derrierloisirs.fr
» » Western films: A complete guide

Download Western films: A complete guide ePub

by Brian Garfield

Download Western films: A complete guide ePub
  • ISBN 0892562188
  • ISBN13 978-0892562183
  • Language English
  • Author Brian Garfield
  • Publisher Rawson Associates; 1st edition (1982)
  • Pages 386
  • Formats lrf azw mobi txt
  • Category Humour
  • Subcategory Movies
  • Size ePub 1282 kb
  • Size Fb2 1459 kb
  • Rating: 4.9
  • Votes: 571

From the Wild West Show the silent film developed a style that soon became an American art form. This guide to Western films from Abilene Town to Zanny Bride lists credits and ranks the great figuresâ?”John Ford, Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, Howard Hawksâ?”who shaped this influential genre.

Brian Garfield recalls: "The 1987 film was based on the real case of John List, who .

Brian Garfield recalls: "The 1987 film was based on the real case of John List, who murdered his family and disappeared

Brian Garfield's "Western Films: A Complete Guide" takes you on a tour of Western films up till the time the book was originally published, 1980.

Brian Garfield's "Western Films: A Complete Guide" takes you on a tour of Western films up till the time the book was originally published, 1980. At nearly 400 pages it covers pretty much everything you'd want to know about Western films - the Western myth, the genre, the directors, the writers, the crews, the actors and the films up till 1980. These topics are covered in the first 95 pages and Garfield's knowledge and writing style makes the material completely absorbing, even if you don't have much interest in the particular topic (.

Western films: A complete guide. ISBN 10: 0892562188, ISBN 13: 9780892562183.

Shipping & Handling by region. Western films: A complete guide.

Western films: A complete guide ) .

Western films: A complete guide ) From the Wild West Show the silent film developed a style that soon became an American art form. 62188/?tag prabook0b-20. Western films: A complete guide by Brian Garfield (1982-05-03). X0QJQ/?tag prabook0b-20. Published in 1982, this guide to Western films provides, in one volume, a critical encyclopedia of all "A" Western features shown in the United States since the advent of talkies to 1982.

Western Films: A Complete Guide (1982). The Meinertzhagen Mystery: The Life and Legend of a Colossal Fraud (2008).

Brian Garfield, a prolific suspense author best known for his novel Death Wish, which became one of. .Mr. Garfield was rarely involved in the film adaptations of his books, deliberately extricating himself from a process he found distasteful even though it meant giving up control.

Brian Garfield, a prolific suspense author best known for his novel Death Wish, which became one of Hollywood’s longest-running film franchises, died on Dec. 29 at his home in Pasadena. He was 79. His wife, Bina Garfield, said the cause was complications of Parkinson’s disease. His 1975 novel Hopscotch, which won an Edgar Award, was an exception: He adapted it into a comedy starring Walter Matthau in 1980. Garfield’s Death Wish was the best known of his more than 70 books.

This guide to Western films from Abilene Town to Zanny Bride lists. Garfield's preferences are a bit dated to say the least. Not just in his dismissal of spaghetti westerns which so irks some of the other viewers but in his dismissal of so many worthy westerns as well.

Talk about Western films: A complete guide


Gogul
Brian Garfield's "Western Films: A Complete Guide" takes you on a tour of Western films up till the time the book was originally published, 1980. At nearly 400 pages it covers pretty much everything you'd want to know about Western films -- the Western myth, the genre, the directors, the writers, the crews, the actors and the films up till 1980. These topics are covered in the first 95 pages and Garfield's knowledge and writing style makes the material completely absorbing, even if you don't have much interest in the particular topic (e.g. the silent Westerns or the crews).

Incidentally, I appreciate the fact that he included a whole chapter devoted to the writers, both the screenwriters and the writers of the books the films were based on. Garfield explains how films in general shouldn't be viewed as solely the director's movie. This is a myth with few exceptions. For instance, how can a picture be the director's medium when, in most cases, he or she had nothing to do with the writing? The story is the most important part or, at the very least, just as important as the photography, actors, editing, locations, effects and score.

Garfield no doubt gives credit to writers because he's a writer himself. He wrote the book that "Death Wish" was based on and many others, including Westerns, two of which were made into movies, "The Last Hard Men" and the TV miniseries "Wild Times".

The rest of the book is the best part, of course: Reviews of every Western you can name up until 1980. What makes these critiques better than the average review guide is Garfield's fiercely opinionated approach and his excellent writing. In regard to the former, many reviewers here lambaste Garfield for being somewhat strong with his assessments, but isn't this what a reviewer is supposed to do, give his opinion of something? Wouldn't it be dishonest and artificial for him to say he likes something when he doesn't? Strong opinions come with the territory of review guides like this. It doesn't mean you have to agree with the writer. Who agrees with anyone about everything anyway? Is that even healthy?

Many complain about Garfield's obvious dislike of more modern Westerns, specifically those made after 1962 (he claims that Peckinpah's "Ride the High Country", released in '62, was the last of the traditional Westerns as well as the beginning of the new). He particularly dislikes European Westerns, like Sergio Leone's "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly". Then again, he continuously praises "The Wild Bunch" and gives a respectable nod to films like "The Long Riders", so there are exceptions. Yet, whether newer or older, Garfield is very evenhanded with his cheers and jeers. For instance, even films he hails he'll criticize for one reason or another, e.g. "The Searchers" (a film I personally find grossly overrated). Plus he definitely doesn't love all the classics seeing as how he gives numerous negative reviews of beloved classics, such as "Rio Bravo", "Gunfight at the O.K. Corral" and "The Man Who Shot Liberty Vallance".

Garfield often brings up the moral underpinnings of the Western myth and this is why he bemoans Westerns made after 1962, like the Spaghetti Westerns and the ones they've influenced. Why? Because they lack noble protagonists. This explains the weakness of Westerns like "The Wild bunch", which is about a group of criminals, the dirtbag posse that chases them, and the equally dirtbag Mexican "general" who provides sanctuary. It's hard to care about the outcome of a story when you don't care for the main characters or, at least, sympathize with them. I'm obviously not talking about films that involve antiheroes who are either redeemable or generally good-at-heart, like Brando in "One-Eyed Jacks" or Eastwood in "The Outlaw Josey Wales." I'm talking about the ones where everyone's a criminal scumbag, like "The Wild Bunch" (a film that I appreciate and recommend for a number of reasons, but I'm just pointing out its weakness).

Garfield's preference for older Westerns explains why he'll give classics a pass for dubious content, but fails to grant newer Westerns the same grace. For example, he hails "The Magnificent Seven" as 'masterful entertainment' while totally ignoring two of its blatant script flaws: Chico effortlessly being able to infiltrate Calvera's bandits and utterly fooling them, even though there were only 32 of them by this point (rolling my eyes) or, later, the village leaders' sudden cowardly turnaround (i.e. betrayal) in the last act. By contrast, Garfield writes off "Chato's Land" (1972) as juvenile and 'phony' even though it lacks the lame script problems of "The Magnificent Seven." Actually, "Chato's Land" is a convincing, austere character study focused on the group dynamics of the posse.

Interestingly, Garfield mentions Jack Nicholson, who plays a horse thief in "The Missouri Breaks", and then points out that Gary Cooper, the quintessential Westerner of classic Westerns, would've never played a horse thief on moral grounds. (He fails to point out that Nicholson's likable character in "The Missouri Breaks" is essentially redeemed by the end of the story and that Brando plays the purveyor of justice -- the hero, if you will -- despite his many idiosyncrasies). What's curious about this is that, throughout the book, Garfield holds up "The Wild Bunch" to be a masterpiece when it features not one positive main character. The protagonists in this film aren't merely horse thieves, they're perfectly willing to murder innocent citizens to succeed in their crimes (remember Pike Bishop's opening line: "If they move, kill `em"?). Garfield never really explains this glaring contradiction and explained to me in an email that he simply found the characters interesting. If nothing else, it shows that he's open to films with extremist antiheroes as long as the film itself is skillfully made.

He also dislikes certain actors and, to be expected, hates their films. For instance, he can't stand Marlon Brando so he lambastes three of his four Westerns when, actually, two of Brando's Westerns are highlights of the genre, "One-Eyed Jacks" and "The Missouri Breaks". The one he praises is, unsurprisingly, the oldest B&W one, "Viva Zapata" (1952).

Despite these hitches, it's obvious that this guide was a labor of love for Garfield and he put his whole heart & soul into writing it. The entire book has an air of excellence seldom seen because it simply takes too much time and work.

The writing itself is the best part. Garfield is easily one of the most gifted writers I've ever had the pleasure of reading. The way he writes -- his sentence structuring and verbiage -- is second to none. Needless to say, if you're an aspiring writer of any kind, do yourself a favor and expose yourself to his works, especially this guide.

I bought this book over a dozen years ago and I always enjoy picking it up and perusing through it, even though I fully disagree with him half the time. It has great re-reading appeal.

It would be great if Brian could do a revised edition someday that includes all the Westerns made since 1980, not to mention edit the ridiculous biases noted above.

GRADE: A
Perdana
Excellent, often quirky survey of the western film, Brian Garfield's is by no means the only book a western fan should have but it's a valuable addition to any classic film buff's library. I disagree with half of what Garfield says most of the time and yet he's such a good writer,--has such high standards--that I can forgive him almost anything. One can also, if nothing else, use the book as a reference guide. It needn't be read in one sitting. It's a gift that keeps on giving.
Qag
I found this to be an interesting book and of value to the western movie collector. I agree with his take on movies after the late 60's and the B-Western. I'm not that big a fan of "The Wild Bunch" as the author is and I like a lot of movies better than his choice of the top. He could have added a little more detail on some reviews about what scenes from other movies were included as scenes with other movies. I found that I don't really care for westerns where let us say all the action scenes were from "Buffalo Bill" or some other western that I have watched dozen of times. It's not hard to pick out battle scenes where the same battle is fought in every movie. The cast list of each movie was a big help in finding who stared in what movie. I did notice he left off "Shark River" which I own on video.
In collecting western movies on VHS and DVD this book comes in very handy.
Jogas
For a book that reportedly took over ten years of Brian Garfield's life, WESTERN FILMS: A COMPLETE GUIDE reads with the joie de vive of a sniper. Garfied, the author of DEATH WISH and HOPSCOTCH, has constructed this volume twofold: first with an opinionated overview of the genre delienated by time periods, directors, actors, etc., followed by capsule reviews of over 1500 "A-list" Westerns. Granted, the scope and breath of information alone makes this book worthy of any movie buff's bookshelf , but beware, Garfied has axes to grind and uses his book more as a warring tank than a friendly tour bus.

Garfied is a purist who favors Westerns from a earlier period of time- Westerns that do not stay too far from their mythic and literary roots. He hates, in no particular order, "Spaghetti Westerns," the auteur theory, (auteur fave Howard Hawks is a repeated target) self-consious artiness, and ulimately, much produced after the Kennedy assination (save for THE WILD BUNCH which Garfield repeatedly considers a masterpiece but exhibits all the characteristics of Vietnam era Westerns that Garfied supposedly despises. Go figure.). Garfield also turns a blind eye to "B-Westerns." Oaters starring the likes of Roy Rodgers and Gene Autry are mostly a "trite trife," and best left for other "historians, stunt-action fans and nostalgic programmer-buffs." Whether you agree with him or not, Garfied ultimately bleeds the fun out of Westerns and offers a world without an interesting thing to say about Clint Eastwood, Sergio Leone, RIO BRAVO, or the attributes of, say, Hopalong Cassidy. It's a world that I'll visit from time to time, but one that I quickly vanish on the noon time stagecoach.