Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

A_Different_Drummer You gotta love those goshdarned IMDb volunteer reviewers (of whom, of course, your humble scribe is one). Generally they appear literally out of nowhere to heap praise on a movie that really appealed to them, back in the day, no matter how obscure the production, or what the reaction of the crowd was at the time. (A phenomenon I noted specifically in my IMDb review of Johnny Cool.) Interestingly, unlike Marc Antony, they seldom "come to bury Caesar," but, rather, almost always to praise him. (There is a reason for this -- if you point a finger at a beloved flick, someone's pet favourite, you are penalized with a "not useful" rating. The bittersweet irony, of course, is that the time spent contemplating the review is always the same, whether the review is judged "useful" or not, so in all cases where a comment is ticked the reviewer has still done his job, regardless of the heaping scorn.) Which brings us, in a roundabout way, to this film. Rather than engage in fisticuffs with all the other commentators who are simply beside themselves telling you how good this film is, I would rather draw your kind attention to the significant fact that the IMDb has only one single professional review listed, FROM AN OUTFIT THAT MAINLY TALKS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF TRANSFER FROM CELLULOID TO DVD; in other words, an outfit what will usually try to ENCOURAGE you to buy the DVD, and even THAT review deployed the specific words "this is not an especially good film." And, frankly, truer words were never written. Leaving aside Dern's work -- he could not give a bad performance if the character he was playing was actually written as a "bad actor" -- this film actually destroyed the career of the producer and the production company behind it, as well as (as is the nature of the biz) a daisy-chain of other films, in development, that were conditional on the success of this one. That's how bad it was. Think about that. Put on your sci-fi Trekkie hats for a moment. Go all "Butterfly Effect" on me. Because of the wretchedness of this film, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of other films that simply do exist in the IMDb database because they were never made, at least in this reality timeline. And please keep this information in mind the next time you are tempted to sing the praises of a production which, at the time of its release, was rejected both by its peers and its audience both. Yes, film is indeed a journey to a magical land. But reviewers, on the other hand, need to keep both feet firmly in the mundane world.

weezeralfalfa My title is derived from the '47 John Wayne western, with Gail Russell as 'the angel'. I thought it an appropriate summary of the main plot of the present film, although the two stories end quite differently.A generally well done and entertaining adaptation of the last few years of the lives of the infamous American outlaws Harry Tracy and David Merrill. Seems incredible that it took a consortium of Canadian film companies, and at such a late date, to exploit the possibilities of the criminal career of Tracy, billed as the last of the infamous desperados of the Wild West.Perhaps it was just as well, as Hollywood was notorious for highly fictionalized biops. Yes, there are important elements of pure fiction and dramatization of uncertain incidents in their lives, but there is also a goodly amount of factual detail as a counterbalance, as evidenced from my readings of various source materials on the web.Like the story itself, filming took place in various locations. These include several sites in interior BC and Alberta, as well as Vancouver Island. Bruce Dern, who plays Tracy, was 20 years older than the mid-20s real Tracy, enhancing a more mellow characterization of Tracy. No doubt, Tracy was presented as less sociopathic and kinder toward strangers than the real Tracy. Like the real Tracy, he was rather careless about being recognized as a wanted multiple prison escapee, and liked the public to know about his prowess as an elusive desperado. But, he also didn't like to be blamed for robberies he didn't do, nor to shoot people, unless he considered it absolutely necessary for his safety. As the monetary price on his head escalated over time, this attitude became an ever greater liability.The seemingly inexplicable mutual infatuation and brief physical love affair between Tracy and young patrician Catherine Tuttle(Helen Shaver), which played a central role in the film, is fictional, but is very important in providing some warmth to an otherwise purely sinister story. However, several years before his death, the real Tracy did marry the sister of his frequent partner in crime, David Merrill. Like Catherine, she lived in Portland with her mother. The forbidden attraction between Harry and Catherine, marriageble debutante daughter of the judge who sentenced Harry to his last prison sentence, rather reminds me of the romance between Robin Hood and Maid Marion, for example. Why would Catherine become infatuated with this roughish charmer she hardly knew? Probably, this was her way of rebelling against her very restricted patrician life, which seemed to lack other suitors(why?). Tracy was her bad boy romantic free spirit, her ticket to a brief escape from the boredom of her life. Their extended romp through the backwoods of Washington state, after eluding the posse that came to her house, rather reminds me of the 'fish out of water' escapades of Gable and Claudette Colbert in "It Happened One Night", or MaCrea and Veronica Lake in "Sullivan's Travels", for example. Unfortunately, despite her desperate sprint after the train that Tracy has just hopped on, Catherine comes across as a shy colorless debutante, lacking the natural charm of Ms. Colbert, for example.The friendly Jesse James -like acceptance of notorious Tracy by the isolated rural folk he encounters on his last sojourn with Catherine is in marked contrast to their reception of the often rough treatment by the desperate real Tracy and Merrill. This altered image was necessary to conform with Catherine's romantic image of Tracy. Another curious fictional detail in likeness to the James story is the involvement of the state governor and Merrill in a (failed) plot to assassinate Tracy in a rigged prison escape attempt. The Missouri governor also had a deal with Bob Ford, Jesse's rather new crime partner and assassin. In addition to his very limited tenuous relationship with Catherine, Tracy's only other apparent close human relationship is his reluctant buddy relationship with crime partner Merrill. Unfortunately, this was hardly an ideal relationship either. Tracy considered this former artist, who had become infatuated with old style desperados, an incompetent outlaw, and not entirely loyal to him. Their old-fashioned duel with firearms was perhaps an inevitable ending to their troubled relationship.Tracy's fictional relationship with Marshall Nathan(Gordon Lightfoot) rather resembled the fabled relationship between Billy the Kid and Pat Garrett. In the film, Nathan visits Tracy in prison, complaining how bored he is when he doesn't have Tracy to chase.Like "Thelma and Louise", during his last run from justice, Tracy knew his time was short and that he would not allow himself to be captured alive. Tracy's last stand against capture occurs in the cornfield of a possibly traitorous trusted farmer, as a huge posse surrounds the field. This event was considerably more dramatic than the corresponding real event, which occurred in a wheat, not corn, field, and Tracy was already gradually bleeding to death when he crawled into that wheat field.

Woodyanders 1900. Wily train robber and desperado Harry Tracy (a superb performance by Bruce Dern) has outlived his era. Harry gets arrested, but manages to break out of prison. He goes on the lam with sweet, loyal gal pal Catherine Tuttle (well played by a luminous Helen Shaver) in tow and becomes the target of the largest manhunt in North American history. Director William A. Graham, working from a smart and literate script by David Lee Henry and R. Lance Hill, relates the gripping story at a leisurely, yet steady pace, offers a flavorsome evocation of the period, and delivers a thoughtful and touching cinematic eulogy on the death of the Old West and the outlaws that populated it. Moreover, there's a nice line in wry humor evident throughout, with a bungled train robbery rating as the definite comic highlight. Dern effortlessly carries the film in a rare substantial lead role; he brings a sly roguish charm and amiable quality to Harry which makes the guy easy to like and root for. The supporting cast is likewise excellent, with praiseworthy contributions by Gordon Lightfoot as Harry's hard-nosed nemesis U.S. Marshal Morrie Nathan, Michael C. Gwynne as Harry's awestruck, bumbling, untrustworthy partner David Merrill, Frank C. Turner as humble homesteader Eddie Hoyt, and Fred Diehl as no-count Governor Raymond Millhouse. Harry's romance with Catherine and the couple's encounters with several honest hard-working folks are extremely warm and moving. Harry's final face-off with a huge posse is also poignant and exciting. Both Allen Daviau's picturesque cinematography and the harmonic score by Micky Ebbe and Maribeth Solomon are up to speed. A neat and satisfying little sleeper.

happipuppi13 Safe to say I don't know much about the career or films of Bruce Dern.I do however know all about the career of Canadian singer/songwriter Gordon Lightfoot,who plays the U.S. Marshall in the film,he's almost unrecognizable. He's the one in the picture to the left/right with the beard,mustache & hat. (I'm a major fan of his with every album he's put out.) Most remembered for songs like 1974's "Sundown" and 1976's "The Wreck Of The Edmund Fitrzgerald",this was his 1st and only foray into acting (except for an episode of ABC's "Hotel" in 1988). I can honestly say that he doesn't do too bad a job,although Mr. Lightfoot may tell you different. His character vows to hunt Harry down and bring him in.Trouble is,Harry always seems to be able to embarrass him by escaping just the same or making him look foolish in other ways.Still,I'm happy to say the now 67 year old (2005-2006) stayed in the music business and still draws a crowd. Besides,whoever said a Marshall had to be larger than life anyway? Hollywood?As for the overall movie itself,its really good! Harry Tracey is a robber,a killer and "Desperado" as they were called back then. Still,when he goes from town to town,people greet him like he's a celebrity. Which is true of most outlaws back then. Harry doesn't however just shoot down folks in cold blood,he only shoots those who may be trying to get him first.The sets fit perfectly with the era,making it historically accurate for 1899 to early 1900's. The cast does a great job at making this an exciting believable drama & love story. Although,I had a little trouble believing a man like Harry could have time to frolic on the beach with a woman he's fallen for though.Overall,it's a truly great adventure,love story and western...right up to it's great climax,which I wont spoil it for you but I will say the closing song "My Love For You" (by Gordon Lightfoot),plays over the end credits and while not available on record,tape or CD...it's a beautiful coda to all that you'll have watched. I have 2 copies of this on DVD,one open one not,re-titled: "Harry Tracy,Last Of The Wild Bunch" (Which he wasn't by the way) One star short of ten because there's no closed captioning/sub-titles on the DVD. (END)