From watching the “Making of” I’ve gathered that Kurt Russel was really into the story, that’s why it’s so strange to me that the film turned out such a typical 90s action film rather than a good western.
The film opens with a stylized silent film sequence and a narrator voice. The sequence could have been suitable due to fact that the real White Earp lived to see the silent films era, but seeing Val Kilmer in one of the silent clips is weird, as that becomes not the 20th re-telling, but a documentary. Did have the “breaking the fourth wall” effect on me.
To sum up my first problem with the film, I will put it like this: it is an incredibly naive “Good” vs “Bad” story. Straight away, in the first scene you “meet the bad guys”, then, in scene 2, the good guys are presented to you.
The scene with Wyatt arguing with Virge and Morg about getting involved would have worked if the previous scene wasn’t such a pathetic tear-jerker – the town, oppressed by the horrible cowboys, terrorizing the citizens on a daily bases ( just for the sake of it, it seems), Virgil looking at a scarred woman, holding her little son…
Let’s make it obvious how bad the bad guys are – true maniacs. And only Earps can stand up to them
Scene 1 – Dear Viewer, let me present you the Bad Guys of this movie
“Baddie’s” evil laugh – approx 3 minutes into the film just made me laugh too. Curly Bill is a raging maniac here. Not like he was a nice guy, but shooting down an entire Mexican village is just laughable. I am guessing the origins of the scene go into the documented “practical jokes” of Curly bill who made a preacher “dance” and the villagers to dance naked. But the way it is in the film – it’s an absolute overkill.
“Of course” they are shown as a gang of “inhuman” beings who kill a number of innocent, defenseless people. Also, if that’s not enough for you to hate the “baddies” – Curly Bill tortures and kills the newly wed husband, and then Johnny Ringo shoots the priest dead. These are the Bad guys, got it now?
Scene 2 – Now, please meet our Good Guys! (Don’t forget to applaud at how touchingly good they are)
Meet Wyatt Earp, first shown protecting his horse from a whipping. Yes, real Wyatt Earp did like animals, but again the implementation of that fact is far too on the nose. I remember a book on Screenwriting I read, when I was at a film school – there was a part about writing a likeable character, presented as bullet points list – “He/she should love animals, children….” I guess they’ve read that book too.
A couple more weird bits
- I find it hard to believe that Morgan has no idea about his brother’s religious beliefs. Morgan Earp: Wyatt, do you believe in God? No, c’mon really, do you?Wyatt Earp: Yeah. Maybe… Hell, I don’t know.Yes, it is true – the whole bit about Morgan being fascinated by what people see when they die, it’s just the dialogue as it is in the film seems to be unnatural way of introducing this fact
- Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that the idea of some guy with a shotgun (his face hidden under a hood), bursting into Virgil Earp house, and unloading his shotgun just over the heads of the Earp’s women is downright ridiculous. Maybe I’ve missed some hidden meaning of that scene?
Best bits
There are some notably good scenes and lines of dialogue ‘though.
One is the scene with Wyatt getting 25% of the saloon revenue.
And the following scene with Doc sending off a guy with the shotgun “I apologise, I forgot you were there. You may go now.”
In the theater after an exerpt from Faust, where Faust sells his soul to the Devil, Holliday remarks with a nice line: “very instructive”.
The scene with Doc mocking Ringo when they first meet.
A bit of a summary
It seems that the intentions were good, there was love and interest in the story, but something went very wrong along the way. From what I read there were massive production problems and replacements, so that might be the reason.
Classic Western Movie Genre 