nitro-glycerine. It's theorised that this nitro could be employed to execute a gold robbery. When news of this reaches Ford Smith, Judge Parker naturally runs to Rooster Cogburn to beg for his services. If Cogburn completes the assignment he'll be reinstated as a Federal Marshall. The money becomes too much temptation for Rooster to handle, so he agrees. During his travels he meets Miss Eula Goodnight (Hepburn) who wants revenge for the death of her father. Also joining the team is an Indian boy named Wolf (Romancito).

Just about everything in Rooster Cogburn is superfluous to the interplay of the lead actors. The combination of Katharine Hepburn and John Wayne can only be described as irresistible. Aside from the actors, as well as a good smattering of action and wonderful visuals, not much more can be said in the film's favour. At times the dialogue is cheesy, the romantic angle of the story is excruciating (not to mention predictable) and the plot is a dud. The bad guys are just soccer players struggling for possession of the ball. With the main characters gaining control of the main plot device early into the game, there's a distinct lack of momentum.

Everything is blatantly clichéd: enemies can't shoot straight while the heroes (two old-timers and a young, inexperienced lad) outfight and outwit the hapless outlaws at every turn. There's never a sense that the good guys will lose. On the eve of battle (no matter how unprepared the heroes are) we know the outlaws will lose. No surprises, no subversiveness...it's formulaic and safe the whole way through.

Rooster Cogburn bares countless similarities to The African Queen. Structure and characters are glaringly similar, for instance. This is just The African Queen transplanted into a Western world dominated by rocks, rivers, guns and beautiful open vistas. On that note, a deficiency of originality is detrimental. If you've seen The African Queen (like I have) you'll suffer constant bouts of déjà vu. Even with such powerful stars and exciting action sequences, it isn't good enough.

John Wayne earned an Academy Award for his performance as Rooster Cogburn in True Grit. He immersed himself into the role despite a body ravaged by cancer and numerous health problems. His commitment to acting is inspirational and amazing. Six years on, and he's still doing what he does best. However Wayne's performance seems more laid-back and less rugged. Perhaps his health conditions were the cause of this. Whatever the case, I was underwhelmed...especially since he was reprising the role that marked his finest moments on film. He might've just been too old to carry a movie. During one particular scene while he's loading a raft, The Duke is unmistakably gasping for air. He's still interesting and still looks good in action, but he was passed his prime at this point.
It's priceless watching The Duke's interaction with Katharine Hepburn (who also starred in The African Queen, which is further evidence that the filmmakers wanted to replicate its success) as the two share looks and banter. There's easy charm and chemistry between the leads. The rest of the cast are outshined by the two authoritative stars that light up the frame. Thoroughly ridiculous, though, is the notion of 69-year-old Jon Lormer as 68-year-old Katharine Hepburn's father.

Overall, Rooster Cogburn is a fun and reasonably entertaining Western and one of the final films in the John Wayne canon. It's a moderately disappointing film with such a banal script lacking in originality, but there's enough action and priceless star moments to keep anyone entertained. There are a few witty lines and amusing moments; however they're in disappointingly short supply. As a sequel to True Grit to continue the adventures of Rooster Cogburn, the film could've done with a script rewrite. It isn't a particularly great Western, but in the end it doesn't matter. This is a star vehicle in every sense of the word. The script doesn't do the leads any favours, but Wayne and Hepburn make the most of their scenes. The plot and script are straightforward and nothing groundbreaking, yet there's a good dosage of action and a fairly satisfying offering of beautiful scenery.

5.8/10