. . . just a "gripe" about guns in movies . . .

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

I’ve been re-watching again the movie . . “Streets of Laredo” . . . after the book by Larry Mcmurtry.

 

. . . totally un-historic . . but well made and watchable . . . early on James Gardner is boarding a train and as near as I can tell is carrying a ’73 Winchester. . . . a bit later he is laying on the ground in a camp and rubbing down the brass on a Henry, . . . damn, damn, damn . . can’t an armorer do any better than that ? The Henry looks BRAND NEW . . ( and it is an Italian "Henry" not a "hollywierd" Henry made from a '92 ). . . . . the movie is set in early 1900s . . . ( ie. steel passenger car on the train) . . . No Texas Ranger would be carrying a Henry anyhow . . . and if there was a Henry carried by anyone in the early 1900s it would not be "new" since Henry productions stopped in 1865 ( ? ) . . ( ie. before the introduction of the ’66).

 

But it is still a watchable film. Good sets, locations, costuming, acting . . . all good . . . .just not historical at all.

 

[Alpo]

Why would a Texas Ranger not be carrying a Henry? Because it's a 1860 and it is 1900, so it is a forty-year-old gun?

 

Last I looked, Mr. Browning's 1911 was 104 years old, and lots of us still carry them.

[SGT. QUINCANNON, SASS #32999]

I once read about a family in Montana that used the granddad's Henry .44rf to hunt deer well into the 1960's. They only quit when they ran out of the non-reloadable shells for it, and had to switch to a .30-30 Winchester '94. Old don't mean worn out.

[Utah Bob #35998]

I don't really have a problem with guys carrying older guns in movies. Muzzleloaders were used into the 20th century. Hickok used 51 Navys. Guns were seldome discarded.

But I do have a gripe about using ones that haven't been invented yet.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

I once read about a family in Montana that used the granddad's Henry .44rf to hunt deer well into the 1960's. They only quit when they ran out of the non-reloadable shells for it, and had to switch to a .30-30 Winchester '94. Old don't mean worn out.

 

I dunno... I'd like to hear Badger's opinion on that...

[Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172]

I don't really have a problem with guys carrying older guns in movies. Muzzleloaders were used into the 20th century. Hickok used 51 Navys. Guns were seldome discarded.

But I do have a gripe about using ones that haven't been invented yet.

You Purist!

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

Why would a Texas Ranger not be carrying a Henry? Because it's a 1860 and it is 1900, so it is a forty-year-old gun?

 

Last I looked, Mr. Browning's 1911 was 104 years old, and lots of us still carry them.

 

He would not be carrying a Henry that shoots a low power .44 Henry rimfire cartridge when he could carry a "73 Winchester that shoots a much better .44-40 cartridge.

 

Or by 1900 he could be carrying even a a '92 or a '94 Winchester.

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

I once read about a family in Montana that used the granddad's Henry .44rf to hunt deer well into the 1960's. They only quit when they ran out of the non-reloadable shells for it, and had to switch to a .30-30 Winchester '94. Old don't mean worn out.

 

I'm sure there was plenty of use for Henry's and '66s . . . well into the 1900s. . . . but I can't imagine a Texas Ranger on the hunt for train robbers carrying one.

 

It was also a "Brand New Uberti . . . right out of the box" . . . without a bit of wear to it. Looked really out of place in that camp scene to anyone who knew anything about old west shoot'n irons.

[Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171]

I have a low opinion of McMurtry and don't think there is much you can do to disrespect his books. It's not that he is a bad writer, He is an excellent writer that makes money retelling old west stories that are folklore. I guess that bothers me because he is living off other peoples stories rather than using his imagination to create his own. It's not history, it's not fiction, and it's not original, it is however entertaining. So, what's my problem with it? I don't know how to put it into words. I guess I think it misleads people to think they know what really happened after they read them and that is a disservice to the reader. But then nobody ever accused me of being rational.

[Muleshoe Bill SASS #67022]

BB how do you figure that?

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

I have a low opinion of McMurtry and don't think there is much you can do to disrespect his books. It's not that he is a bad writer, He is an excellent writer that makes money retelling old west stories that are folklore. I guess that bothers me because he is living off other peoples stories rather than using his imagination to create his own. It's not history, it's not fiction, and it's not original, it is however entertaining. So, what's my problem with it? I don't know how to put it into words. I guess I think it misleads people to think they know what really happened after they read them and that is a disservice to the reader. But then nobody ever accused me of being rational.

 

Very well put. About how I feel about it. . . . Historical people portrayed in this film doing things that they never did. I'm aware of that . . . but many younger folks that are not knowledgeable about western history will get well confused opinions / knowledge ( sic ) from it, . . .

[Utah Bob #35998]

Feel free to vent here. But...

The problem with movies is that, sadly, a Lot of people get most of their history from them.

But Hollywood studio execs are not concerned with that. It has always been and always will be about entertainment and fantasy and making MONEY. As long as the money flow continues, things will remain the same.

[Tennessee Trapper Tom]

That's right UB, its all about the money and entertainment. Me thinks the same about our colleges

[Anvil Al #59168]

Think they might have used a Henry this movie.

Because the showed some in Lonesome Dove.

Director trying to carry over.

 

Just a thought.

[Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172]

 

I dunno... I'd like to hear Badger's opinion on that...

Yer a trouble maker, ain't cha, Hardpan!

[Tom Bullweed]

Garner/McCall was a stubborn mand and was not serving as rahger when this movie starts. I too have issues with McMurtry's version of history, but I like to think that this 1860 depcitdd two things: McCalls stubornness and his likely lack of financial prosperity.

I believe that Winchester made .44rf until the start of The Great War. All of production was for the Russian, UK and US militaries for about 3 years, based on two books that I have That noted how Winchester almost failed after 1919.

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

I have a low opinion of McMurtry and don't think there is much you can do to disrespect his books. It's not that he is a bad writer, He is an excellent writer that makes money retelling old west stories that are folklore. I guess that bothers me because he is living off other peoples stories rather than using his imagination to create his own. It's not history, it's not fiction, and it's not original, it is however entertaining. So, what's my problem with it? I don't know how to put it into words. I guess I think it misleads people to think they know what really happened after they read them and that is a disservice to the reader. But then nobody ever accused me of being rational.

 

 

I liked Lonesome Dove and the miniseries made from it, both.

 

It has long been observed that there are only so many basic stories and story lines, and I think the history of Western movies shows that in spades. We have had a lot of fun here at times in the past setting out the constantly-repeated elements: the cowardly townspeople, the hard-bitten cattle baron, his no-account son, the wide-eyed schoolmarm next to the soiled dove in the stage, the mysterious stranger with a past; on and on and etc. and etc.: there are dozens of them.

 

It's hard to think of many Western stories (much less other genres) that aren't built on pre-existing stories and folklore. "Retelling" is something most good authors do. Quests, coming-of-age, left-for-dead; there are so many.

 

For instance-- Lonesome Dove is a retelling of the Charles Goodnight- Oliver Loving story. So are a lot of cattle-drive Westerns.

 

So I respectfully disagree!

[Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171]

 

 

I liked Lonesome Dove and the miniseries made from it, both.

 

It has long been observed that there are only so many basic stories and story lines, and I think the history of Western movies shows that in spades. We have had a lot of fun here at times in the past setting out the constantly-repeated elements: the cowardly townspeople, the hard-bitten cattle baron, his no-account son, the wide-eyed schoolmarm next to the soiled dove in the stage, the mysterious stranger with a past; on and on and etc. and etc.: there are dozens of them.

 

It's hard to think of many Western stories (much less other genres) that aren't built on pre-existing stories and folklore. "Retelling" is something most good authors do. Quests, coming-of-age, left-for-dead; there are so many.

 

For instance-- Lonesome Dove is a retelling of the Charles Goodnight- Oliver Loving story. So are a lot of cattle-drive Westerns.

 

So I respectfully disagree!

 

I respect your disagreement and I am as guilty as any when it comes to watching old movies over and over even when I know they are historically incorrect. I have mentioned here before that i have written and published a Western wherein I attempted to avoid the cliche's and make it different yet still maintain the values. As far as i know nobody from the wire has read it and If they have they have not embarrassed me by commenting on it if. It takes hard work to try to think outside the normal structure of any type of work. That is one of the reasons I have never tried to write a murder mystery. I can't think of anything that hasn't been done and I don't want to just do a variation on a theme. The name of my Western is "Quinton" by Paul Mazan and it is available on Amazon in both Kindle and Print format just in case you would like to try something that attempts to leak out of the mold at the corners.

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

One of the amazing thing about "Western" stories and movies is how short the period was that has produced hundreds of novels and hundreds of movies. Basically, from the end of the Civil War until sometime in the 1890s. Before that, it's the "mountain man West", after that it's the elegiac "end of the West". Not much more than 25 years-- the "Western West".

 

I remember being struck by this 25 years or so ago when I went with my two teenage sons on three trips around the mountain West, three summers in a row on vacations. We visited a lot of "pioneer museums" in a lot of towns in Montana, Idaho, eastern Oregon, and Wyoming. We pretty quickly noticed that all of the stuff in the exhibits was basically the same: same guns, same domestic items, same farm items, same wagons, etc. But of course-- it was all the same very short era.

 

So the reservoir of original stories from the time is limited, but the creative variations are unlimited....

[Aunt Jen]

Ive been re-watching again the movie . . Streets of Laredo . . . after the book by Larry Mcmurtry.

 

. . . totally un-historic . . but well made and watchable . . . early on James Gardner is boarding a train and as near as I can tell is carrying a 73 Winchester. . . . a bit later he is laying on the ground in a camp and rubbing down the brass on a Henry, . . . damn, damn, damn . . cant an armorer do any better than that ? The Henry looks BRAND NEW . . ( and it is an Italian "Henry" not a "hollywierd" Henry made from a '92 ). . . . . the movie is set in early 1900s . . . ( ie. steel passenger car on the train) . . . No Texas Ranger would be carrying a Henry anyhow . . . and if there was a Henry carried by anyone in the early 1900s it would not be "new" since Henry productions stopped in 1865 ( ? ) . . ( ie. before the introduction of the 66).

 

But it is still a watchable film. Good sets, locations, costuming, acting . . . all good . . . .just not historical at all.

 

Maybe it's historically accurate, and we're in an alternate timeline---like if Riker was left behind with Samuel Clemens and influenced his writing, that glamorized the west and they made Henrys again---and that affected the timeline between the two guns shown.

 

??

 

Well? It could be?

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

Later in the second part of "Street of Lerado" . . . I haven't seen Garner pull his rifle out of his scabbard so don't know if they went back to the blued one that was in the first scene at the train station or continued with the Henry. . . but did see his deputy by a campfire with a "Hollywierd Henry" . . ( a '92 with the forearm removed ). . . . . everything else is very, very good in this film . . . the saddles, costuming, locations, sets, the minor "character actors", . . . etc. far better historical looking than in most western films.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

I once read about a family in Montana that used the granddad's Henry .44rf to hunt deer well into the 1960's. They only quit when they ran out of the non-reloadable shells for it, and had to switch to a .30-30 Winchester '94. Old don't mean worn out.

 

I dunno... I'd like to hear Badger's opinion on that...

Yer a trouble maker, ain't cha, Hardpan!

 

Whoooo, meeee....?

[ShadowCatcher]

Maybe it's historically accurate, and we're in an alternate timeline---like if Riker was left behind with Samuel Clemens and influenced his writing, that glamorized the west and they made Henrys again---and that affected the timeline between the two guns shown.

??

Well? It could be?

I'd really like to meet your bartender......

[DocWard]

 

I respect your disagreement and I am as guilty as any when it comes to watching old movies over and over even when I know they are historically incorrect. I have mentioned here before that i have written and published a Western wherein I attempted to avoid the cliche's and make it different yet still maintain the values. As far as i know nobody from the wire has read it and If they have they have not embarrassed me by commenting on it if. It takes hard work to try to think outside the normal structure of any type of work. That is one of the reasons I have never tried to write a murder mystery. I can't think of anything that hasn't been done and I don't want to just do a variation on a theme. The name of my Western is "Quinton" by Paul Mazan and it is available on Amazon in both Kindle and Print format just in case you would like to try something that attempts to leak out of the mold at the corners.

 

This one?

 

http://www.amazon.com/Quinton-Mr-Paul-W-Mazan/dp/1494895129/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1428028904&sr=1-7&keywords=Quinton

 

I must have missed reading about it. I will see if my local, independent bookseller can order it for me tomorrow. I like to support local business when I can. If she can't, I will order from Amazon.

[Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171]

That's the one. By the way I made the holsters in the cover shot and that is also the Remington 1894 I use shooting SASS The pistols in the holsters are Pieata Cap and ball .44 brass framed Navies. A gun that never existed until invented by the Italians. I used them in an article I did for "American Gunsmith" on shortening Cap & ball barrels and on making Manhattan Conversions. Thought they looked better and more authentic than my Rugers.

 

PS. There are a couple of places in the book where my tongue is pretty firmly in my cheek. It's not a comedy Western but a smile or two never hurts, after all it coudda happened that way.

[Wolfgang, SASS #53480]

I finally got thru the rest of "Streets of Laredo" . . . . it turns out the blued rifle that I saw Gardner holding early on ( and couldn't get a really good look at ) was a "Holly Weird Henry" ( ie. '92 with the for end removed.) The pistols seen through the film looked period, . . appropriate wear on them, . . . . but the rifles looked NEW right out of the box . . both the brass Henry and the Holly Weird one . . . . and the '92 ( with the forend on it ) that judge Roy Bean had on his lap on his front porch. Why with the amount of money it took to produce such a film . . . and with everything else actually very period correct, ( saddles, costuming, wagons, sets, locations, etc. ) . . . . cudn't they get the rifles correct ? . . or at least worn and used looking as they would be having been carried around in a scabbard for a few years ? . . . . . anyhoooo . . .and enjoyable film . .

[Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171]

Gee Wolfgang, they couldda just sent me those new rifles. I have a knack of making new rifles look old and worn in no time at all. I can do it without even trying and it doesn't take any chemicals or anything.

[Grumpy Old Man]

Bugs, will add it to my Kindle. Thanks

[Utah Bob #35998]

.......Why with the amount of money it took to produce such a film . . . and with everything else actually very period correct, ( saddles, costuming, wagons, sets, locations, etc. ) . . . . cudn't they get the rifles correct ? . . or at least worn and used looking as they would be having been carried around in a scabbard for a few years ? . . . . . anyhoooo . . .and enjoyable film . .

Because it wouldn't have made them any more money.

[Bugs Bonney SASS # 10171]

Bugs, will add it to my Kindle. Thanks

 

Thank you Grumpy, I hope you enjoy the story.