Author Topic: In defense of Quick an the Dead (Read 13440 times)

Leo Tanner · « **on:** January 14, 2009, 08:41:46 PM »

Go ahead an throw yer tamaters now.

As most western fans have found, whenever a holiday or birthday comes around, folks'll pick anything "western" off the shelf ta give ya. They don't know no better, all the same ta them. This Christmas I was given a combo pack of Silverado and Quick and the Dead. It's one of the most widely panned movies in here, but having not watched it for quite a while a gave it play just to pass time.

The plot is silly, but credit needs ta be givin ta the technical advisor. How many westerns have you seen in which they actually show someone load a cap and ball revolver, right down ta applying the grease. A Le Mat no less. The Navy conversion given to Cort had the correct loading gate and ejector on it. When the character needs a bullet, he calls out for .38 long Colt specifically.
The gunfight between the Lady and the child molester shows them running towards each other while firing and missing for the most part. Seems more realistic than most other Hollywood gunfights.
I dunno, I just can’t hate the movie no matter how hard I try.

Will Ketchum · « **Reply #1 on:** January 14, 2009, 09:23:07 PM »

I agree Leo. The plot is terrible but the clothing and hardware is great. I really like the suits that Gene Hackman wears throughout the movie. Now I "like" Sharon Stone's outfit but it isn't appropriate dress for a Victorian woman. The dumbest think is where you can see light through a torso bullet hole

Oh well it's just a movie.

Will Ketchum

Marshal Will Wingam · « **Reply #2 on:** January 14, 2009, 10:26:47 PM »

I also enjoy the movie, too. And for the same reasons. Will, you're right about the bulet hole. I feel that's the dumbest thing in the whole movie. Well, he was kind of a two-dimensional character anyway.

Advertising · « **Reply #3 on:** **Today** at 09:42:04 PM »

Deadeye Don · « **Reply #3 on:** January 15, 2009, 06:01:07 AM »

I liked the 38 long colt call out also, but did you happen to notice just how big that "38 long colt" was? It actually looked more like a 45 colt to me but it might just have been "camera angles". My 38 colt ammo looks about half the size of that one in the movie. I still liked the movie though.

Major 2 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 15, 2009, 06:56:33 AM »

"...The Navy conversion given to Cort had the correct loading gate and ejector on it. "

it is an orginial

I have photo's of it on my Home "puter"

The Lamat was Pietta ...and the SAA's were Cimarrons
including the nickeled ones .....

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #5 on:** January 15, 2009, 10:58:59 AM »

You got a good set of eyes Major

Deadeye Dick · « **Reply #6 on:** January 15, 2009, 12:40:18 PM »

Leo,
I think the Major had something to do with the prop's since he is in that business.

Major 2 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 15, 2009, 01:06:43 PM »

Yes sir ...Guilty

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #8 on:** January 15, 2009, 01:13:39 PM »

Had a feelin bout that, but figgured I'd give em the benefit

It's nice haven someone "in the business" around--lot's of insight.

Willie Dixon · « **Reply #9 on:** January 18, 2009, 08:25:22 AM »

Guilty myself too!
and I gotta say, the whole reason why I became a SCORRS member is because back in 2003 I saw this "guilty pleasure" and fell in love with the Remington with silver grips... hmmmhmmm. I just loved how it was different, not a Colt and it did look slicker. Major, if you had any part in that, or know the people who made that movie, tell them thanks. Thanks for letting people actually see there are other pistols besides the Colt.

Daniel Nighteyes · « **Reply #10 on:** January 25, 2009, 09:35:54 AM »

I agree in both directions -- great cast, sets, wardrobe (with that single exception),and firearms; poor premise and plot.

I liked the REAL The Quick And The Dead much better -- the 1987 movie based on the Louis L'Amor novel of the same name. It starred Sam Elliot, Tom Conti and Kate Capshaw. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093811/

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #11 on:** January 25, 2009, 12:49:27 PM »

I've been looking for that one, thanks for the link.

Deadeye Don · « **Reply #12 on:** January 26, 2009, 07:05:04 AM »

Quote from: Daniel Nighteyes on January 25, 2009, 09:35:54 AM

I agree in both directions -- great cast, sets, wardrobe (with that single exception),and firearms; poor premise and plot.

I liked the REAL The Quick And The Dead much better -- the 1987 movie based on the Louis L'Amor novel of the same name. It starred Sam Elliot, Tom Conti and Kate Capshaw. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093811/

The Sam Elliott and ummmm Kate Capshaw

movie was really good.

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #13 on:** January 31, 2009, 12:36:28 PM »

Finally saw the Sam Elliot one last night. To be honest I was hoping his character would get shot at the end, he bothered me. The husband/father character was IMO the REAL man. And of course Miss Capshaw was a treat as usual.

Daniel Nighteyes · « **Reply #14 on:** January 31, 2009, 02:55:31 PM »

Quote from: Leo Tanner on January 31, 2009, 12:36:28 PM

Finally saw the Sam Elliot one last night. To be honest I was hoping his character would get shot at the end, he bothered me. The husband/father character was IMO the REAL man. And of course Miss Capshaw was a treat as usual.

I understand how one might see Con Vallian (Elliott) that way. Do you recall that he was raised by his mother, who happened to be Blackfoot?

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2009, 03:44:58 PM »

Quote from: Daniel Nighteyes on January 31, 2009, 02:55:31 PM

I understand how one might see Con Vallian (Elliott) that way. Do you recall that he was raised by his mother, who happened to be Blackfoot?

Yes, but I doubt that had any bearing on his letcherous and disrepectful behavior. That's the part of his character that jabbed at my nerves. It would have been different if the husband had been a coward or a wimp. Even the boy saw through it to an extent.

Daniel Nighteyes · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2009, 08:28:19 PM »

Quote from: Leo Tanner on January 31, 2009, 03:44:58 PM

Yes, but I doubt that had any bearing on his letcherous and disrepectful behavior. That's the part of his character that jabbed at my nerves. It would have been different if the husband had been a coward or a wimp. Even the boy saw through it to an extent.

It does have a bearing, Leo.

1. The definition of "disrespectful" is culturally specific. I suspect you may be applying Victorian and/or Western European values, morals, etc to a culture where they're unknown.

2. "Susanna McKaskel" (Capshaw) was undeniably attracted to Con Vallian (Elliott), and he to her. Once he figured out she considered herself as Duncan McKaskel's "woman", he backed off. Entirely consistent with many Native American cultures, where the role of women is quite different than in Western European cultures.

But hey, let's not quibble.

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2009, 08:49:12 PM »

No quibble here. However McCaskel himself told him to stop. Vallian didn't really take a cue until the boy told him to. A child. And though he was raised by his mother, he obviously had plenty of experiance with western/european culture, that is clear from the beginning.
Again, not quibbling, just spirited

Daniel Nighteyes · « **Reply #18 on:** February 01, 2009, 10:34:12 AM »

Quote from: Leo Tanner on January 31, 2009, 08:49:12 PM

Again, not quibbling, just spirited

Agreed. Ain't it grand?

Leo Tanner · « **Reply #19 on:** February 01, 2009, 12:03:04 PM »

Quote from: Daniel Nighteyes on February 01, 2009, 10:34:12 AM

Agreed. Ain't it grand?

Well I thought more on it last night and had ta watch it again. I enjoyed it much more the second time around being in a different frame of mind. I still really felt for McCaskel but understood Vallian better. Glad he didn't die

News:

Author Topic: In defense of Quick an the Dead (Read 13440 times)

Advertising