The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Rio Bravo


#1

One of my favorite films of all time.



Roger Ebert has added it to his list of great films. Read his article here, you may not always agree with him but the man knows his movies and sees a lot of what makes Rio Bravo the film it is. Rio Bravo truly is a great film.



<LINK_TEXT text=“http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc … /907159989”>http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090715/REVIEWS08/907159989</LINK_TEXT>


#2

[quote=“Ordell Rodriguez”]
One of my favorite films of all time.



Roger Ebert has added it to his list of great films. Read his article here, you may not always agree with him but the man knows his movies and sees a lot of what makes Rio Bravo the film it is. Rio Bravo truly is a great film.



<LINK_TEXT text=“http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc … /907159989”>http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090715/REVIEWS08/907159989</LINK_TEXT>
[/quote]

The end gun fight sequence is so legendary, and just the way Dean Martin picks himself up after all the humiliation of being a drunk did to him , he comes out on top blasting and singing.



My rifle, pony, and me.


#3

[quote=“Ordell Rodriguez”]
One of my favorite films of all time.



Roger Ebert has added it to his list of great films. Read his article here, you may not always agree with him but the man knows his movies and sees a lot of what makes Rio Bravo the film it is. Rio Bravo truly is a great film.



<LINK_TEXT text=“http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc … /907159989”>http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090715/REVIEWS08/907159989</LINK_TEXT>
[/quote]

Roger Ebert is out of touch, again - he’s a guy that’s too analytical of things. He gave Bruno two thumbs up and gave it a great review. Now with Harry Potter he gave it a mixed review and only one thumb up - what ever that means. I despise critics, those people just can’t program their brains to have fun, they just have to think like robots and analyze every scene, trying to find some kind of meaning to everything! It’s just a story. All you have to do is sit back and try to enjoy the film.



But that’s what a critic does, they get paid vast sums of green to complain about any minor inconsistency and persuade the general audience to avoid this and that, because it does not meet their standards. I have standards of my own, but if I were to compare Bruno to Harry Potter: The Half Blood Prince, there would be no contest. Harry Potter has a lot more to offer, and it’s a charming picture that everyonce can enjoy. You see they underestimate the difficulty of adapting a great book and making a good picture out of it. They overlook everything, it’s appalling. Filmmakers spend years making their work, and then here come the bloodhounds - spewing their nonsense on the papers and feeding it to the general public in a matter of minutes. Critics are jealous bores who wish they could make any kind of film in general. It doesn’t occur to them that some people are only searching for entertainment and nothing more. Me, I like all kinds of films. Smart, entertaining, as long as it’s good and bearable. Bruno was a piece of shit, it’s not even a fucking movie. You wanna really laugh? Watch a Jerry Lewis film.


#4

I’ve seen this movie like… 4 times(?) but it was 5 years ago so, can’t remember much of it :-</E>


#5

[quote=“Lt. BioBasterd”]
Roger Ebert is out of touch, again - he’s a guy that’s too analytical of things. He gave Bruno two thumbs up and gave it a great review. Now with Harry Potter he gave it a mixed review and only one thumb up - what ever that means. I despise critics, those people just can’t program their brains to have fun, they just have to think like robots and analyze every scene, trying to find some kind of meaning to everything! It’s just a story. All you have to do is sit back and try to enjoy the film.



But that’s what a critic does, they get paid vast sums of green to complain about any minor inconsistency and persuade the general audience to avoid this and that, because it does not meet their standards. I have standards of my own, but if I were to compare Bruno to Harry Potter: The Half Blood Prince, there would be no contest. Harry Potter has a lot more to offer, and it’s a charming picture that everyonce can enjoy. You see they underestimate the difficulty of adapting a great book and making a good picture out of it. They overlook everything, it’s appalling. Filmmakers spend years making their work, and then here come the bloodhounds - spewing their nonsense on the papers and feeding it to the general public in a matter of minutes. Critics are jealous bores who wish they could make any kind of film in general. It doesn’t occur to them that some people are only searching for entertainment and nothing more. Me, I like all kinds of films. Smart, entertaining, as long as it’s good and bearable. Bruno was a piece of shit, it’s not even a fucking movie. You wanna really laugh? Watch a Jerry Lewis film.
[/quote]

I know man, it’s terrible, someone has an educated opinion about something and wer’re forced to read it at gun point.


#6

[quote=“Eastern Beauty”]
I’ve seen this movie like… 4 times(?) but it was 5 years ago so, can’t remember much of it :-</E>
[/quote]

That’s a shame, you should definetley look it up again, it’s one of Howard Hawks better movies. Now that’s saying something.


#7

It’s a perfect “chill out” movie. When you just want to be sit back and relax, not have to be glued to the screen or on the edge of your seat. I remember seeing parts of this film when I was very young, I always liked John Wayne. I last watched it about a month ago, but had it as background viewing. The scene where they break into song is awesome!!