Movie Review - Open Range
User Rating:
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
2003 / 145 Minutes / R
Reviewed by Dale Nauertz
Kevin Costner was once a box office titan. How else can you explain the fact that he was able to play Robin Hood despite a distinct lack of English accent? “Dances With Wolves” not only won him an Oscar, but it was the sort of box office event that, literally, EVERYONE attended back in 1990. Not only that, but it was a damn good film that deserved every ounce of praise that was heaped upon its broad shoulders. It was a beautifully made movie of epic vistas and a cast of thousands that also had a point and a true human heart beating at its center. It was a thinking person’s blockbuster, an epic, a thrilling shot of adrenaline at times, and a meditation on the plight that befell the Native Americans (which is probably not what they want to be called, but it’s a blanket statement from a Caucasian man who doesn’t have time to name every tribe in this paragraph). It was a rarity that happened along at the right time in the right place. And it was a Western that made a lot of money. That, in and of itself, is an amazing thing.
In the decade since then, however, his fortunes have taken a decided turn for the worse. He’s starred in one flop after another. Some of them deserved better than they got. In fact, most of them deserved better than they got (”Tin Cup” is a great movie, as is “A Perfect World”, and “3000 Miles to Graceland” is not a great film, but it’s a helluva lot of fun) and just didn’t hit the right notes with the public. Some of them probably weren’t that great (”Message in a Bottle” didn’t look so fantastic, and neither did “Dragonfly” or “For the Love of the Game”). But there have been a lot of formerly loved actors who’ve starred in a lot of dreck and are still afforded a great deal of slack (Harrison Ford and Sean Connery sprint to mind) whereas Costner could probably come up with the cure for cancer and he’d still be inexplicably hated. But if you can overlook your unreasonable hatred for Kevin Costner, you’ll find “Open Range” is more than worth the effort. And if you, like me, have stuck by Costner and even enjoyed films like “Waterworld” then “Open Range” is your rightful reward.
“Open Range” is the best Western film since “Unforgiven” and I’m not kidding. It’s a gorgeously shot, beautifully constructed film that reminds you how damn good of an actor Costner can be and that he is also a hell of a director when he chooses to put that hat on. He knows how to choose the right people for every spot both in front of and behind the camera and knows how to tell a gripping yarn in a gripping manner. “Open Range” is the story of a group of free-range ranchers driving their cattle across country. This group consists of Costner and his boss (aptly named “Boss”) played as effortlessly as usual by the chameleon-like Robert Duvall and several others. One day, however, they run afoul of a crooked rancher (Michael Gambon) who kills one of their men and mortally wounds another. Costner and Duvall are not about to take this lying down. Thus, a small-scale war begins between the rancher and the free rangers; culminating in a gun battle that is as exciting as anything you’re likely to see this year.
“Open Range” is an old fashioned sort of Western (well, the whole notion of a Western is pretty old fashioned in this day and age, but…), the sort they used to make before guys like Sergio Leone and Sam Peckinpah took the whole genre through a new door back in the late sixties. It’s a film filled with epic vistas and moral decisions and even a hint of low key romance. It’s a movie that reminds you what guys like John Huston used to do with the Western film back in the Fifties, back when they constructed solid, durable Westerns filled with down-home values and action in equal measures. “Open Range” doesn’t push the envelope with innovative camera angles or bold, twisty storytelling. It simply takes its time, develops its characters and situations as naturally as possible, and makes us actually give a damn about everything onscreen. I can’t think of a single moment of this picture that wasn’t absolutely engrossing, and I’m really trying. It’s refreshing to see a film that’s this magnificently old-fashioned (in the best possible sense). It’s really nice to see a movie that’s about real people in days of old, that explores themes of personal freedom and redemption and nobility. It’s nice to see a movie that’s about people, in short, rather than flashy special effects. And it’s nice to see an epic film that doesn’t involve battle sequences of thousands. Yes, I enjoy epics of that sort. But it’s nice to see an epic film that is more personal, more intimate, as well. Speaking of intimate, I also loved the romance between Kevin Costner’s ambiguous cowboy with a haunted past and Annette Bening’s spinster nurse character. So often in films like this, we get a mature man who sparks with a woman who either seems invented by mere screenwriter contrivance or who seems to have been chosen because she looked hot and would appeal to a young male demographic. This romance feels like a true connection between two lonely souls who truly understand one another. These two fit together very nicely and it’s a wonderful thing to watch. I also loved the camaraderie between Costner and Robert Duvall. You really get the sense that these two characters have an easy relationship, a real back and forth with one another, and a sense of deep respect for each other. You understand why these two guys have teamed up. Duvall is the sort of honest, hard-working man that Costner’s character has always aspired to be, and Duvall seems to understand the mistakes and dangers and haunting nature of Costner’s mostly implied, violent past and is willing to help him change his life for the better. When Costner must return to his violent ways in the final act, yes, you do root for him to kill those who seem to deserve it, but you also wince at the fact that this is a step backward for his character, that this is the sort of thing that he has been trying, probably for decades, to put behind him and that, once again, violence has found him and cannot be denied.
If the acting or the look or the tone of this film were off by so much as a millimeter, it wouldn’t work. The whole thing would probably feel stilted or even corny. But the truth of the matter is that nothing in this film is off by even the smallest margin. Everything clicks, everything about this movie is running smoothly. It’s a beautiful, meditative, fascinating film filled with small touches that I’ve never seen before in a film. For example, everyone has seen a gunfight in a movie like this. But have you ever wondered about the aftermath? Who takes care of things once all this is finished? Who cleans up the bodies and makes sure life returns to normal? And, when the town gets flooded, you see the results that gallons of cascading water might have had on those rustic, dirt streets. It’s little things like that which give “Open Range” its remarkable, slice of life feel. And it’s little moments of those sorts that stuck with me from this movie and keep returning to my mind, making me anxious to own the DVD of this film so I can bask in it whenever I choose. Love him or hate him, Costner is great in this movie, both in front of and behind the camera, and “Open Range” is worthy of your attention. Please, give this engrossing film its proper shot. You won’t be disappointed.
