Jon Peters Reviews: “Appaloosa”

Most genres, there’s not too much you can do with their conventions anymore. Play them right, you got a decent film, play them wrong, people will say that’s typical of the genre. Last year, ’3:10 to Yuma’ and ‘Assassination of Jesse James’ both gave the western genre a much needed shot it their arm. Both were excellent and both treated the material with respect, proving the western genre isn’t dead; you jus need a good script to get them made. I think something like ‘Appaloosa’ is a by product of the success on those two films last year. I don’t think it’s a bad thing and judging by the audience I was with seeing this film, people still love the westerns.

‘Appaloosa’ is a decent film, there’s little new they add to the genre, but like I said in the opening paragraph, they played their cards right with the western conventions.

Ed Harris directs the film and also stars, but his direction isn’t flashy, but they cover all the angles needed to craft this late 19th century tale of a couple of lawmen hired to clean up the town from these murderers (one played by a grim Jeremy Irons). It’s perhaps a typical scenario, even though the script tosses a few twists and turns. The film is accurate in its tone and grit. It’s more of a John Ford western than a Leone and that’s fine.

There’s the typical guns fights; a few of them actually, short and sweet. Those looking for more action might rent ‘Tombstone’ again, but like after one short gun fight, Ed Harris remarks on why it was a quick battle ‘we are all good shots’. I think the film excels in the reteaming of Ed Harris and Viggo Mortensen, their first since Cronenberg’s ‘A History of Violence’. They quip off each other in perfect time, as if they are good friends in real life outside of the camera’s eye. Their chemistry is great.

For me the film looses a bit when it’s focused on an unneeded three-way love triangle. I didn’t buy it and its conclusion is more than a shrug. The strength of the film is in these two guys devotion for their friendship, something that makes the climax really worth it, but this triangle adds only fat to an otherwise lean film.

Fans of the westerns should like this quite a bit, but if you don’t have an appreciation for the genre, you might think it’s a dry film. It’s worth seeing, as Harris’ direction is assured (it’s his second attempt after the great ‘Pollock’ in 2000) and the performances are good. I might have sounded a bit nonchalant on it all, but like I said it follows the conventions closely without stirring too much up and even though I liked it (the humor is a lot of fun), it’s more for fans of the genre than the casual movie goer.