Chris Farley Archives - All-True Outlaw

Project: 100 Westerns: Part Five: Chino; The Westerner; Wagons East!; The King and Four Queens

Posted on April, 2025 by JS

Ayy All-Truers,

Welcome to the fifth go-around of Project: 100 Westerns, in which I will watch 100 Westerns and provide thoughts on them. By now, if you’re doing any type of quick math, you can see I’m woefully short of hitting the one year goal. Whoopsie, that’s life! 😎

On to the next four movies:

#16. Chino (1973)

“What a man says and what a man does doesn’t always end up being the same thing.”

In this Charles Bronson-led film, a horse tamer living in solitude has his life upended when a young man named Jamie (Vincent Van Patten), and later, a woman named Catherine (Jill Ireland), intrude on his daily dealings, eventually forcing him into situations that rattle his uncomplicated existence.

Aside from a couple of awesome fights with above-average choreography (Bronson could move, man), and the obligatory shootout at the end, this is one sleepy, listless movie. Based on the novel The Valdez Horses (also the title presented at the start of the English version of this film) by Lee Hoffman, the events that take place center on the everyday happenings of a man and his lonely horse breeding operation. The plot opens with Jamie wandering in and squeaking his way into a job as ranch hand, and the viewer (this one, at least) understands the story to be that of an uneasy alliance between a hardened man and bright-eyed boy. The two acclimate with each other quickly, Chino delivering the hard lessons and Jamie teaching the elder man how to enjoy life again.

This dynamic carries the movie part of the way, but is mostly forgotten once Catherine enters the picture. The sister of the nefarious town boss, Maral, she adheres to Chino despite his gruff demeanor and seemingly apathetic posture. It’s pretty typical Western stuff from there, but there’s a certain chemistry that doesn’t quite manifest despite the script, actors and soundtrack trying to make it work. It seems that the romance element may have been punched up a little because of Bronson and Ireland’s real life vows.

The one-two punch of Jamie and Catherine feel like they were thrown by different people at different times of the day. Their presence in the story represent similar themes to the title character but since the two don’t really interact, nor have similar plot concerns, they work against each other, ultimately.

Eventually, Maral’s ire reaches an action point and he threatens Chino to stay away from his sister, then to eventually leave town, or else. Being a man of hard principles and honor, Chino initially balks at this idea, his ardent independence not allowing him to be bullied, but once he sees the violence on the horizon, and his inability to deter it, he, surprisingly, decides to free his horses, shoo Jamie away and burn his cabin to ash. It’s a bit of a reversal of what we’d expect from the genre, but slots right into the “revisionist” era. The West is not a place of justice and hard virtue, but rather chaos and compromise. Chino flees while still drawing breath and preserves the lives of the two people who matter most to him. It’s a bold ending, but sad and more than a little muddled.

All in all, the movie is OK. No idea how it’s rated PG with the flashes of horse cock, and a rape-y sort of first hook-up between Chino and Catherine, but it’s got an appeal in the somber, relaxed mood it gives off. I just wish the focus was a little tighter, there’s something the film is trying to say but voices it in a hoarse (hah) whisper.

#17. The Westerner (1940)

“By Gobs!”

Within the first ten minutes of this movie, Walter Brennan will have you clenching your jaw and shaking your head.

Playing the infamous “Judge” Roy Bean, the self-appointed “law” of small-town Texas, Brennan presents the audience with an immediately unlikable, yet inexplicably endearing, antagonist. Bean is a nasty guy, causing damage under the guise of righteousness and shared values, yet he hits the notes of common man charisma you’d expect from the endearing hick-ish sidekick. Before we even meet the main character, Bean is already sentencing a man to hang for mere acts of survival and self-preservation. His power and sway are apparent, and it makes for an insurmountable problem from the jump.

When Cole Harden (possibly the most Western name ever?) is dragged into Vinegaroon for alleged horse theft, Bean is quick with his gun-gavel and sentences the stranger to death under the guise of peacekeeping and moral tenacity. He cares not for evidence or doubt, but rather works to maintain a contrived status quo. Most notably, he’s cheered every step of the way by a village of cronies and goons.

He of the Type Strong and Silent, Gary Cooper, plays Cole with a directness that bounces off of Brennan really well. He’s the standard drifter type – nothing holding him down to any place or purpose, but his sense of justice peeks out every once in a while. Understanding that he’s down to his last verbal bullets, Cole coerces Bean into a friendship over the shared admiration of (real-life) starlet Lillie Langtry, which unfolds a whole other set of plot dramatics.

One thing I find interesting about films of yesteryear is the sort of disjointed talent and production levels in any given picture. Like, you can feel Hollywood learning and evolving as it goes along. Specific to this film, Walter Brennan is so good that the acting abilities of others, or lack thereof, become glaring. Cooper is fine, he always sort of plays it straight, retreating into an everyman style that obviously worked for him over a long career, but some of the day player types are perpetrators of over or underacting. It doesn’t detract from the film too much, however.

A few other things work against the movie, as a whole. The depiction of Roy Bean is fun but does not align too ardently to the real life man. I certainly think a pastiche would have been an adequate replacement. While the plot has some good turns (i.e. the push/pull of the relationship between the two leads) the central conflict of homesteaders vs cattlemen is a big whatever. The final scene too, which sort of lionizes the villain in a way that’s unearned, feels off kilter and driven by a misplaced nostalgia of the West and its imperfect ways.

Still, I’m sort of surprised this movie isn’t talked about a little more with other classics of the era. In my view, Brennan’s Oscar-winning performance makes it an essential part of the early-Western catalogue.

#18. Wagons East! (1994)

Last month, I watched Almost Heroes, the Chris Farley-driven explorer comedy set during the 1800s. When I browsing Prime for that movie, Wagons East! was suggested right along with it, and I softly marveled at the similarities between the two. Beyond the similar setting, both starred comedic giants in their final acting role, featured foppish co-leads, and are generally considered failures, both financially and critically.

That said, this movie has a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. I know that review aggregators isn’t gospel, but jeez, its a deal better than Almost Heroes.

Richard Lewis stars as Phil, a former war doc who, with others, are flat exhausted by the West and the turmoil it brings. He, along with other characters played by (the Doctor) Robert Picardo and (Dr. Cox) John C. McGinley, decide to take the unconventional route of going against the flow of traffic and returning to civilization. The move is presented as ironic, which it is in the context of Western films, but you have to think that sort of thing happened all the time.

The group hires the drunken and disheveled James Harlow (John Candy) to lead them back to Saint Louis. That’s sort of contrived impetus for the plot, I’m not saying the roads are clearly marked but you’d think going back to civilization wouldn’t require a whole ass guide. Predictably, Harlow, much like Bartholomew Hunt from Almost Heroes, is far from a competent leader and hijinks ensue.

The movie suffers from a lot of the same ills of it’s cousin-movie. The jokes are often too stupid to solicit more than a chuckle and it deals too heavily in tropes and typecasts to be considered daring. Still, it works way better than its counterpart, actually attempting to deliver on character arcs and even giving us a capable antagonist or two to impede the protagonists from time to time.

I didn’t hate Wagons East!, it’s got a good cast and is earnest in it’s attempt to entertain, but given that Candy died in the throes of production there’s a wisp of melancholy in the cinematic ether. Fire this one up if you’re bored and looking for some that mid-90s vibe, but be warned of the tinge of sadness is may produce between the quips and arrows.

#19. The King and Four Queens (1956)

I love the way “thirst” manifests itself in older movies.

This film could be alternately titled “Down Bad Ranch” with its plotline of a charming older man sauntering into a remote homestead with four man-deprived widows all vying for his attention. Clark Gable is Dan Kehoe, a wandering con man who discovers via town gossip that a huge sum of gold is buried somewhere on the McDade property. Apparently, the four McDade brothers secured the treasure from a robbery, but rumor and conjecture claims three were killed in the resulting skirmish with the law, with one escaping and now MIA.

As an unknown McDade sibling is possibly still alive, the four wives of the brothers (played by Eleanor Parker, Jean Willes, Barbara Nichols & Sara Shane) are sort of in a Schrödinger’s Widow situation — any of them could still be married and thus are obligated to wait around until the missing brother returns. Thus, the harsh and protective Ma McDade (Jo Van Fleet) is immediately skeptical of Kehoe when he wanders onto the estate, and keeps a steady eye on his movements throughout the film.

The King and Four Queens does that typical Golden Age Western thing where the roguish lead is presented as a dashing black knight, rather than the antihero-with-a-redemption-sidecar type. Even though we’re told Kehoe is a bit of a thief and swindler, nothing negative comes about from that lifestyle, and Gable plays him like an imperfectly perfect gentleman. This lack of consequence prevents actual drama from happening in the film, and the thin plot reflects that. A huge portion of this movie is cute banter and some physicality between Kehoe and each of the sisters, but ultimately a lot of that positioning and intrigue goes nowhere.

There’s a sense something is missing from this film, and according to IMDb, scenes with the missing McDade brother were cut from the final version. The viewer feels that omission, the script alludes to that dangling mystery more than a few times yet decides to resolve it with an alternate turn during the final moments. An additional antagonist would have pushed the tension greatly but instead this venture sort of meanders and ends abruptly.

What we get is in the end is a lighthearted movie that feels like a minor missed opportunity. The performances are adequate and it’s shot well enough, however the lesson I take from this one is that it’s pretty hard to make a great movie, even if many of the components work on their own.

Four more movies down! I’m enjoying myself and learning a good bit about the Western genre and the movie-making machine.

Check back on May 5th, 2025 as we premiere another All-True comic, a must-see for fans of the steed.

Westward!

~Jamil

Project: 100 Westerns: Part Four: Gunless; Ride in a Whirlwind; Dark Command; Almost Heroes

Posted on March, 2025 by JS

Oi Outlawians,

This is the fourth installment of Project: 100 Westerns. I’m angling to watch 100 Westerns this year, and if you’re keeping count, you can see I’m way behind! 😵

Here’s the next batch of movies, selected on whim and vibes:

#12. Gunless (2010)

Movie poster for Gunless. The Montana Kid, played by Paul Gross, in profile

Way, WAY back in the day, a teenage me used to riffle through IMDB like I was a card shark with a fresh deck. This was back when the Internet Movie Database was one of the more complete and robust sources of information on the nascent web, and as I was introduced to more and more classic and mature films, I was enamored with the resource IMDB offered. I mention this because IMDB also has pages for movies in pre-production, and that’s how I first came across Gunless. This was before 2005, and for whatever reason, a Canadian Western where the gunslinger is not revered like he is just south seemed like a concept that could work. I took a mental note to check that movie out, then like most teen things, it faded into the mist of memory – however every few years I’d think “I wonder why they never made that Canadian Western about the displaced outlaw?” then subsequently would forget about it again.

So, I was pretty surprised to see Gunless show up across my screen when combing the apps for a weekend Western viewing. I didn’t think it existed!

The movie centers on “The Montana Kid” (Paul Gross), a man who drifts into a very small Canadian town and quickly discovers the residents don’t care about nor understand the Wild West way of doing things. He’s a spectacle to these common folk, and while rife with that famed Canadian politeness, their interactions with him border on scoffing. The Montana Kid, also known as Sean, is dismayed by the lack of urgent violence, and spends most of the movie adjusting to his new atmosphere.

I’ve written before that the Western Comedy doesn’t work as well as filmmakers and audiences might like. There’s a tonal tension between the savagery of the West and humor that does not square under most circumstances, especially under the scope of time and changing tastes. Gunless, though, I think hits the mark and is a legitimately funny and entertaining flick. The use and role of violence is the humor, and it satirizes the Western genre without veering into territories of parody.

Gross plays the fish out of water role very well, alternating between the gruff ne’er-do-well and confused newcomer through just about every scene. When he tries to settle disputes through threat or intimidation the townspeople put him in his place with a quip or a shrug, which totally throws him off his game. The subtext is a gentle needling of American tastes, views and values, and it’s done in a brotherly, amusing sort of way that gets the idea across while not making it the totality of the piece.

I really enjoyed the movie, it’s pretty low budget but you don’t notice that too much between the plot movements and the capable cast. I definitely recommend it, probably one of the better “modern” Westerns I’ve seen. It gets points for originality and execution!

#13. Ride in a Whirlwind (1966)

Movie poster for Ride in a Whirlwind. Nicholson up top, a posse on horseback on the bottom.

“They’ve seen their last sunrise.”

Before he was the coolest guy in Hollywood, and one of the world’s most accomplished actors, Jack Nicholson was sort of a writer-producer in the movie game. A sputtering start to his career gave rise to his work behind the camera, and Ride in the Whirlwind is placed in this era, released just a few years before Easy Rider.

Filmed back-to-back with the more notable The Shooting, this movie is like when you buy bulk at Costco or Sam’s Club: “hey if we’re already here may as well stock up”. Featuring basically the same cast, crew, locale and director (Monte Hellman), it’s also considered an “acid Western”, which I feel like is one of the haziest labels in the entire genre.

In 1966, the revisionist Western was just emerging from the studio machine, and its close cousin the acid Western was budding at the same time. Like most long-running genres, when the people who grew up watching a certain type of media begin working in that same arena, they will often try to break down and invert the conventions and commonalities in order to challenge audiences. Ride in the Whirlwind, light on some of the more trippy elements that sometimes define acid Western, is certainly oriented to do that. This is a movie that does nothing to glorify the western frontier. It’s closed off and claustrophobic, violence is random and without honor and by the end there’s no one to really root for. In the era it debuted, it likely felt more grave and important than it would today. I can respect that.

With that said, I didn’t find this movie too engaging or poignant. It’s a poor man’s The Ox-Bow Incident. The plot: A set of three cowboys run into a gang of outlaws, a mob mistakenly groups them all into one bad sect, and the cowboys commit crimes in their increasingly desperate attempt to escape. The down mood of the film is understandable in what it’s trying to do, de-romanticize the Western and condemn mob justice, but the characters, scenery, dialogue and action are pretty bland. This may jive with the acid Western coda however it does little for the movie as a standalone piece. This is clearly a low-budget project, yet the old adage of “desperation breeding innovation” didn’t seem to stick here.

I gave this a pretty low score on the All-True letterboxd, but it’s not overly offensive in quality if you’re looking for a Nicholson fix.

#14. Dark Command (1940)

Movie poster for Dark Command. Drawings of actors John Wayne, Claire Trevor and Walter Pidgeon populate the image.

“You’re fighting for the host of darkness and the devil’s riding beside you.”

You might describe my view on John Wayne as agnostic.

Never really had a high or low opinion of the Western genre’s most recognizable actor. He’s good to great in some stuff, average to whatever in other projects. It seems nostalgia is the main driver when it comes to Wayne opinions, and well, he was before my time.

The title of Dark Command is what caught my eye first. I knew it to be a sort of historical piece on the Civil War-era Middle West region, and I kind of stayed away from it because, uh, the quality and tone of a movie about the happenings in and around Kansas during this period depend greatly on the script and direction. I mean that’s the case with every movie, but this one wades into some murky territory.

Dark Command follows Bob Seton (Wayne) and “Doc” (Gabby Hayes) as they enter Lawrence, Kansas. The two have a bit of a scam operation going, Bob picks fights with mouthy jerks and Doc pulls whatever teeth may be loosened. When they enter Lawrence, they make the acquaintance of schoolteacher William Cantrell (Walter Pidgeon), a surrogate for the real-life William Quantrill, a notorious guerilla fighter that was so aggressive and brutal in his tactics that the Confederacy decommissioned him following the events depicted in this movie.

The portrayal of Cantrell/Quantrill is fairly benign, presenting us with an intelligent man frustrated with his station and angered that a cowpoke like Bob can win a Marshal position that he coveted. Cantrell also is eager for the affections of Mary McCloud (Claire Trevor), the daughter of Lawrence’s banker, which Bob is also in competition for. Seeing no other path for his ambition, Cantrell turns toward a sinister path, attacking and stealing from both sides of the conflict, then using stolen Confederate uniforms to pose as legitimate soldiers in order to pilfer more good and influence.

Despite all this action by the movie’s antagonist, Wayne’s Bob is the primary focus. Wayne plays the undereducated and overly earnest Texan with bravado and charm. There’s a certain “aw shucks” quality to the character that is backed by a large stature and a heavy fist. He is at his most charming when in the presence of Mary, fumbling over words and smiling a little too much, and glowers at the appropriate times too, like when he softly confronts Cantrell about his extracurricular activities outside of the town.

An interesting component to the film are some of the tidbits and footnotes to the production. This marks the first time that Wayne and Raoul Walsh worked together since when the director discovered him in 1929; this film is second reunion for Wayne and Trevor after co-starring in the previous year’s Stagecoach; and this is the only time that Wayne and Roy Rogers (who plays Mary’s brother Fletch) worked together in their storied careers. Also (as posted on reddit recently) there is a really ambitious stunt involving horses diving off a cliff. It stands out in a movie from this era, if only because you’ll ask “hey, are those beasts OK…?”

Despite some anachronisms, the plot of this film hides many folds, and the characters ebb together adequately. Overall, a pretty good Golden Age offering.

#15. Almost Heroes (1998)

Movie poster for Almost Heroes. Actors Chris Fairley and Matthew Perry stand near a sign post indicating all the danger of the frontier

Screamed lines, indecipherable shouting, fidgety physicality – in his final role, we got Farley at his most Farley.

A Comedy Western set in 1804, the movie centers on the previously unknown counterparts to explorers Lewis & Clark as they attempt to beat the famous expedition to the Pacific Ocean. Leslie Edwards (Matthew Perry) is a milksop-y aristocrat who enlists supposedly seasoned tracker and guide Bartholomew Hunt (Chris Farley) to help with the mission in exchange for riches and glory.

Imma be frank with you, this movie, despite its premise, cast, director and setting, is pretty poor. It’s fiercely goofy in the way a lot of 90s comedies are, but not misses the tonal mark unlike other Farley hits like Beverly Hills Ninja or Tommy Boy. The jokes are shallow and gross, there’s too much reliance on Hunt’s ineptitude as a source of humor and a real lack of surprises or ingenuity in plot turns keeps the viewer from getting too engaged. Also, the movie just sort of dissipates into what we’re forced to consider an ending – it almost feels like the studio felt like there would be a sequel.

So yeah, it’s not bad-bad, but it’s not good-bad either.

This is Christopher Guest’s weakest turn as a director, and despite some legitimate acting chops in the names of Perry, Farley, Eugene Levy, Bokeem Woodbine, Kevin Dunn, etc. no one can really save this effort.

That said, you can do worse in frittering away 90 minutes. There’s a few scraps of meat on this bone, and I chuckled at parts. Still, Almost Heroes is probably best left to those who greatly enjoy the works of Perry and/or Farley.

Another batch of movies in the bag!

On April 7th, 2025, we debut our newest short comic. Be sure to mosey back for a looksee.