MovieChat Forums > The American West (2016) Discussion > Kiefer Sutherland? really??

Kiefer Sutherland? really??

posted 8 years ago by stephanieericsson
10 replies | jump to latest

There was a lot about this first episode I liked-- mostly that it painted the context of the times and circumstances which subsequently drove other events like:

1. Jessie James coming home to the devastation of his family's home in post-Civil War Missouri which explains his second career as a bank robber;
2. the post-war economy that General Grant needed to remedy and how that led to
3. the land deal given to the railroads which resulted in
4. war with the Lakota...

But two things were so blatantly hokey that they really undercut its credibility--

1. the scene where Jessie is practicing being a bad guy in the barn made me laugh out loud...
2. Tom Selleck, Danny Glover, Kiefer Sutherland and Redford himself acting as historical experts??! wtf really???

That alone completely derailed any believability.

So far, I'm not sure what history this series is supposed to cover that Ken Burns didn't do a much better job covering in his excellent series, The West.

It's a surprise, really, because I had the impression that Redford had more integrity and a higher standard in the things he produced.

I'll still watch the rest of the series, but it's disappointing...

God made man because he loves a good joke.

[–] morbius001 8 years ago

Kinda agree with your point. Wasn't exactly convinced that because a few guys once acted in westerns, that they had any special insight... other that saddle-sores.
But- I suppose RR figured that in the public's eye, it was convincing enough. Sorry to add, that he may have been right.

[–] rickathedj 8 years ago

Maybe Redford thought that would be a good way to attract interest. Far too few people have an interest in history. If they can draw a few more viewers who might not be interested just in the historical aspects, I think that's a good thing.

The saga of getting my first novel on Kindle
http://ricksmidnightquill.blogspot.com/

[–] Bobby_Dupea 8 years ago

Not if it's sloppy and unconvincing, it's not.

[–] stahl-ej 8 years ago

I agree, The West is an excellent series done by a real Historian(s). Unfortunately, it is not really a Ken Burns project, he just kind of lent his name to it. Dayton Duncan was the real historian behind it.

[–] jpease1223 8 years ago

I saw Keifer Sutherland, Mark Harmon, and Tom Selleck. Robert Redford produced it. All of them research their roles when they play it so why not?

[–] YouthIsWasted 8 years ago

Sutherland, Harmon and Selleck are just there as eye-candy. Everyone has seen them in cowboy movies and that's good enough for the producers. But seriously, none of them are historians or have the knowledge to speak with any authority. However, it really doesn't matter as the "history" being presented is so full of inaccuracies and just plain wrong info that it's just more myths and legends. The public deserves better. Too many people get their "history" from TV and this sort of prattle does nothing to educate them. The truth is much more interesting ......go read a book instead!

[–] mnbush 8 years ago

I agree with you about the way history sets up the actions of the protagonists and I wondered about all the talking heads. But watching historians talk isn't as entertaining as watching MOVIE STARS for the general public and who better to recite lines than actors? Especially actors who played these characters.

[–] joe_538 8 years ago

who better to recite lines than actors?

Historians, authors, professors, museum curators... people who actually know the subject. Not everybody needs actors to tell them what's what.

Especially actors who played these characters.

Kiefer Sutherland played a member of Billy the Kid's gang over a quarter century ago. That's as close as any of them come to playing the characters in the series. Should Russell Crowe or Val Kilmer be featured alongside experts in programs about the Roman Empire?

[–] olihist 8 years ago

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii was featured in History's"Barbarians Rising." How she ended up on a docudrama about the Roman Empire is anyone's guess...

[–] ma0u 8 years ago

Uhhh no ? lol The actors names (Keifer, Burt--all of them) were only captioned as: 'Actor "moviename"'; everyone else was labeled accordingly as well e.g. historians as 'Historian, University of blah', author as 'Author, Bookname'.