MovieChat Forums > Appaloosa (2008) Discussion > What a DREADFUL Screenplay

What a DREADFUL Screenplay

posted 15 years ago by film_ophile
81 replies | jump to latest

Don't bother being nasty with me. If you like the film, go play with the many others who agree with you on this board. It's the potential Apaloosa viewers that i am trying to warn.

I have not voted a '4 out of 10' in many years. The screenplay was absolutely dreadful; the plot flat and predictable, the acting awkward and wooden.This is one of the very rare occasions when I am horrified by Roger Ebert('3 stars'.) I have been admirers of ed, viggo and renee for years; I feel they are all very talented.
ed and viggo's work together in A History of Violence was compelling and amazing .As ed was both the screenwriter and the director, I'm now thinking that my previous assumption that ed harris is very smart- is far from correct. I actually feel quite naive; now I'm seeing that being a brilliant actor doesn't mean being intellectually brilliant.

Anyway, I don't know how to warn you further. I'm tempted to say if you are a sophisticated film goer, do NOT bother with this film. And yet, with all the positives it has rcvd on this board (in addition to roger ebert)there are surely sophisticated viewers who have liked it. I guess all I can say is
"Go figure."

Ad hoc, Ad loc, Quid pro queeee,
So little time and so much to see

[–] Bilwick1 15 years ago

On the other hand, filmgoers, you might want to give the film a try. Many others liked it.

[–] samantha3 15 years ago

It got onto several "best" lists for the year. So even some critics (roughly 75%, according to rottentomatoes.com) liked it. Perhaps there was something there that the OP just didn't see or didn't appreciate. The only solution when people are so divided on a movie is to judge for yourself, if you are so inclined.

[–] bmw9521 10 years ago

I do understand this message was written about 5 years ago and was never intended for me when written.

After recently watching this film, I was disappointed. With a cast that included Ed Harris, Viggo Mortensen, and Jeremy Irons and a screenplay written by an intelligent actor like Ed Harris, I was expecting something better. The only good acting surprisingly came from Jeremy Irons. The directing and screenplay from Ed Harris was shockingly bad. The acting of Viggo Mortensen was shockingly wooden.

When it comes to movies, I don't usually trust critics. I am usually inclined to judge a movie for myself. Perhaps there was something in this film that roughly 6,500 people on IMDB, 24% of critics and 46% of people on Rotten Tomatoes, the OP, and myself must have missed or didn't appreciate, besides the bad directing, screenplay, and vast majority of the acting.

[–] scofflaw3 10 years ago

As a huge Ed Harris fan, I hate to admit I felt the same way.

[–] polygnotus 7 years ago

This was the worst, A-grade western I've ever seen.

Everything was great about this movie except for the story which continually shot itself in the foot, so to speak.

In the setup, we have this super lawman who is seemingly invincible, brought in to take on the bad man and his goliath like army of thugs.

It starts off well enough with him and his sidekick effortlessly taking out some nasties in the saloon, and the device of juxtaposition between their arrogance and his superiority plays well.

But then our hero disappears. Suddenly, he's replaced by a weak, stupid and incompetent man who is easily beaten by the charms of a woman (who wasn't particularly charming I hate to say) and his own idiocy.

And all this happens in the first act leaving the rest of the movie to drag on with more weakness, incompetence and stupidity.

If it wasn't for the "Skip" button, I wouldn't have made it as far as I did, which still came short of the ending.

[–] wvmcl 9 years ago

I agree completely. A potentially good story (read the book) was completely blown in the execution. Imagine what a talented director (Quentin Tarantino, Sergio Leone -okay he's dead but just an example) and an appropriate cast could have done with the story. Instead, it's a total dud -no humor, no suspense, very little to be said in its favor. Ed Harris displays all the charisma of a telephone pole.

[–] spielberto 15 years ago

I'm with film-ophile. I prefer pretenious overly dramatic acting and plots that involve twists and turns for the sake of twists and turns even if they don't make any sense.
This movie wasn't like real life at all. There were no wagon chases or explosions. The main bad guy didn't have an even more superiorly skilled 'number 1' guy to be Viggo's equal nema...nesima...what am I looking for here?
Nemesis
Thank you. Viggo doesn't have a nemesis to have a one-on-one super battle with at the end. This movie tried to examine the unimportant concepts of what it means to be a man with set of rules to live by, the nature of love and the the illogical side of it. Fah! Why aren't these people perfect in their views and actions like REAL people! Why wasn't this a 'perfect' romance where each person is perfect for each other without flaw? No one in REAL life is ever attracted to someone who has problems, who they KNOW they could do better than.
Again I say FAH! I prefer a REAL western, a REAL movie, about REAL people.....like 'The Quick and the Dead'! :)

[–] tinydancer1 15 years ago

Oh yea real westerns where the good guys wear white hats and red scarves, and sing to their horses. and bad guys who where black hats, black leather vests, and talk with a low grumble. and when all the shooting is over the townspeople run onto the streets and cheer happy little cheers, then they all eat cake.

Use Things, Not people.

[–] herzogvon 15 years ago

Your sarcasm is noted and approved. Sadly, a lot of film watchers seem incapable of understanding that real life is full of ambiguities. Perhaps this is why wars are so easily sold in this country?

[–] JW-30 14 years ago

Thank you for your posting. You leave nothing more to say here.
--
Please. Accept the Mystery.

[–] slugdub 13 years ago

Yeah, we all go to movies to see a slice of reality not escape into a world of fantasy and thought provoking drama.

Too bad this movie takes you to neither. It just takes you to some solid writing the first couple pages and then.. it's like someone else got ahold of the script and didn't know what they were doing. It has no vision and is excruciating to watch.

[–] Cienna 15 years ago

According to your other post you only watched the first 40 minutes. How can the people that you are trying to warn, going to take you seriously? Surely, one must watch a film all the way through to be able to comment properly.

[–] film_ophile 15 years ago

ah, cienna, you are so young.

Ad hoc, Ad loc, Quid pro queeee,
So little time and so much to see

[–] Cienna 15 years ago

And I suppose you are old? And wise? lol

[–] amigoatul 15 years ago

@film_ophile - I've got news for you. You are not sophisticated. You just think you are.

@spielberto - Ur post is one of the best i've seen on imdb. It was absolutely sacr....scar....wats the word....Sarcastic. Thanks.

Ok,ok i got *beep* lost it....bam!whack! - Tyler Durden,Fight Club

[–] film_ophile 15 years ago

ami, can't you read? i said if you want to be nasty, go play in the nasty little boys' sandbox. don't waste your venom here.

Ad hoc, Ad loc, Quid pro queeee,
So little time and so much to see

[–] samantha3 15 years ago

film_ophile,

Are you the only one permitted to waste venom here, then? How do we know you have permission, and have the right to deny it to others? Do you have a certificate? A license? A note from your mommy?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Desrio 15 years ago

Hey amigoatul, you must be American. spielberto isn't sarcastic, he's iro...ionic. Ironic!Thank you, Hitch.

[–] noromance 15 years ago

Agree with film_ophile, Harris must be pretty simple... or smart enough to make a movie for simpletons.

[–] jdsony 15 years ago

Agreed. It definitely wasn't the worst movie and I'd consider it decent but the screenplay was a a bit of a mess. I've been watching a lot of westerns lately (old & new) and this one falls short of most of the others I've watched. I liked the relationship between Ed & Viggo but the whole movie kind of felt pieced together. The whole prostitute that Everett confided in seemed to be just thrown in there just so the audience could hear his thoughts. It seemed like it almost had it all together it just fell a bit flat for me.

[–] Kyosho 15 years ago

I have to agree with film_ophile. I watched this yesterday, and boy was I disappointed. I am a fan of all of the main actors. I am even a fan of Robert B. Parker whose book this was based on (though I haven't read that particular series). Yet even that couldn't save this movie for me. This movie had everything going for it, in my opinion, and completely fell flat. It was such a slow, meandering movie. I typically like slow movies (Lost in Translation, etc.) but this just continually went nowhere. The direction was semi-decent, I suppose. I think it's really the script that is to blame.

This is just my opinion, people. I can suppose I can see some people liking this movie. It just wasn't for me.

[–] tmalpeli 15 years ago

Totally agree with the OP, without doubt the worst Western ive ever seen and one of the most boring experiences ive ever had at the cinema. This film is truly awful .. Its up there with 'Wayne's World', 'Van Helsing', 'Star Trek 2009' and 'Matrix 2 and 3' for the worst films ive ever seen ..

[–] DD-931 15 years ago

Just thought I'd point out that the other screenwriter on this movie is a cousin of Ed Harris. You might check out his IMDB credits.

[–] samantha3 15 years ago

The screenplay follows the book more closely than screenplays usually do, with, as the director said, about 85% of the dialogue straight out of the book. So is it the screenplay you didn't like, or the story as told in the book, or what?

A lot of EH's family and friends were involved in the movie, because it was the only way he could afford to do it. The other main actors took huge pay cuts. It's what is called a labor of love, a classic Western not designed for the current market, as the 3:10 TO YUMA remake was.

And it seems that some people did like it. It got 75% favorable reviews on rottentomatoes.com, and it appeared on several "Best" lists for the year. And it even made a bit of money.