MovieChat Forums > Open Range (2003) Discussion > Admit it. This movie was horrendous

Admit it. This movie was horrendous

posted 13 years ago by stuert2343
46 replies | jump to latest

A spittable, a forgettable, an embarrassment to the Western genre. Did i accidentally watch BrokeBack Mountain(but the somewhat less gay version) instead?

Robert Duvall did not fit in this movie at all. He's usually decent in thrillers'/mafia/father type roles, but he was just a decoy, a wooden broken down old fart trying to make a buck.

Kostner was fine, but the lack of story telling/everything just being poured out/lack of direction/sub-par cinematography/average acting/careless and dull story progression/no moral/no nothing/lifeless characters/ a forgettable script that a 14 year old can come up with and receiving it an undeserving 7.6 is just beyond me.

But really... few guys wearing KuKluxKlan masks are stealing some cows and Boss and Kostner take revenge and then everything becomes happy go lucky? Is this really what i watched for 135 minutes? They should rename this movie to Oh Boss, What Shalth Approach Us and put it somewhere in the emo genre.

Aside from the semi-entertaining shooting in the near ending, this movie was just abysmal. And i loved how it tries so hard with the "lightning storms" to copy Unforgiven's style. Don't even get me started when that 40'ish year old broad gave the necklace to Kostner, i almost cracked my LCD monitor. Really wish i could have 2 hours of my life back.

[–] Nikon11 12 years ago

I generally try to stick it out to the end, no matter how much I don't like a movie.

Recently I've watched some "classics" - Citizen Kane, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Rebel Without a Cause. Man, those were tough to sit all the way through. I didn't end up enjoying any of them, but felt that I wanted to give them a fair shot.

Plus, I don't want to get convinced, on another day, to give it another chance, if I didn't watch the whole thing.

I agree, this was a terrific movie.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Bilwick1 12 years ago

I will only "admit" this: I liked the movie.

Definitely not one the Dumbest Generation would like. Except maybe the director's cut, in which the Costner character dons a super-hero costume and the Robert Duvall character blows stuff up real good.

[–] speedo58 12 years ago

I fast forward to the ending. If I don't like it, I don't watch the rest of the movie.

[–] brianehill 12 years ago

LOL! You may want to try "Sleepless in Seattle".

[–] sirstiffie 12 years ago

RE: "Really wish i could have 2 hours of my life back."

And I wish I could have the two minutes back of my life it took to read your asinine review....this is a classic Western in my humble opinion and one of COSTNER'S (NOT Kostner) best and Duvall is perfectly cast as a cowboy...to each their own but clearly you're wrong.

"The first one of you moves, and I'm gonna kill the whole lot of ya."

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] davidwile 11 years ago

Hey folks,

I am not going to get into a childish argument about the merits of this film with those who may disagre with me. I am just too old and tired to waste my time doing so. I will, however, state clearly that I believe this will be considered one of the best westerns ever made, and it will be a new measure for the term "classic." Duvall has long been a favorite actor of mine, and Costner is also a slightly newer favorite. This film also features a whole lot of other actors who may not be as big as Duvall, Costner, and Benning, but they are truly fine journeyman actors. To suggest this film is horrendous is simply foolish to me, but that is just my opinion.

Best wishes,
Dave Wile

[–] unclejay73 11 years ago

Wow, you are so misguided and off-track!

It's kind of sad!!

[–] ilutrov 11 years ago

> Really wish i could have 2 hours of my life back.

You're obviously not including the 30 minutes it took you to write your little critique. So, I guess that wasn't time wasted?

http://imdb.com/user/ur2019270/ratings

[–] ridge-m-1 11 years ago

Why this movie is so lousy to our young, wanna-be movie critics.

1. It is an R rated Western as opposed to a PG rated toilet-humor comedy or a
PG rated horror flick in which cute girls with big boobs get knocked off
one by one.

2. The pace is slow, no quick MTV-like cutting. The attention span of the
young mind results in boredom when attempting to make it through all 139
languid minutes.

3. They actually constructed a set resembling an 1870's western town as
opposed to using CGI.

4. There was no martial arts fisticuffs.

5. Except for rifle reports, there were no explosions causing cheap sub-
woofers to shake, thump and rattle, which as we all know is essential to
the Home Theatre experience.

6. The movie spent time developing the backstory of the characters, which is
time wasted as far as the young are concerned.

7. There were no chase scenes.

8. There were no cartoon characters with super-human powers.

9. The soundtrack did not include even one Rap song.

10. There wasn't a cute, skinny, young model in the entire film.

[–] drtagnjr 8 years ago

Hey no need to uniformly bash superhero films :).

That having been said, this is one of my three favorite "modern" Westerns along with Silverado and Pale Rider. I have seen this many times and will again I am sure.

[–] newfrontier45 11 years ago

Stupidity like this is not even worth responding to.