Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Apparently Horizon is going to be at least 4 parts


Recommended Posts

It's a Kevin Costner film - the man has no concept of pacing or brevity.

 

EVERY film that he has had control of is a bloated slogfest.

 

He is a very talented, capable actor; but his productions would benefit from a STRONG editor that could remind him that every scene does not require slow burn buildup and that film is about entertainment and message - not vanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched, maybe, 5 minutes of that video. And in that 5 minutes he spoke of the woman that wanted to get clean. And how horses needed to drink.

 

Several hours later it occurred to me that they were probably crossing the desert, and all the water they had was in the barrels on the side of the wagon, and she decided to take a bath.

 

If this is what happened, she's lucky nobody killed her.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, irish ike, SASS #43615 said:

Dances with Wolves, Open Range??????

Dances is over three hours in length.

Open Range is well over two.

 

Dances is at least an hour too long - bloated by "scenery shots" that do not advance the story.  And is way more interested in its own "message" than conveying entertainment.

 

Open Range is an hour and forty five minutes of boredom - waiting for ten minutes of action.

 

I am not one that believes an extended runtime equates to a better film - a good recent example of concise story telling is the Coen Brothers "Ballad of Buster Scruggs" (now I am not a huge Coen fan as some of their films have suffered from their own over indulgence), but "Ballad" managed to tell multiple stories over the films runtime that encompassed complete tales.  If X number of stories can be told in a thorough and entertaining manner within a single films runtime - why does a singular story require three hours or FOUR chapters to do the same if not because of bloat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Dances is over three hours in length.

Open Range is well over two.

 

Dances is at least an hour too long - bloated by "scenery shots" that do not advance the story.  And is way more interested in its own "message" than conveying entertainment.

 

Open Range is an hour and forty five minutes of boredom - waiting for ten minutes of action.

 

I am not one that believes an extended runtime equates to a better film - a good recent example of concise story telling is the Coen Brothers "Ballad of Buster Scruggs" (now I am not a huge Coen fan as some of their films have suffered from their own over indulgence), but "Ballad" managed to tell multiple stories over the films runtime that encompassed complete tales.  If X number of stories can be told in a thorough and entertaining manner within a single films runtime - why does a singular story require three hours or FOUR chapters to do the same if not because of bloat?

I’m assuming you didn’t like Lonesome Dove then either ? 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Buckshot Bob said:

I’m assuming you didn’t like Lonesome Dove then either ? 

Just going to get myself in all sorts of trouble here.

 

Now obviously - Lonesome Dove is better than non quality attempts or joke movies (i.e. it is not "Hell to pay" or "The Terror of Tinytown").

 

But among serious attempts at western entertainment; with quality skilled participants (and Lonesome Dove had skilled folks at every level, writer, actors, direction, production) - with all of those components being considered...

 

I think Lonesome Dove is among the worst western film events ever made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JEDI Creeker has a point about Costner movies and series dragging things out. Most of his stuff could have been done in half the time. His looong conversation with Annett Benning literally put me to sleep in Open Range. Parts of Dances With Wolves felt like nap time too. Mrs. lose really likes to take me to movies at Cinoplis (I think it’s called) because of the in seat dining service, I like it for that too but the best part is your chair fully reclines so that you can sleep through the boring parts of the movies that she like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Creeker, SASS #43022 said:

Just going to get myself in all sorts of trouble here.

 

Now obviously - Lonesome Dove is better than non quality attempts or joke movies (i.e. it is not "Hell to pay" or "The Terror of Tinytown").

 

But among serious attempts at western entertainment; with quality skilled participants (and Lonesome Dove had skilled folks at every level, writer, actors, direction, production) - with all of those components being considered...

 

I think Lonesome Dove is among the worst western film events ever made.

It’s just entertainment, and we all have different opinion's/tastes . So I don’t think you should get beat up about it “but you probably will” How dare you not like Lonesome Dove :) 

Personally I really enjoyed all 3 discussed here and I’m guessing I’m going to enjoy Horizon. I even liked Kosner in Wyatt Earp , didn’t like it as much as Tombstone but thought it was entertaining. 
Guess I’m willing to go through some slow parts if it tells a good story. Not every movie can be as action packed as John Wick 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just saw the trailer in a movie theater.

 

Cinematography looked good. Costner getting a little old to be portraying Billy Bada** though IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Cypress Sun said:

 

Just saw the trailer in a movie theater.

 

Cinematography looked good. Costner getting a little old to be portraying Billy Bada** though IMO.

There’s quite a few Hollywood actors in that category 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Buckshot Bear said:

Creeker..... We're riding for different brands on this one. 

That's what makes the world go round.

 

Some folks will agree with me

and some others

will be wrong.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ill check it out - ive not found a major problem with his work , i liked lonesome dove and watched dancing with wolves .....ill check it out ,  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Cypress Sun said:

 

Just saw the trailer in a movie theater.

 

Cinematography looked good. Costner getting a little old to be portraying Billy Bada** though IMO.

CS,

 

  Agreed. Costner just needed to direct, and turn the main role over to a solid younger 40ish actor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I saw the first episode last Sunday with Schoolmarm and a couple of our cowboy friends!  
 

When Creeker is wrong, he does it up right!! :lol:

 

The three hours was more like an hour and a half! The multiple plots were all interesting and the cinematography was outstanding!!

 

Costner’s character didn’t appear until very late in the first hour and the character is totally believable.

 

There are other characters that you’re going to root for and some you will despise, but they all fit and fit well.

 

We’ve already reserved seats for the second episode and I’m happy that production on the third is underway!!

 

If you don’t like long movies or suffer from a short attention span or narrow gauge conceptualization, this is probably not the movie for you, but that’s your loss!!

 

No disrespect intended on my part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/3/2024 at 7:47 PM, irish ike, SASS #43615 said:

Dances with Wolves, Open Range??????

Postman and Water World. Wyatt Earp was a little too long as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Buckshot Bob said:

I don’t mind long movies, just watched Oppenheimer a couple of days ago. Not a bad film 

I won’t watch it again, thought I was going to see more history on how the bombs were made and less sex but it seems more about how many women he was screwing and poof the bombs are on a truck going to the airport. But to each his own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nimble Fingers SASS# 25439 said:

I won’t watch it again, thought I was going to see more history on how the bombs were made and less sex but it seems more about how many women he was screwing and poof the bombs are on a truck going to the airport. But to each his own. 

It isn’t something I’d want to watch a 2nd time but I wasn’t disappointed in it . It wasn’t one of those that goes on the list as a complete waste of time for me 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.