Scenes in Johns movies can sometimes be interpreted as controversial what particualr scene did any of yous find particualary controversial either when it was released or now?

B)

None, it's all good! :D

hi robbie,

not to be a nitpick but you should have used "you" instead of "yous" as it makes us all sound like sheep baa baa. :lol: as for your post will have to get back to you on that one.

cheers smokey :D

But not to nitpick smokey but you would only refer to one sheep I was trying to refer to many! ;)

B)

Sheep?!?!?!? Ba-a-a-a-a-a-a! Duke was into horses, not sheep!

Sheep is a dirty word around cowboys! :P Next thing you know, you'll want to be fencing us in.

Get a rope . . . !

Chester

Yo Chester

What was the name of that big guy in Shepherd of the Hills :D

B)

So as this topic never really took of and future posts are unlikely am I to believe that scenes with sheep in them are the most controversial in Dukes movies. <_<

B)

hi robbie,

the sheep could have been the most controversial scenes but as for the rest will have to think real hard on that one am giving myself a headache :D .

cheers smokey

Any John Wayne move that can be rated as controversial at the time of it's release would have to be "The Green Berets" during the vietnam conflict. But as a retired service member of 21 years the heck with the public opinion of a John Wayne war movie in the 70's.

Brian
Tulalip Wa

As far as the most controversial, I would have to say the Alamo. Not that the film itself was controversial, but with all the hubbub surrounding it, such as the on location murder, and the Academy Awards fiasco with Chill Wills and Russell Whats-his-name's publicity campaign, there was sure quite a stink made over what I thought was a great film.
Colorado Bob

Colorado Bob

You will make it soon enough. When I said we I meant the three people Duke directed the comment towards namely Chester, Smokey and myself.

:agent:

As far as the most controversial, I would have to say the Alamo. Not that the film itself was controversial, but with all the hubbub surrounding it, such as the on location murder, and the Academy Awards fiasco with Chill Wills and Russell Whats-his-name's publicity campaign, there was sure quite a stink made over what I thought was a great film.
Colorado Bob
It was most unfortunate that Chill Wills had to get on his high horse and rub the Academy the wrong way:headbonk: . I really feel that if he hadn't made those irritating statements, "The Alamo" would have won best picture.
Cheers - Jay:beer:

I agree Jay, 100%. I believe The Alamo, like a lot of other John Wayne films, was definitely Oscar quality.
Best,
Colorado Bob

Nobody has answered yet to the original question about most controversial scene. I think a good candidate could be the end of Green Berets, because it summons the message of the obviously controversial movie.

What comes to a list of controversial JW movies, The Searchers should be on it, even though I believe Wayne fans generally accepted it (or did they?), but I know that many Ford fans didn't get it at all, it was accused of racism and Ford giving up his principles. And the same movie is several times voted as the best western ever, and also done well in best movies ever -listings.

The Searchers I believe deals with the issue of racism and in my opinion is not a racist movie.

Stephen Spielberg when asked if Schlinders List was the greatest movie concerning racial tollerance and understanding, he replied no the movie that fits this category is the Searchers.

:agent:

The most controversial scene is where he shoots the Comanche in the eyes in the Searchers.

And on a different subject, I'd like for Robbie to get his azz back on these boards and quit worrying about what everyone else here thinks about his posts.

Duke expressed his opinions and didn't give a damn about what anyone else thought so why should you?!?!?!?!?

The most controversial scene is where he shoots the Comanche in the eyes in the Searchers.

And on a different subject, I'd like for Robbie to get his azz back on these boards and quit worrying about what everyone else here thinks about his posts.

Duke expressed his opinions and didn't give a damn about what anyone else thought so why should you?!?!?!?!?

Why would his shooting the Indian in the eyes be controversial? Is it more politically correct if he shoots him in the nostrils? He evens scalps an Indian in that movie, would that be bad as well? I don't think he did anything in his movies that could be considered racist. He simply played out history. It was all part of what actually happened in those days. Or what about when he started killing all the buffalo... we did that back then to starve out the Indians. That's not racist, it's tactical.

What I could see from Robbie's posts that he seemed to enjoy arguing. Since many of us are an older generation and some even older than others, a younger opinion seems to set off some of us. I for one don't deal with youngins very well. He was 23 and many of us are over 40... but no one is keeping him away.

And on a different subject, I'd like for Robbie to get his azz back on these boards and quit worrying about what everyone else here thinks about his posts.
Did I miss something somewhere? I wasn't aware that had been any discussion that would have sent Robbie packing. He has left the board for periods of time in the past, and I just assumed he was busy with work since he was out of school. According to his profile, he visited the board just yesterday.

Chester :newyear:

He visits, but he doesn't post anything anymore. I didn't mean to offend anyone with that last post, I just hated to see Robbie go the way he did.

See the topic "Try to contain your excitement" back at the end of April for the pertinent dialogue on this!
Cheers - Jay:beer:

I get messages from him from time to time and believe me, I am trying to get him to start posting here again. I think right now, he's just too busy with things in life.

Believe me Robbie will be posting soon enough. I really haven't heard from him for a long time. I've been out of touch for a while in the past and Robbie has been posting. His studies have kept him busy as his job but he willl return.

I do echo what Chester said, "Am I missing something?"

Cheers :cool: Hondo

Believe me Robbie will be posting soon enough. I really haven't heard from him for a long time. I've been out of touch for a while in the past and Robbie has been posting. His studies have kept him busy as his job but he willl return.

I do echo what Chester said, "Am I missing something?"

Cheers :cool: Hondo

This is what you guys are "missing"

http://www.dukewayne.com/showthread.php?p=44347#post44347

Thanks, guys, for directing me and Hondo to the other thread. Somehow, I definitely "missed" the other thread and that whole conversation. You miss one day around here, and if you don't do a little digging, I can see that you can miss some stuff - big time!.

All I can say is . . . I had no idea!

Chester :newyear:

The most controversial film would obviously be The Green Berets. I would say Big Jim McLain as well, only I don't think that movie is well known. The Searchers is widely considered a racist film today, and some people feel very uneasy watching The Quiet Man because of the way Duke treats Maureen O'Hara.

In terms of controversial I suppose Green Berets and Big Jim Mc Lain would be the most nominated movies for that award.

Big Jim proberably did the most damage to John Wayne's career in terms of recognition by his peers.

I don't accept that The Searchers is a racist movie or even that The Quiet Man is controversial. I think it is nonsense to post judge films years after they have been made as each generation will have different moral slant or outlook on the content of a film

Can you imagine what previous generations would think of odays output of films & TV.


Mike

ColeThornton,

Thanks for reining us back in, on topic.

The Green Berets was definitely controversial because the Vietnam War was so unpopular; certainly the troops did not garner the same support as our troops today (despite how unpopular today's war effort is).

I would also have to agree with your comments about The Quiet Man - the scenes where he is dragging and kicking Maureen O'Hara's character would not be tolerated in a movie today, I don't think. There would be a big ruckus over that. But when the movie was made, the times were different.

i remember when the cowboys came out the shootout with the kids was very controversial.:ohmy:

I don't accept that The Searchers is a racist movie or even that The Quiet Man is controversial. I think it is nonsense to post judge films years after they have been made as each generation will have different moral slant or outlook on the content of a film

Mike,
I don't think The Searchers is racist either, in fact John Ford's purpose was clearly to make an anti-racism statement. However, many people today feel very uncomfortable with any movie which presents the Native American Indians in an unfavourable light. In recent years many black people have criticized Gone with the Wind and Song of the South as racist. As you say we have to look at these films in the context of the time in which they made - as Chester said, it was a very different time.

Also Hatari and El Dorado are controversial.

Yes, Hatari was made in a completely different era. El Dorado enlighten me what was controversial about it. Dont tell me it was James Caan's chinese impersonation the worst & weakest scene in the whole movie.


Mike

Yes, Hatari was made in a completely different era. El Dorado enlighten me what was controversial about it. Dont tell me it was James Caan's chinese impersonation the worst & weakest scene in the whole movie.


Mike
I agree that James Cann chinese impersonation was bad and in poor taste. but not controversial.:ohmy:

Hi

Like some others I am slightly baffled about El Dorado bearing in mind as it was the second airing of Rio Bravo which had attained a marvellous reputation on its own by then.

Possibly my opinion of the most controversial film that John Wayne and John Ford made was the last one - Donovan's Reef with the issues of mixed race marriages.

But that was then as was of course South Pacific which dealt with the same sort of subject matter.


Regards

Arthur

I wouldn't call the scene controversial more like chronic. What Hawks was thinking about is beyond me I couldnt see Ford letting a scene like that through.

Mike

James Caan's impersonation of a Chinese man would not be allowed today because it is racist. Also Hawks traetment of violence is far weaker in El Dorado. Rio Bravo would also be controversial because it was made as a response to the anti-blacklist movie High Noon by Carl Foreman.

(bs2) I think the best way to describe Caan's Chinese impersonation would be Peter Sellers at his most indulgent so I guess the Pink Panther films are heading to the bonfires as well.

I guess if we allowed the thought police :stunned: to have their way everything would be banned or censored. :afraid:

By the way what is your opinion of Borat? His racist impersonations makes anything discussed here seem insignificant.

Poor old Khartoum with Charlton Heston was lifted from the viewing schedules everytime there is a whiff of war in the Middle East. That's why I bought the DVD!!

Up the Rebels!!

Mike

I've got to agree with DP here. Even though I have never seen Borat (and not sure that I want to), but that scene where Caan (disguises) himself as a Chinese person was sort of a funny scene to me.

I don't want to step on any toes in admitting that I too thought that scene was funny. I am also a fan of Dave Chappell, and I howled with laughter, when I saw him do a skit that had him, a black person who was blind, raised by white people, and he happened to also be the leader of a group of KKK. That was hilarious, and I did not find that at all, insulting to white people.

El Dorado, was made in a time that was much different than today is. I think it was simply "A-Sign-Of-The-Times" and nothing at all, was meant to be detrimental towards Asians-Chinese in particular.

What would people say about an early John Wayne Western called: "Haunted Gold.?" In Haunted Gold, there is a character played by a black actor who gets wide-eyed and is afraid of everything. I would almost bet that someone would call that movie, a racist movie. All it was, was a sign-of-the-times. Nothing more, nothing less.

Just my 2 cents worth ;-))

Well Ringo, in all fairness El Dorado was made in 1965-66, and although Old Hollywood was still important then (with the Best Picture Oscar having recently gone to the resolutely old-fashioned My Fair Lady), movies and the times were changing. El Dorado was a western that could have been made twenty years earlier, while more modern westerns like The Apaloosa and The Professionals were being made.

I've heard that the Chinese impression is sometimes cut out when the film is shown on TV, does anyone know if this has happened?

Hi Cole, well said. And basically all I was saying is that: people need to lighten up and quit trying to pick something from an old movie just to cause a ruckus. Or in other words: "They need to quit making a mountain out of a mole hill." This p.c. garbage needs to stop. What's hollywood supposed to do about James Caan? blacklist him because of a minor part in a movie he did about 40 years ago?

See what I mean and where that could go? ;-))

Best regards--C.

I would also have to add that McLintock and Donovan's Reef would be controversial for the same reason as The Quiet Man. What was tolerated in the 1950s and early 1960s would not be allowed today.

I think those offended by the likes of McLintock and Donovan's Reef etc would be better occupied tackling the violent movies and lyrics of rap today rather than spending their days worrying about 40 year old movies.

Mike

Well said and fully agree with you both.

I'm still trying to figure out why the thread began with sheep? LOL & LMAO!!!!
Anyway as DUKE said in BIG JAKE " SHEEP !! WHOO SO THATS WHAT THAT SMEEL IS" !!!!!!!!

REGARDS
ETHAN

I think those offended by the likes of McLintock and Donovan's Reef etc would be better occupied tackling the violent movies and lyrics of rap today rather than spending their days worrying about 40 year old movies.

Mike

Ah yes but as 50 Cent says you can only show violence today if it shows that violence itself is wrong. When Michael Caine made Get Carter in 1970 he had to make it very violent for the time because the old movies were you could hit a man in the face without any blood were far more dangerous. Clearly no film which glamourizes violence against women would be tolerated today.

I also think that no movie today could use the Native American Indians as the villains, so old westerns like Stagecoach, The Comancheros and the Cavalry Trilogy would probably be almost as controversial as The Searchers.

Hi Everyone

I have watched this thread with interest to garner the opinions of others before adding my twopenorth (English) not British or European as is now PC but an old fashioned, or maybe just old! English gal.

Most of what is released today on TV and film is much more "controversial" to me than much of what we are discussing here. It has already been pointed out that the time in which these films were made has a huge bearing on what is acceptable. Please also bear in mind the moral climate of the time and the spirit in which the movie was made (often conveniently forgotten).

I am very happy for my grandchildren to watch ANY and ALL of JW movies. They can also watch Song of the south and lots of other things I watched as a child. I would not say the same of 95% of the movies and TV made in the last say 25 years.

Why because although they may grow up to be accused of being non PC they will also grow up to know right from wrong, the rewards of hard work, justice, fairness and TOLERANCE.

I am finding it more and more difficult to accept that just because a generation of folks, younger, maybe smarter but wiser? than me say it is now "controversial" or no longer PC to say or like something I have done so for fifty years I should just say OK.

I will agree to differ with this newer more politically correct generation, but having spent 50 years never causing any harm by the words I use or the views I hold, I have no wish to change now thank you very much.

A hard working, honest, decent, tax paying citizen (tired of being pushed around by lazy, dishonest, welfare collecting, politically correct, attention seekers)

I am very happy for my grandchildren to watch ANY and ALL of JW movies. They can also watch Song of the south and lots of other things I watched as a child. I would not say the same of 95% of the movies and TV made in the last say 25 years.
VERY well said, Elly! I would have to add my children to that statement, although with a slight difference. Some of JW's later films have more adult themes or graphic violence than I would prefer my kids or grandkids to watch at a younger age (Big Jake comes to mind, as one example, along with In Harm's Way and Kirk Douglas' slimy character). But overall, I would agree with your sentiment.

Mrs. C :angel1:

well said elly. there are many things that our children see just on the news that i find unwanted and unwarrented. the duke's movies teach a lot more then they harm, yes as they get older they do see that the same indian falls off their horse but who cares as long as they enjoy the movie. there is much that my little bloke would like to watch but before he is allowed to watch it, it has to pass the parent review and if i say ok then he is allowed to watch it.

cheers smokey

well said elly. there are many things that our children see just on the news that i find unwanted and unwarrented. the duke's movies teach a lot more then they harm, yes as they get older they do see that the same indian falls off their horse but who cares as long as they enjoy the movie. there is much that my little bloke would like to watch but before he is allowed to watch it, it has to pass the parent review and if i say ok then he is allowed to watch it.

AMEN! One of the reasons we cut off the cable was because there was obnoxious stuff just in commercials and sometimes the movie trailers were just awful, certainly not suitable for young children. As we've mentioned before, it seems obvious that Hollywood has an agenda, and it doesn't seem to be to offer clean wholesome entertainment for the most part.

It is quite an annoyance to our kids that Mom has to check out a movie before letting them watch it, sometimes even the lower rated ones (PG) have objectionable content that we don't want them exposed to.

Chester :newyear:

AMEN! One of the reasons we cut off the cable was because there was obnoxious stuff just in commercials and sometimes the movie trailers were just awful, certainly not suitable for young children. As we've mentioned before, it seems obvious that Hollywood has an agenda, and it doesn't seem to be to offer clean wholesome entertainment for the most part.

It is quite an annoyance to our kids that Mom has to check out a movie before letting them watch it, sometimes even the lower rated ones (PG) have objectionable content that we don't want them exposed to.

Chester

I agree, with everything you said.

Thankfully most children today have a TV in their room so they can watch films late at night.

cole

there may be many children who have tv's in there rooms but my son is one who does not a bedroom is for sleeping not watching tv. yes we have 2 tv's but the second one is in the back room. my nephew didnt get a tv in his room until he was 15 yrs, i believe that if my little bloke wants to watch something questionable then i have to check it out before i will let him view it. the only things he is allowed to view on his own are G rated movies and anything i have given permission for him to watch. the tv is not my sons babysitter

cheers smokey

I second that smokey.

My kids are grown up but never had TV in thier rooms. Now my kids say they will not let thiers (my grandchildren) have TV in thier rooms either.

My children also do as I did and do, watch TV with thier children in order we can talk about what they see and make it a family time rather thank plonk them in front of it and use it as the baby sitter.

I even am beginnig to enjoy the childrens shows I watch with my grandchildren, although the songs are sometimes still going round in my head long after the show ends, much to my annoyance! Otherwise I am quite a fan of the tweenies, upsadaisy and iggle piggle!!

Elly

cole

there may be many children who have tv's in there rooms but my son is one who does not a bedroom is for sleeping not watching tv. yes we have 2 tv's but the second one is in the back room. my nephew didnt get a tv in his room until he was 15 yrs, i believe that if my little bloke wants to watch something questionable then i have to check it out before i will let him view it. the only things he is allowed to view on his own are G rated movies and anything i have given permission for him to watch. the tv is not my sons babysitter

cheers smokey

Thankfully I always had a TV and a computer in my room, with plenty of great games like Cannon Fodder. My best friend lived in a bungalow with a TV in his room which he could watch all night, since his aprents' bedroom was in the converted loft above him.

Have to admit to mixed views. I had a TV in my room courtesy of having a older brother who then left without it :hyper: from 12-13 onwwards.

The thrill of watching late movies in bed without any interference. Mind you we only have 4 channels in UK then well actually 3 before 1982. Before you USA guys laugh I have seen your 100+ channels and there is only so much Star Trek, The Simpsons and X Files you can take before you want to shoot your TV out when it takes its 17th commercial break
through a movie.

Mind you what the cable and satellite channels are like now I think my parents would have had second thoughts:wub: about letting me have a TV.


Mike

I will never understand why Americans think it's OK to have loads of killing and violence in films, but no nudity or sex. Thankfully it's completely different in Europe.

Have to agree with you Cole on that one. :afraid:

The puritanical views on sex as opposed to mind numbing violence has always puzzled me.


Mike

Getting back to the original topic, "Three Godfathers" and "The Greatest Story Ever Told" would also be controversial because they promote Christianity, and could not be made today unless the star finaced them himself, like Robert Duvall with "The Apostle".

Have you seen the Passion of Christ by Mel Gibson come on get real.

If all these movies are controversial they MUST be due to be remade.

Wouldnt bet your life on that Cole. Westerns and Musicals will still be made maybe not in the same quantities. Science Fiction movies and special effects were close to being dead in the water before Star Wars appeared.

Mike

A comment to your TV discussion, when I was a kid we didn't have TV at all, because, from age 6, I convinced my parents it's not good for kids. My mother finally bought one, mainly for herself, when I was 15. That's the first time I started watching some TV series

. . . when I was a kid we didn't have TV at all, because, from age 6, I convinced my parents it's not good for kids.
What a wise child you were! How do you feel about it now, as an adult?

Chester :newyear:

Wouldnt bet your life on that Cole. Westerns and Musicals will still be made maybe not in the same quantities. Science Fiction movies and special effects were close to being dead in the water before Star Wars appeared.

Mike

Westerns and musicals died out forty years ago and they will never come back. Most of the people who went to see 3:10 to Yuma were middle aged or elderly. I was the only young person in the cinema.

What a wise child you were! How do you feel about it now, as an adult?

I only watched TV more or less actively for about 10 years - the most recent series I remember well would be Dallas, Soap and Saphire and Steel... When I bought my own TV, I paid the lisence for the first half a year, during which I realised that my taste, the programmes and their timing almost never met, so I removed the receiver (no fees that way) and watch videos only.

No, I don't believe I missed anything important by not watching TV as a child. Probably it made me even more an outsider at school not being able to discuss the popular programmes, but I don't think there were that many - there were only two channels in the 70's and not very many childrens' programmes

I was around 16 years old before I first saw a T.V. and in those days in the 1940s we spent Saturdays a the Old Fox Theater in Down Town Phoenix Watching all the Great Westerns of that Day on the Big Screen !
:hyper:
Most people did not have T.V.s in Phoenix until the early 1950s and then we only had one T.V. Station!
:yeaahh:
Chilibill
:cowboy:

Hi

At $200,000 for a few days work, more than anyones else on the picture Duke didn't do to bad for an elderly fill in.

it is also a fact that he didn't want to make the picture because of Darryl Zanuck's early comments and offered his services at a fee he felt sure would be turned down.

again some fee for an elderly fill in.

Regards

Arthur

it is also a fact that he didn't want to make the picture because of Darryl Zanuck's early comments . . .
What were Zanuck's comments? I knew Duke hadn't been that interested in the film, and as you stated, agreed to it only after suggesting being paid a huge sum (assuming they would turn him down). I hadn't heard the original reason, however.

Chester :newyear:

Hi Chester

It related to Zanuck's comments after The Alamo that actors should not be producers.

When Duke was needed for The Longest Day he taught Zanuck an expensive lesson.


Mike

Hi Chester

It related to Zanuck's comments after The Alamo that actors should not be producers.

When Duke was needed for The Longest Day he taught Zanuck an expensive lesson.


Mike

I read somewhere that JW gave this fee to charity as he only wanted Zanuck to eat a little crow!!

Elly

I read somewhere that JW gave this fee to charity as he only wanted Zanuck to eat a little crow!!

Elly

Did he donate his fee to charity? I know he was in need of money after Bo Roos and the cost of The Alamo

Mike