now that the dust has settled, was it really an american saga?
>>201753738Kevin Costner's "Horizon: An American Saga" aimed to capture the drama of the American West in the wake of the Civil War. The film delved into themes of family, loyalty, and the rugged individualism that defined the frontier, promising a cinematic experience that would resonate with the enduring American spirit. However, the dust settled, leaving a mixed reaction. While "Horizon" undoubtedly presented a visually stunning depiction of the era, whether it truly captured the essence of an "American Saga" remains a point of contention.On one hand, the film successfully showcased the pivotal themes that shaped the American identity during this turbulent era. The film explored the allure of the West as a land of opportunity, attracting individuals from diverse backgrounds seeking a fresh start. These elements, crucial to understanding the American experience, were effectively portrayed, lending "Horizon" a sense of historical grounding.However, "Horizon" failed to truly delve into the complexities of the American experience. The film focused primarily on the stereotypical narrative of the rugged frontiersman, neglecting the diverse voices and perspectives present in the real West. The portrayal of Native American characters was criticized as lacking depth and authenticity, perpetuating harmful stereotypes. Moreover, the film's romanticized portrayal of the Old West could be seen as a sanitized version of history, downplaying the brutality and hardship that were integral to the frontier experience.In conclusion, while "Horizon: An American Saga" managed to evoke the spirit of the Wild West and capture some of the themes that shaped the American story, it ultimately fell short of being a truly nuanced exploration of the era. Its failure to adequately address the complexities of the American experience, particularly its portrayal of Native Americans, left audiences questioning whether it truly presented a definitive "American Saga".
>>201753971>However, "Horizon" failed to truly delve into the complexities of the American experience. The film focused primarily on the stereotypical narrative of the rugged frontiersman, neglecting the diverse voices and perspectives present in the real West.fuck your bot shitthere's literally two (2) scenes where they explicitly mention the main theme of the movie, yet you come up with this nonsense about "romanticized portrayal of the Old West"
>>201753738With seperate storylines all spread out over various movies, the first one feels like it doesn't go places because the climax of the story will be in another movie. I am not sure but I feel it might have worked better to cut it into a series format and release it like that, instead of giving people the bingewatch experience of half a season at the cinema.
>>201754387movies and series have different grammars (I'm talking about shot composition and story structure). This is clearly a movie. A movie with narrative and tonal problems, but still a movie.When people talk about how it would have worked better as a series, I think that you say this because you've internalized that most of tv shows today lack a good narrative engine, or they have a clear misunderstanding on how a compelling narrative works (or maybe they accurately know that most of their audiences are phone-watching morons)
>>201753738it's 100% kinosome of the dialogue is awkward like that danny houston/ michael rooker exchange
>>201753738Personally, I loved it. The landscape is beautiful, the score is good, the scenes are impactful, and it is great to see how things are evolving. The shots were so beautiful that I unironically thought, wow, America sure is beautiful. Truly, a big screen experience, and an event we haven't really seen since maybe Pirates or LotR. But, only boomers went to see this. Even people around my age, 30, rarely have the attention span for a 3 hour western. I was excited for the whole series, but now am pretty disappointed that no other parts may hit theaters.
>>201754587>tonal problemsthis is the most serious thing wrong with this movie, you have four different western subgenres here:a prologue (40-50 minutes long) without a clear protagonist about random acts of violence in the same place (I thought it was the best part of the movie).the "Fort" narrative which is a John Ford western with the drunk doctor and the bossy women and the lovey hijinks between Sienna Miller and the Avatar dude. This is the part that doesnt work, imho. Costner tries to be John Ford but he just cant.the "Costner gets stuck with a conniving whore and a baby", this is a Clint Eastwood western from the 60s, the most "normal" narrative to create modern day western. It features one of the best scenes of the movie, they could really have focused the movie around them escaping south and later joining the trail until Arizona.the "kid and other survivors go hunting Apaches", dirty and cruel like a Sam Peckinpah western. Good, but it clashes with the rest as it cuts back and forth to the lovey-dovey stuff.the "Santa Fe trail" narrative, like The Big Trail western. The main problem with this arc is that nothing interesting happened.
>>201754587>When people talk about how it would have worked better as a series, I think that you say this because you've internalized that most of tv shows today lack a good narrative engineBut costner's effectively structured it like a show but with the episodes being 3hours long. This is more like Lonesome Dove, an old school miniseries.
>>201754778yea this sucks I didn't have this much fun at a cinema in a decade
>>201753738"the lure of the old west"?
>>201756569dysentery and comanche raids
