Simply A Masterpiece

How sad is this?

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

This is a wonderful Western for all the reasons other reviewers have mentioned. I won't reiterate them, but I'd like to add that it's incredibly rare to see a social-dance scene in a historical movie where the dancing is completely appropriate to the period and not the product of some modern choreographer's creative urges. (There's a brilliant spoof of that sort of thing in "Top Secret.") In "Long Riders," the dancers are doing exactly the sort of dance that people did in that time and place, and they're doing it to the music on the soundtrack, and -- this one is even more rare -- whenever you see a musician playing an instrument on screen, he's really actually playing what you're hearing. This is probably related to Ry Cooder's influence, and he did a magnificent job with the score, but it's worth noting that the film also features veteran folkies Mitch Greenhill and Mayne Smith as two of the musicians; those guys used to play vintage Americana at various folk clubs in California all through the 70's and 80's. And speaking of which: there's a funeral scene in which there's a guy singing a traditional American hymn. The guy is Hugh McGraw, who ran the Sacred Harp Publishing Company for about a million years, though he's passed on now. Sacred Harp singing, or more generally "shape note singing," is a very distinctive American tradition that's closely associated with the time and place the film is set in, though it's done all over the country these days. (I won't go into details about what "shape note" means, but Google it if you're curious.) The song McGraw sings in that scene is right out of the Sacred Harp book. They could have found a million people who'd have done a fine job of singing a song, but they decided to hire the one guy who best represents the tradition they were portraying. That's a truly mind-boggling degree of attention to detail.9 stars rather than 10 because of the animal stunts. This film was made before the Humane Society's "no animals were harmed" seal of approval became as ubiquitous as it is today, and I won't go into details, but there are a couple of scenes where that's really obvious. I checked, and the Humane Society rates the film "Unacceptable." I understand that this sort of thing used to be common and that the movie industry felt differently about it in 1980 than they do today, but I still found those scenes disturbing. People with strong feelings about animal abuse in movies might want to pass on this one, though you'll be missing an otherwise stunningly great movie if you do.

The western is not what it once was. Remember that the first American movie (1903) was a western, "The Great Train Robbery." Not long after, heroes like Tom Mix and William S. Hart dominated the silent screen of the Old West. In 1928, "In Old Arizona" became the first talkie western. Over the next several decades, the genre continued to attract audiences. Even though the peak probably occurred in the early 1960s, the 1950s decade became the best decade of the brand, and not only because John Wayne and Randolph Scott were at their crests. In the 1959-1960 television season, no fewer than 26 westerns appeared on prime time. There had always been a major distinction of who were the good guys and the bad guys. Each had their roles, and audiences knew who was who. It should be noted that even in some earlier westerns like "Jesse James" (1939) the outlaws were given sympathetic treatment. The characters were made likable. But beginning in the mid-1960s, the format of the western changed. Revisionism and anti-westerns were the vogue as they became more cynical and darker. European westerns made an impact, and the anti-hero was born. The code of the former good guys changed: Sometimes there was little to distinguish who was good and who was bad. Unlike those well-spoken and compassionate good guy cowboys like Hart, Mix, and Gene Autry, the newer "heroes" (like Clint Eastwood and Gene Hackman) were often flawed. Empathy abated, and some broke the law; a few were even murderous. Likewise, the language of the good guys turned crude. Throughout the 1970s the old-time western was obviously in decline; John Wayne's final movie was "The Shootist" in 1976. The days of "The Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp" (1955-1961) had long passed. Just compare "Rio Grande" (1950) or "Warpath" (1951) with "The Wild Bunch" (1969) or "Soldier Blue" (1970), or try to equate any Gene Autry western with "Cry Blood, Apache" (1970)."The Long Riders" gives us an early aspect of the post-modern western, a style that tended to choose atmosphere over form and still sometimes blurred the distinction between good and bad. The heroes may or may not be anti-heroes. So were the "protagonists" of "The Long Riders" working-class heroes or just bad guys? The answer is that they were outlaws, but not sadistic villains. The focus of "The Long Riders" is on the highlights of the James-Younger gang of the nineteenth century Midwest (not the Far West). The supporting population was mostly sympathetic to the James-Younger gang as they were looked upon as rebelling against the hated Yankees. In summary, the film highlights their train and bank robberies after the Civil War; the acceptance of danger by the James-Younger women; the Pinkerton National Detective Agency methods of hunting down the gang; the killing of John Younger by a Pinkerton detective (1874); the exploding flare thrown into the James home that maimed Jesse/Frank's mother and killed his half-brother Archie (1875); the disaster at Northfield, Minnesota that finished the Youngers and destroyed the gang (1876); and the traitorous act of Bob Ford (1882), the dirty little coward that shot Mr. Howard. Four sets of real life brothers play the four historic families of the Wild West: the Keaches are the James, the Carradines are the Youngers, the Quaids are the Millers, and the Guests are the Fords. James and Stacy Keach play Jesse and Frank James, respectively; David, Keith and Robert Carradine are Cole, Jim and Bob Younger (and since there are not enough brothers, Kevin Brophy plays 4th brother John Younger, although he is a cousin in the movie) James; Dennis and Randy Quaid are Ed and Clell Miller; and Christopher and Nicholas Guest play the backstabbers Charlie and Bob Ford. Bob plugged Jesse in the back of the head as he adjusted a framed copy of the saying "God bless our home." Actually Jesse was just dusting the picture. The movie does some romanticizing of the gang, although the early murderous act of Ed Miller is portrayed brutally. Then again, Jesse dismisses Miller for his action against an innocent civilian. What ultimately makes the movie watchable is its favorable aspects. These positives include the (already explained) imaginative casting, top-notch acting, remarkable period detail, outstanding editing, and great photography. But also note there is violence and that the history is not always accurate (like the confrontation between Cole Younger and Sam Starr that never happened). Then again it is accurate enough. For instance, the gang did wear dusters at Northfield and Frank James did turn himself in to the law; he was later acquitted.

THE LONG RIDERS isn't as gritty as THE GREAT NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA RAID nor as theatrical as, say, TOMBSTONE (another movie about a real life shootout), but it IS super-stylized, with an impressive cast. If I have one complaint, it's that the historical background of "the James gang" is only briefly touched upon: it would've been interesting to see how the Civil War atrocities that were committed BY and AGAINST some of these men resulted in the formation of the gang- from the loss of personal property to the acts of outright murder they then committed themselves. I've never bought into the idea that these men were Robin Hoods (I've never read any documentation to that effect); they were robbin' hoods, and they were murderers. THE LONG RIDERS is a romanticized version of what was for many a true life horror story. It would be interesting to see this story from THAT perspective. (And I've always thought it telling that the gang was decimated by armed citizens and not by Law Enforcement.)

"The Long Riders" is yet another saga of the life and times of legendary outlaw Jesse James and his gang. Director Walter Hill gives us a visually stunning authentic looking ultra violent western.What sets this one apart is the playing of the various historical brothers by actual brothers. James and Stacy Keach play Jesse and Frank James, David, Keith and Robert Carradine play the Younger Brothers (Cole, Jim and Bob respectively), Dennis and Randy Quaid are Ed and Clell Miller and Christopher and Nicholas Guest, Charlie and Bob Ford.The film gives us a sample of the James Gang's repertoire through a bank robbery to a train robbery to a stage coach hold up ( with a delightful bit by Harry Carey Jr.), to their final caper, an attempted bank robbery in Northfield Minnesota complete with bloody Peckinpah-ish slow motion bloody violence. It also covers Jesse's courting of his wife and Cole Younger's "relationship" with saloon gal Belle Starr whose husband Sam Starr (James Remar) takes exception.As mentioned, Director Hill gives the film an authentic post civil war look. The color photography is excellent and the costumes and set pieces realistic.As a final note, I have to point out the scene within a bank hold-up where James Keach as Jesse is standing stone faced with both guns drawn looking every bit like a cross between William S. Hart and Buster Keaton. I got, I am sure, an unintended chuckle out of that one.