Open Range
2003 Directed by Kevin Costner
Synopsis
A former gunslinger is forced to take up arms again when he and his cattle crew are threatened by a corrupt lawman.
Cast
Popular reviews
More-
Slow moving and brooding where nothing happens until they kill the dog.Two leads are excellent along with the obligatory Brit bad guy.I can never decide if the yanks think allBbrits are bad guys or simply just better at acting.Fantastic shoot out at the climax observed by the townsfolk from afar.
-
Cool showdown, but the dialogue's pretty generic and the score is just cheesy and unnecessary most of the time.
-
Pros: Costner's decision to cast himself in a supporting role; the stunning cinematography; the climatic gunfight (smartly shot with mostly wide angles to lend a more realistic impression); the production design.
Cons: Costner's "Hollywoodized" and over-the-top direction; too many aphorisms; wooden and cheesy dialogue; Annette Bening's performance; the sweeping and distracting score.
-
Open Range is a wonderfully traditional Western with large helpings of sprawling countryside and an old fashioned western score. Kevin Costner doesnt take a lot of risks with the direction or the story and even though he hits a lot of familiar notes from previous westerns, he hits them well and leaves a positive impression on the viewer.
-
Staring and directed by Kevin Costner, Open Range is arguably the best thing veteran actor has ever done, in front or behind the camera. A western in the grand, sweeping, old school horse opera sense, this is a slow burning joy. Costner and Robert Duvall’s relationship has genuine warmth, and Annette Bening brings an extra layer of class as a love interest, all of which helps make the outstanding final shootout an even more emotive experience.
-
A fantastic final shoot-out is worth watching this western.
Great cast and got to say Duvall and Gambon fitted into their role's nicely.
The problem I had with it was the score, felt that it was trying to outburst into a musical. Too cheesy for my liking.
Overall it's not bad but I have seen better (Eastwood anyone).
Recent reviews
More-
A beautiful film, masterfully designed and shot. Everything looks cool from the massive sweeping vistas to the very real ginfight.
That fight seems so gritty and real, it's not perfect like westerns past.
Robert Duvall is extremely fun to watch and his role makes me happy. Kevin Costner is good to watch in westerns too, honest.
One thing that does bother me about the movie is some of the non-action editing. They use a lot of dissolves that are weird. They also seem to have taken 3 alternate endings and used them all instead of picking one. It takes forever to finish and each of the 3 endings is repetitive.
This is probably the best western from the last 10 years!
-
Pros: Costner's decision to cast himself in a supporting role; the stunning cinematography; the climatic gunfight (smartly shot with mostly wide angles to lend a more realistic impression); the production design.
Cons: Costner's "Hollywoodized" and over-the-top direction; too many aphorisms; wooden and cheesy dialogue; Annette Bening's performance; the sweeping and distracting score.
-
The most recent directing effort from Costner is a superbly crafted Western which is relatively slow and quiet until an explosive and extraordinary shootout occurs. Costner and Duvall's connection on screen here is fantastic and much like Butch and Sundance leads to a hugely enjoyable and engaging watch throughout from start to end. The pacing as mentioned is slow, but not in a bad way at all, it is still thoroughly gripping and intriguing throughout it just moves at its own steady pace until a sudden outburst of violence in the final shootout. It seems slightly unique compared to other westerns in the smallest of ways such as, there appears to be a lot more grass than your standard western…
-
Well, the scenery was great. Story was less than captivating, but it felt like a western.
-
I love the faces of Robert Duvall's Boss and Kevin Costner's Charley. The whole movie is written on them. It's a straightforward movie (as is the dialogue): Two men put in a situation, an impossible one, and how they work it out with the help and hindrance of their pasts. On the right, you can see Boss' life has taught him grim determination and there's strength behind his statement, "Man's got a right to protect his property and his life." Charley too can get behind those words, but his past is tainted with regret and when he says, "there's things that gnaw at a man worse than dying." he's not just talking about other men's lack of bravery. Resignation to…
-
Less effective as a Western than as a "cowboy movie," in that it isn't particularly good at delivering the expected oater goods, but it's so immersed in the details of the cowboy way of life that it becomes fascinating in that regard. From the moment we see Costner hold out his hat so that his horse will recognize his scent, this is a movie that has thought out the way these characters live, down to the little things like what they do in a rainstorm or what they would spend their money on if they thought they might be killed soon. For while, yes, the story ends up building to a final showdown, Boss (Robert Duvall) and Charlie (Costner) are…
-
Aside from a fantastic final shootout, Open Range is very much a generic western film. It's a shame that the hour and a half before the shootout feels like a chore, but it is ultimately worth it. Duvall and Gambon standout from the otherwise decent cast as they inhabit their roles very well.
-
Costner and company craft a more than satisfying Western (a genre of non-guilty weakness of mine). While it plays the story in a careful blanket of melodrama, its last half hour is greatly crafted, and exciting to boot.
-
Costner lets every scene drag on for a beat or three longer than it probably should, but it's not so much ostentation at work as the sense that Costner and company simply enjoy this world and its personalities too much to let go, and their affection proves infectious. An honorable contribution to the genre with a relative minimum of pretensions, and much better than any film from the director of 'Dances with Wolves' has any right to be.