Artivels Undescribable Perfection

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

bbluebirds I enjoyed this movie, being a John Wayne fan for years, and felt it was one of his best. In short, a big distraction for me was seeing Natalie Wood playing an indian squaw wearing lipstick and mascara. Not a good call. Plus, her acting was below par.

grantss A classic from possibly the greatest actor-director combination in the history of westerns: John Wayne and John Ford.An epic western. Epic in its timespan, its vistas, in its sheer grandeur.Entertaining story, with a plot that feels just right - complete, circular and doesn't overstay its welcome.Pacing is just right. Movie doesn't get bogged down at any stage. However, there are some silly detours that threaten to derail the progress.Incredible cinematography and scenery. Fantastic soundtrack too.Moreover, you get a feeling that this is how the west really was: untamed, where everyone had to be resourceful and also rely on their fellow settlers for survival.Solid performance by John Wayne in the lead role. His sheer presence carries the film. Good support from Jeffrey Hunter and Vera Miles. Natalie Wood (aged 17 at the time) does well as (the older) Debbie. Henry Brandon is suitably menacing as Scar.However, it is some of the other performances, or characters, that let the movie down and prevent it from being an absolute masterpiece. I found the Reverend, played by Ward Bond, incredibly irritating. So too Lars Jorgenson (played by John Qualen), Charlie McCorry (played by Ken Curtis) and Mose Harper (played by Hank Worden). All these characters just don't seem real: they're either overly stereotypical or extreme. It feels like every single one of those actors is over-acting.

Harry T. Yung Watching, for the first time, the 1956 Ford/Wayne classic that many hailed as the best western ever , I missed out on the most-praised aspect. On DVD, even with a modest flat TV screen, the splendour of the panoramic Texan landscape was lost.Before and after watching this movie, I gleaned two scores of "prolific author" reviews. Almost all, in addition to the cinematography, talk about the simple plot: the odyssey of a retired Texas ranger (Wayne), together with his 1/8 Apache nephew (Jeffrey Hunter), searching for two nieces kidnapped by Comanches that massacred his brother's family. Almost all talk about the racist aspect (real or perceived) and the good performances. One points out that the nieces are actually daughters from licentious activities with sister-in-law, and Wayne's real motivation is not to rescue them but rather to kill them, to be rid of the haunting memory. Be that as it may.I have only two specific observations and one general comment.The scene depicting the lull before the storm, the approach of the Comanches to the almost defenceless household (just one man with a rifle), is absolutely masterful. The suffocating suspense is almost good enough to give "High Noon" a run for its money. The violence is never shown, just implied.The other scene, or sequence rather, is the depiction of a good part of the odyssey via a letter from Hunter to his childhood sweetheart played by Vera Miles. Various scenes unfold as she reads the letter to her family. Without this technique in the midpoint, the two plus hours of narrative would feel too long.In general, I find this movie enjoyable but not exactly the best western ever. One setback is the rather inconsistent mix of pathos and comedy. Hitchcock and Kurosawa are masters of injecting a pinch of sense of humour when needed. Ford, unfortunately, has not accomplished the desired result in this movie.

Wuchak Released in 1956 and directed by John Ford, "The Searchers" chronicles the story of Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) who returns from the Civil War to his brother's ranch in the Southwest; and to his brother's wife, whom he secretly loves. After the ranch is raided by Comanches, Ethan and his 1/8 Indian nephew (Jeffrey Hunter) search for the band of Indians to get his captive niece back (Natalie Wood). As time passes and the niece assimilates with the Natives it's not certain if Ethan intends on rescuing the girl or killing her.Touted as a masterpiece and one of the greatest Westerns, I've seen "The Searchers" twice now and was disappointed each time. Sure, the Monument Valley locations are breathtaking and the cast is great, but the story leaves a lot to be desired. The plot's excellent, but the way the story is told isn't interesting and so there's very little momentum. On top of this we get sequences, characters and dialogue that seem to be stabs at amusement, which (1.) aren't funny, (2.) are awkward because the main story is a serious drama/adventure in a Western context, and (3.) make some of the characters out to be dimwits (note to the writers: just because someone lives in the wilderness it doesn't automatically make them doofuses).Give me "Stagecoach" (1939), "The Horse Soldiers" (1959), "The Alamo" (1960), "North to Alaska" (1960), "True Grit" (1969), "Chisum" (1970), "The Cowboys" (1972) and "Rooster Cogburn" (1975) any day over this mediocre Western. Heck, I'll even take "The Comancheros" (1961), "El Dorado" (1966), "The War Wagon" (1967), "Rio Lobo" (1970), "The Train Robbers" (1973) and "The Shootist" (1976).The movie runs 119 minutes and was shot in Arizona, Utah and Colorado.GRADE: C-