Post by elisabeth on Jan 31, 2006 6:43:54 GMT -6
Yes, it did look as if great chunks had been edited out. The dance scene at Fort Lincoln, for another example: there were people hanging about who looked like actors, not extras, but any part they'd originally played in the scene must have ended up on the cutting-room floor. Was it longer when it aired on TV, or is the video/DVD exactly the same as what was broadcast? (The "Gettysburg" movie is some 2 hours shorter than the mini-series, I believe ...)
Such a pity that they had to do it on a shoestring. As you say, all that doubling got very confusing at times. And I imagine it's budget that always ruins battle scenes. Directors persuade themselves that lots of nice money-saving close-ups and confusion make it feel "authentic" -- whereas what we, the audience, need to see is what's actually happening, action by action. As we do in the movie "Waterloo", for instance; that couldn't be clearer. But then for that, they were able to use a) an entire army, and b) loads of helicopter shots. Well, maybe CGI will supply enough troopers and Indians the next time anyone tries an LBH movie. Let's hope!
Cole has no neck -- I think that's what makes him look so bulky. Especially unfortunate in uniform; he looks like a sack of potatoes. He's also not quite good enough a rider. He manages, but you sense it doesn't come naturally. As for the Custache (brilliant!), I'm not sure that we'll ever see that done right ... TV and movies seem very nervous about authentic facial hair. "Gettysburg" was brave about it; and "Deadwood" isn't bad; but mostly all we ever get is a token gesture ... Maybe it's the stars' fault, they won't risk their image?
You're right, it's Strathairn's movie from start to finish. Wonderful performance. I loved the moment you mention -- and also the moment when he arrives on Reno Hill. I can't remember if he actually says "There, there, Uncle Fred's here now" or anything similar, but that's the message he conveys. So deliciously cynical, world-weary, seen-it-all-before-and-didn't-think-much-of-it-the-first-time. Fred to the life!
Such a pity that they had to do it on a shoestring. As you say, all that doubling got very confusing at times. And I imagine it's budget that always ruins battle scenes. Directors persuade themselves that lots of nice money-saving close-ups and confusion make it feel "authentic" -- whereas what we, the audience, need to see is what's actually happening, action by action. As we do in the movie "Waterloo", for instance; that couldn't be clearer. But then for that, they were able to use a) an entire army, and b) loads of helicopter shots. Well, maybe CGI will supply enough troopers and Indians the next time anyone tries an LBH movie. Let's hope!
Cole has no neck -- I think that's what makes him look so bulky. Especially unfortunate in uniform; he looks like a sack of potatoes. He's also not quite good enough a rider. He manages, but you sense it doesn't come naturally. As for the Custache (brilliant!), I'm not sure that we'll ever see that done right ... TV and movies seem very nervous about authentic facial hair. "Gettysburg" was brave about it; and "Deadwood" isn't bad; but mostly all we ever get is a token gesture ... Maybe it's the stars' fault, they won't risk their image?
You're right, it's Strathairn's movie from start to finish. Wonderful performance. I loved the moment you mention -- and also the moment when he arrives on Reno Hill. I can't remember if he actually says "There, there, Uncle Fred's here now" or anything similar, but that's the message he conveys. So deliciously cynical, world-weary, seen-it-all-before-and-didn't-think-much-of-it-the-first-time. Fred to the life!