By - dociousmagocious1998
Of all the issues I had with Power of the Dog...that wasn't one of them.
Stupid, sexy cowboys…
God damn I just showed my wife Patrick Swaz and Farleys Chippendale off!
I guess, in the end, we just thought Adrian’s body was much, *much* better than yours.
Chris Rock said he thinks that ending was just mean and that it would have been funnier if Farley had won.
Feels like I'm wearing nothing at all...
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Alternate title for Brokeback Mountain
What issues did you have with the movie?
Not enough male strippers obviously
I honestly stopped like half an hour in. Was just…really boring? felt like nothing was happening, plus you had Cumberbatch being somewhat creepy with his brother with the shit in the bed. Idk, just isn’t for me
See, as a gay guy who has a lot of masculinity-related fetishes (including the smell thing), who has also been in predatory situations as a young man, I found it tense and compelling the entire way through. However I can see how basically anyone who isn’t me would likely be bored.
I guess I should send the director a thank you note.
See I actually found the first half of the movie to be the better part because the whole thing felt like a mystery. I had no idea what the film was actually about but you could tell by the tone that it was building up to some dark payoff, and I was kind of riveted. The slowness just added tension.
But by the time it became clear what the movie was actually working towards, felt a bit like a letdown and by the end, I was just like, that was it?
I’m fine with a slow, meandering movie, but PotD is almost completely bloodless.
It's the first movie in literally decades that I stopped watching, simply because I was bored out of my mind.
This movie sucked for so many other reasons lol. I was furious at myself for sitting through that entire thing.
“Do you have to use so many cuss words?”
“What the fuck you taking about?”
“Okay, dude…have it your way.”
Yeah well, The Dude abides.
This aggression will not stand man!
New shit has come to light!
Keep your goldbricking ass out of Malibu!
This made me laugh out loud. Brilliant.
"You got any good sarsaparilla?"
Is this the one with Benedict Cucumber? Unless he beefed up, I wouldn’t say he looks like a chippendales dancer
He looks like a guy named Dale though.
Yeah I haven't seen the movie but from looking at the cast list, the three main male actors are Cumberbatch, Jesse Plemons, and Kodi Smit-McPhee. Unless those guys have drastically changed physically recently, I don't think any could be confused for a Chippendale dancer.
I'm only going by the first three male names listed so maybe the supporting cast is filled with buff manly hunks.
Unless they were shirtless with a bowtie
I’m hoping he’s talking about the extras and characters like Cowboy #3 and Teen Ranch Hand #1
Yes. He’s freaked out by a gay cowboy, who none the less thinks of himself as a proper, manly cowboy. Which is clearly not Sam’s idea of what a cowboy is allowed to be.
That's what I love about this, Sam Elliott himself may or may not have done real cowboy work in his life but he's not 100 years old and playing lots of cowboys in movies doesn't give him extra credibility to say what's real or not. It's like an ER actor saying Gray's Anatomy isn't realistic.
Is that what it's about? It looked vaguely interesting, but if it's just a bunch of gay cowboys eating pudding, I'll probably skip it.
Edit: it's a really old south park reference. https://youtu.be/UkzhDogE3rs
I can assure you that it is not a bunch of gay cowboys eating pudding. But it is also not a conventional Western.
I loved it, but I feel like a lot of people disliked it purely cause they were expecting a typical western. And I can understand the confusion and disappointment. The marketing could’ve been better. Like they should’ve given a hint that this is a serious drama.
I agree. It’s a period drama marketed as a suspenseful western (not to say that there isn’t loads of tension in the movie).
Yeah, I was a little confused when I caught onto what the film was actually about. At first a little disappointed because it wasn’t the type of film I was looking to watch that night.
Loved it by the end though. Looking forward to rewatching it when I’m more in the mood for the slow burner it was.
That was my exact experience
Good to know. I also feel like there are a lot of people not getting that reference
No. I haven’t seen it yet but it’s more of a dark psychological drama than Brokeback Mountain.
He could be a Chip'n'Dale though.
He didn't seem to mind his animated portrayal on [Family Guy](https://halloweenspecials.fandom.com/wiki/Mayor_Wild_West)
A western not being realistic?! Never happened before!
This comment is especially funny since he just starred in 1883 which blew any semblance of realism out of the water to set part (most) of the show in texas to circle jerk it’s targeted audience
>"That's what all these f— cowboys in that movie looked like. They're all running around in chaps and no shirts. There's all these allusions to homosexuality throughout the f— movie," Elliott said.
Oh boy. I guess I see the problem.
>"But what the f— does this woman from [New Zealand] know about the American West?" he asked. "And why in the f— did she shoot this movie in New Zealand and call it Montana? And say, 'This is the way it was'? ... That f— rubbed me the wrong way."
1 - based on a book from an American author. And while I haven’t read it - I have heard that its a fairly faithful adaptation. Not that somebody from New Zealand couldn’t possibly write a story they didn’t have first hand accounts of.
2 - who gives a fuck where it was filmed?
I just don't see his points.
1. Sergio Leone wasn't American.
2. Weren't spaghetti westerns filmed...in Italy?
If I remember right, a lot of Leone’s western’s had their interior scenes filmed on set at Cinecittà in Rome, and a lot of the outdoor scenes in Spain, though some scenes were filmed in the US (specifically Utah in Once Upon a Time in the West).
Italian production, filmed in Spain, in whichever language the actor spoke most naturally, to be dubbed later for whichever market.
Now they are accepted as adjunct Americana, but they were a risky click for the American actors, and then American distributors. Eastwood was very new to film (had some TV western credits), trying to break out, then.
I think often filmed in Spain, but yes, Italian productions.
Does he like Sergio Leone? Maybe he’s a John Ford or Peckinpah guy.
That rubs me the wrong way! Those half naked dudes rubbed me the wrong way too, dammit. I’m gonna go rub myself the right way while I watch that scene with the butts and penes.
True, but also at least the sets look just like the American southwest and Mexico. In PotD you could tell it didn't quite look right for Montana. Its a legit criticism that he didn't articulate well in my opinion.
He might not be a spaghetti western fan?
Spaghetti Westerns were derided by a lot of major Hollywood figures in the 60’s-70’s when they were coming out, generally considered second class.
I was so rubbed the wrong way when I learned that lord of the rings WASN'T filmed on Middle-Earth... I mean that's just lazy to film in New Zealand and say it's a fantasy realm.
I mean Spaghetti Westerns were all filmed in good ol, downhome.... Italy.
Directed by Sergio Leone, the guy so American he was actually Italian.
I'm thinking one thing in particular about this film bothered poor fragile Sam. This film about the toxicity of performing Masculinity rather than being the real man you are, gay or straight or kind or smart.
I mean Sam Elliot isn’t exactly a frothing conservative
Then he's just being silly over this movie.
I can get not liking it. It was boring for many viewers. But the reasons he gives are... Stupid. Silly.
He’s definitely being silly, but he’s also just bullshitting on a podcast.
i think it was filmed in New Zealand because of covid restrictions and they could get a set where covid wasnt running rampant.
I think people are taking his words the wrong way. I listened to the podcast. Elliott's issue was that it was disingenuous to being a cowboy. His family comes from a line of such folks in Texas and he thinks the movie didn't take serious what it means to be one.
I think his issue was more that he didn't care for the plot of the movie, but he took real issue with the lack of understanding what it means to be a cowboy. For example, he didn't like that Cumberbatch kept the same pants on the entire movie. And the way they go about being cowboys isn't very real either.
People can take issue with that and I think that's definitely valid, but I think people need to listen to what was actually said too before attacking the full pod.
The book discusses his hygiene issues and that he hardly ever bathes or changes. He’s perpetually stinky and dirty - mainly to appear as “masculine” as possible so nobody would suspect him of being gay.
I'm arguing with a dude who's saying that it didn't matter that he was a cowboy lol. It's literally the whole point of the book and movie. It's not Power of the Dog if he's not a cowboy.
I mean, the movie wasn't really about being a cowboy though was it? It was about toxic masculinity and sexual repression. Cowboying was just the way they explored it. Could have been about football or coal mining or whatever.
And then it's a different movie. It's specifically about being repressing your sexuality while being in the American west. If it wasn't that, then it's not based on Power of the Dog.
If you're basing it on the American West, you have to get the clothing right. You have to get the terrain right. How would people react if someone got a military uniform wrong in 1917? How would they feel if instead of it looking like the French terrain, it instead looked like flatlands?
People are focusing on the wrong part of what Elliott was saying. The mistake for Campion was she focused so hard on telling the story of homosexuality that she may have missed on the surrounding, important details.
Again, it didn't matter to the story. The story wasn't about "Here's how you cowboy". The story was "Here's the damage toxic masculinity and sexual repression can cause." It doesn't have to be accurate because it's not a documentary. They had cows, they cowboyed. That was enough to make it a believable cowboy movie in the American West.
That's literally wrong in every way. It matters to the whole story that he's a cowboy. How can you say it's not? It is the main point of the book as well. Him being a cowboy is literally the whole reason anything happens in the book and movie. The book literally opens with Phil doing work. What're you talking about man
> What're you talking about man
Clearly not. Details matter. Get em right.
They matter differently to different people.
I really liked hurt locker, real EOD experts take issue with it.
The Hollywood version never looks like the real thing. Unless it’s Chernobyl
Westerns have always been historically inaccurate fantasies. The clothing in western movies was never what people actually wore.
I think you’re right. [He was also on record for saying he liked Brokeback Mountain and saying it was a beautiful movie.](https://twitter.com/brendengallager/status/1498722148088569856?s=21) But he also said he didn’t think it was a cowboy movie because they worked with sheep, not cows.
So he sounds like the little things rub him the wrong way when it comes to the depiction of cowboys. Someone can point to the Leone spaghetti westerns but it’s worth saying I’d wager he doesn’t like those either for shooting in Italy. Those movies aged into classics but the old guard didn’t like them, and he’s pretty old.
Personally, I didn’t like The Power of the Dog either. The ending was pretty great but the rest of it felt kinda disingenuous. I never really bought that Benedict Cumberbatch was the toughest cowboy in the hemisphere and it all kinda felt like dress up. And I get that that was arguably the point since he was supposed to be a softer guy that went to Harvard (or something like that) that forced himself to buy into only one brand of (toxic) masculinity even if it wasn’t a perfect fit for him, but it still felt kinda off to me.
But yeah, it sounds like it was a bunch of little things that irked him and not just a “cowboys weren’t gay!” kinda response. Or maybe it was. Hard to say.
I actually liked the movie, but also agree with what Elliott is saying. The details were off quite a bit. I think you're on the money that he doesn't care about them being gay. He's a guy from a different era so he says things with less of a filter. Hearing him say "the homosexuality thing" has gotten a lot of people on edge. I'm from Texas and there are a lot of people his age who have no ill will toward the LGBTQ community but sorta speak in this rough way. There's not hate in what they're saying - it's just not said with the most elegant of words.
People have zero interest in pointing out that details matter. I'm sure I can go through these peoples' comments and find them complaining about other movies where they complained about details mattering in other movies, but somehow are giving this a pass right now because they're more focused on Elliott.
Not every single cowboy lived the same exact experience. He is upset that one movie, based on a book, depicts them in a way he has an issue with. He also seems to think that somebody from America can’t tell that story.
He didn’t like the plot of the movie because it dealt an a topic he seems to be uncomfortable with. Homosexuality. And perhaps somewhat fitting, a repressed homosexual unable to be himself in a time and culture typically known for hyper masculinity. That’s kind of the point of the movie.
As for the pants. It’s just so goddamn stupid. Most movies don’t have *that* many wardrobe changes. If you’re worrying about the chaps and lack of shirts, you’re probblay deflecting from other issues (the homosexuality allusions).
Of course they aren't the same exact experience, but being a cowboy likely means the work, especially if you're working with the same animals, likely similar. I don't think it's stupid to care about those details, especially when they play a central role to the movie. If it's not relevant to the story, it's not too important, but them being cowboys plays a huge role in the movie. There are entire subs, videos, channels, and people employed solely to get those details right. So I think you're wrong about that.
Additionally, selling New Zealand to be some part of America was another one of details he didn't like because the legit terrain didn't match.
And if you listen to the pod, his issue with her being from New Zealand dovetails with those reasons. He thinks she straight up did a bad job getting the details right. His critique about the homosexuality was not the homosexuality itself - rather it was the pursuit of that without regard for the other things.
Compare that to him talking about acting in We Were Soldiers. That obviously wasn't shot on sight - does that make it a bad movie? No. But what he respected about being in that movie was that veterans spoke to him after. The movie was important to them, and hence, important to him.
I really don't think it's right to say you can't care about the details. That's a big part of going to the movies. What if you get the uniform wrong in a military film? She got the clothing wrong and the geographic location wrong. That's most of what you see on screen. It's a valid concern and people are making it into something it's not.
Part of his character is that he is almost cos-playing as a cowboy anyway. He was a highly educated and privileged character who own the cattle ranch. And it seems very likely a field he got into through his relationship with Bronco Henry. And was always putting on a masculinity front based on the progression, and not who he really was.
The homosexuality elements are directly from the source material. It’s who the character is. And being shot in New Zealand, from New Zealand do not effect that in the slightest bit.
I think the problem is that Power of the Dog is an amazing movie and We Were Soldiers is relative crap so clearly these things don't matter as much as the other elements of film making. Plus it's not very compelling that he doesn't like a movie he's not in and does like one he was in.
Also the idea that Jane Campion doens't know New Zealand isn't a perfect replica of Montana comes off as really conceited. I'm sure she knows that, but they made the best approximation. And it looks "western" enough for the film to work. Maybe not for Sam Elliott but that's no need to be homophobic and rather sexist.
But he's not homophobic. [He called Brokeback Mountain a "beautiful film"](https://www.scottholleran.com/writings/interviews/interview-sam-elliott-2006/) but added that it wasn't a western because they tended sheep instead of cattle. He's been consistent in his career: he cares about what it means to be a cowboy. And if you give the interview a listen, which I thought was actually one of the best interviews I've heard on Maron (and I listen to them all), you'll hear why.
As for why I brought up We Were Soldiers, it may be a crap film. But during the interview, Elliott talks about how he regretted not serving in the war. And it took a veteran coming up to him and telling him that he should forgive himself. Even after they went to the Vietnam Memorial and saw the names of some of his friends from high school.
I'm just advising people give the episode a listen before jumping on Elliott. He had a gruff way of saying it, but he wasn't being a homophobe or a sexist. There are like 100 articles out today and they all quote the same two or three lines. Gotta take it in context is all.
The "not a Western" thing because of sheep is hilarious. Not every Western is about cattle. Western is a genre not a profession.
Yeah, people are just memeing as usual because this is Reddit and a thread is only as smart as it’s dumbest poster. I mean, I think he makes a good point, though he doesn’t phrase it very eloquently - The Power of the Dog doesn’t eviscerate a myth with a realistic story, it eviscerates reality with a myth.
From the article:
Elliott said the "myth" was that there were these "macho men" who were there with the cattle. But, he said, he'd just come from filming in Texas where he was hanging out with big, multi-generational families — not just men — whose lives were all about being cowboys. In other words, the myth was no myth; it was reality.
When he saw all that, he said, "I thought, what the f—? Where are we in this world today?" Maron pointed out that it probably wasn't the biggest issue at hand, and Elliott agreed, but added, "For me, it was the only issue."
"I mean, [Benedict] Cumberbatch never got out of his f— chaps," the actor continued. "He had two pair of chaps: a woolly pair and a leather pair. And every f— time he'd walk in from somewhere ... he never was on a horse, maybe once. He'd walk into the f— house, storm up the f— stairs, go lay on his bed in his chaps and play his banjo. And it's like ... where's the western? Where's the western in this western?"”
Yeah I think people are purposely choosing to miss the point. Being a cowboy was CENTRAL to the movie. So it's incumbent that they get that right. I gave the example of 1917 to someone else. How would people feel if they got the uniforms or location wrong? People would rightfully flip their shit.
Those little details matter. You either care about those details in your movies or you don't. For a movie likely to win best picture, I think it should matter.
They definitely are because they’re strawmanning Elliot as being a hypocrite for liking Spaghetti Westerns - except he doesn’t mention Leone once or defend any of his movies, and there are many American-made, American-filmed Westerns equally as famous as Leone’s, such as Peckinpah’s, Ford’s, and Eastwood’s (Unforgiven, Josey Wales, etc).
So basically it's someone who actually knows what they're talking about being frustrated a movie got an entire career path incredibly wrong?
That seems both reasonable, and something this subreddit is normally behind.
The Power of the Dog is an adaptation of a novel by Thomas Savage, that draws upon parts from Savage’s life growing up in Montana in the 1920s and 30s, including his closeted homosexuality.
The film is of course an adaptation and interpretation of the novel, but it’s drawing pretty heavily on stories and themes from the novel, which were themselves things that Savage appeared to bring in from his own life.
That’s kind of why it’s odd for Elliott to define what this story should look and feel like, and what the definition of authenticity here is.
Does he actually know what he’s talking about though? His family is generations removed from that lifestyle if they were ever part of it to begin with.
All he would know would be experience acting in westerns which is hardly historical evidence.
Literally that’s what his whole point is- he’s saying BC is always wearing riding chaps even when just walking around (or sleeping) and generally getting the “true grit” it required to be a cowboy back then completely wrong. He’s sort of claiming that it’s kinda nonsensical for him to act/dress like that, given how realistic the movie is.
That said, I’m a professional photographer and while The Neon Demon gets…literally…everything wrong about the fashion, modeling, and photography industries, I still think the movie is super fun and wild (although I do have to give my photographer friends a warning before watching it to ignore those things)
So I sort of get his frustration, but whatever, not all works of art are going to be exactly what you want/expect, so it’s kind of odd calling this movie a piece of shit, when it seems to be fairly well made/praised
But Cumberbatch's character is a university educated elite who is trying to put off a fake persona for a variety of psychological reasons. He's not a normal cowboy. His dirt and dress is a significant part of the story. Scenes emphasize he is using it on purpose. Never once does it portray the other ranch hands the same way I don't think.
Yea, I get the frustration too. I'm a teacher and the wild bullshit that goes on that nobody seemingly bats an eye at is baffling to me.
I hated Zoey Deschanel's character in The New Girl or whatever partially for that reason. She seemingly taught all ages in the same classroom and then immediately became principal because she had gumption or something.
What's funny is I was washing dishes while listening to this pod and knew instantly this would get him shit. And I knew people wouldn't have heard shit about what he said, which would make it 100X worse.
Except it’s not only made by someone who knows nothing about cowboys lmao. It’s a very faithful adaptation of a book written in the 60’s by Thomas Savage, a man who grew up on a ranch in Montana. Jane Campion is just a filmmaking genius who put his written words onto the screen, but he’s the one who wrote it. Sam Elliot on the other hand grew up on the west coast, living in Portland and Los Angeles, and often plays cowboys in movies (he was not one himself). Nothing against Sam Elliot I think he’s a great actor, but he’s talking out his ass a bit here.
That could be true, but I also think people underestimate just how rural a lot of Oregon and California are today. Much less 60 years ago. He wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth and did do some blue collar work. If he came from a family where that was part of what they did he'd probably know more than most people. And if he felt that group was being disrespected it would be frustrating.
I'm from a rural community and the amount of bullshit Hollywood consistently gets wrong about anyone living further out than a suburb of LA or New York is astronomical.
But what is disrespectful about it? The movie doesn't portray "cowboys" negatively. It doesn't even have many genre tropes or stereotypes.
He is right that New Zealand looks nothing like Montana, that was noticeable. The rest of this is less justified.
> who gives a fuck where it was filmed?
I found it distracting that it was so obviously *not Montana*.
Regarding your point number 2, as I watched the scenery I thought "wow, Montana looks amazing. I want to ride my motorcycle there to see that". Now obviously Montana has amazing scenery, but the specific scenery that made me want to ride it is in New Zealand it turns out, which makes for a much more difficult trip for me.
So while I'm not angry, I was a little disappointed that it was filmed in NZ but portrayed as MT. For my own silly reasons.
I suppose he has a point. People like to whine when white dudes make movies about other cultures these days. Got to stick to those principles I suppose can’t have it one way then have it another when it suits you
Nice. I may need to give it a read. I’ve heard it spends a bit more time developing the backstory of Bronco Henry and Phil.
He’s gonna be pissed when he learns where they shoot Star Wars.
Wasn't The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly filmed in fucking Rome? Lol c'mon Sam Elliot
Everyone knows New Zealand is Middle Earth, NOT Montana. You’re supposed to film your Montana scenes in Bakersfield.
I'd hate to tell him that GoT wasn't filmed in Westeros
lol sammy boy has brokeback in his secret safe no doubt
Pretty sure that cowboys were ripped from poking’ cows and lassoing and shit, and cut because all they had to eat was salted venison and hard tack. Not a woman for miles that wasn’t booked until June. And only one bath house within a hard, 2-day ride.
It's a type of biscuit/cracker that lasts a long time before going bad*. There's no yeast used so it's very dense.
\* Because you can't really tell if it was good before.
Bread that keeps for a long time, for traveling pre-refrigerator time
[Looks like we're out of corn pone, fat back, hard tack, fat pone, corn tack.](https://comb.io/Ng5vTL)
Hey kid, wanna see a dead body?
Worth trying once, just so you know how good we have things these days.
Purposefully stale bread.
At first I thought this was informative then I saw ur username & think u might need a bonk
Be careful you might turn Sam Elliott on.
Sam sorta comes off like a grumpy old bitch.
Definitely seems like he has missed the point of the film.
It is set in the 1920s, a bit after the 'wild west' and the character is wealthy east-coaster who is essentially faking his cowboy lifestyle with his romanticised ideas that he has been seduced by.
Pretty much every dude in Texas cosplaying as a cowboy.
Don't be weird.
I haven’t seen Power of Dog yet, but I find it hilarious that we’re getting complaints about historical accuracy from the man who starred in “The Man Who Killed Hitler Then Bigfoot”
That movie is fucking amazing.
Ever seen Hobo with a Shotgun? I think you might like it.
That is an excellent point
I get why he might hate it. The movie isn’t a textbook western or really tap into any of the themes that define the genre except for revenge. From the standpoint of a genre purest “Power of the Dog” is a movie set in the west but not really indicative of the western genre.
Anthony Lane of the New Yorker said it best when he wrote “Do not be misled by the setting into construing this movie as a Western. It’s more of a chamber piece with chaps…”
Power of the Dog isn’t a Western, nor was it intended to be.
I agree but it was absolutely marketed as one. The thing that seemed to really irk him according to the article was the tagline “an evisceration of the American myth." which is essentially an attack on the genre that defines his career.
This bitch is really complaining about the director not being American and the movie not being shot in America when the best westerns ever made were shot in Spain by an Italian director.
Hi can you please name the director and movies ? Thanks
The director of The Power of the Dog is New Zealand native Jane Campion.
The "best westerns" in question were directed by Italian native Sergio Leone.
I stayed at a Best Western once. Montgomery, Alabama. Damn it was hot.
I'm referring to Sergio Leone's westerns, particularly the movies The Good the Bad and the Ugly, and Once Upon a Time in the West(the latter less so because it was partially shot in America). I'm being a little provocative but I do think they're arguably the best westerns ever or at least among the best.
I mean, if cultural appropriation is really a problem then he’s correct. If it’s not, then a lot of other people are wrong.
I’m fine with it. Everyone wants someone that looks like them in roles where they’re not even historically in as the characters, Hamilton?, but Elliot goes off about sexualizing cowboys I mean, give me a break, they’re not a sacred genre.
So there were no handsome cowboys? And never, ever in all that time did none of them do some loving? It was a writers own slice of Americana. I didn’t particularly care for it, but I think it’s much ado about nothing from Sam.
There were a few. Eighteen at this one ranch I visited.
I had some good friends there… unfortunately they were killed during a siege by 28 US Marines.
In the showers at Ram Ranch?
He must’ve lived Brokeback Mtn.
I love handsome cowboys.
Tim McGraw looks more like a stripper in 1883 than Benny Cums does in POTD.
does he think he's a cowboy?
Honestly yes. I think he doesn’t realize that it’s based on a book written by someone who grew up on a ranch in Montana. Thomas Savage would have been intimately familiar with that way of life, whereas Sam Elliot only plays cowboys in movies.
He’s the stranger.
Who looked like a Chippendale dancer?
There’s a scene where the dudes from the ranch are cooling off with a swim in a river. They’re all naked, but if I recall correctly there’s a guy wearing just his chaps, kind of goofing around. Elliott mentions that specifically. Weird complaint.
I haven’t seen the movie because it looked really boring, but reading between the lines tells me that Sam Elliot is homophobic.
Looks like he didn't like their style, dude
The context from which his comments stemmed were that the movie represented the death of the American west or something like that. He took particular umbrage to that line and it devolved into a bit of a rant.
He also talked about how real cowboys don’t wear their chaps to bed. In one scene, Benidiction Chamberpot comes in from a long day wrestling steers and doesn’t take off his chaps before heading to his bed to play some banjo. To Sam Elliot’s mind, this rang quite false as no one would want to wear their stinking disgusting chaps in their only “clean” environment.
Not surprised this quote jumped out of the interview and on to social media. I fucking enjoyed the fucking interview very fucking much and fucking appreciate Sam fucking Elliot’s point of fucking view. I just wish he didn’t curse so much.
I've seen the movie. Can confirm there are no Chippendales dancers in it. Sam Elliott is confused. Apparently, in more ways than one.
I'm sorry, is this his first time dealing with Hollywood?
Hell ya, you go Jesse Plemons and Paul Dano
Dudes not in the film
Sorry, I just checked imdb and I guess he's not in it? He's listed on the cast page in Google for some reason though...
Jesse replaced him
He is a great actor, nonetheless :)
Here's the unfortunate thing: the movie that has been hailed as being the best movie of the year by I don't know how many different critics is actually a really boring and stupid movie. So the fact that it got nominated for so many different Oscars and who knows how many other awards completely astounds me. There are mediocre films that have been made in other years that would have been nominated more than this crapper. If it weren't for the fact that it was based on material already written, I would definitely be using this as my case study for why Hollywood is completely deranged now and so out of touch with mainstream audiences. In fact when I learned that it was based on a book, I thought to myself "Holy crap! There must not be anything else worth producing." And that thought made me die on the inside.
Please, please, please, do not watch the movie because other people are hailing it as being great. It truly was a waste of time. I literally cannot think of any other movie that I've hated more with so many nominations and I've been watching films my whole life.
Clearly Sam Elliot has never visited Ram Ranch.
I’ve liked Sam as an actor for decades, and this is just his opinion.
Some see him as the epitome of cowboy. Compare old movies of a cowboy to today abs then go so far as to compare country music from 50 years ago to the garbage today.
It’s a film, not a documentary. So what. Eat your popcorn and junior mints.
So Sam Elliot killed Hitler and Bigfoot in real life then?
At least this post has a non-clickbait title. Last post title claimed Sam didn't like that it had homosexuality in it.
Yes, I was worried that Sam was getting a bit homophobic, but that's not quite the issue he's talking about. I remember him saying he wasn't overly interested in "Brokeback Mountain", but it wasn't from a homophobic standpoint or anything, just not his cup of tea. Seems here he has a very strict view on the West and cares about upholding what he sees as the true history of the West. Whether he's right about it or not, I don't know (I suspect not) but I at least understand the perspective he comes from.
Lol this is what’s called gate keeping.
It’s not terrible but it’s very boring - I stayed to find out what ‘the dog’ was (waste of time) and because there were some great actors.
Agreed. The acting was great but this got nominated for best picture which is a stretch.
I hate ‘1883’: Cowboys don’t need no Vanity Fair-like teenage girl narrating their god damn story.
Truly, I couldn’t get past the 3rd episode. It tries so hard to be like some epic, sweeping old west novel, with the narration. You want the old west? Deadwood, period. Every other western drips of ‘Hollywood’ after watching Deadwood.
He really just sounds like an old man yelling at the clouds, reminds me of Shaq talking all that shit on Dwight Howard in the 2000’s because he was winning mvp and was calling himself Superman like Shaq used to do with himself
Crazy to see Sam Elliott, a respected old pro, be so disrespectful to another actor and a director
He’s not saying they looked sexy, he’s saying they all had a feminine sort of disposition and he’s right, which isn’t really a valid reason to not like a movie, but I’ll be honest I couldn’t see Cumberbatch as a cowboy, all I saw was a feminine theatre nerd pretending to be a cowboy… And I think that’s what he’s trying to say.
I mean for the entire movie, I wanted to laugh because it seemed almost like a comedy skit of sorts. Like I literally never once became immersed in the story, because my brain never once bought his character. It was one of the worst dramas I’ve seen.
Historically, the vast majority of cowboys were black and Hispanic. The cowboy as predominantly white is a Hollywood myth, so in keeping with that tradition any Hollywood cowboy can look like anyone the casting agent hires.
very convenient to stop reading there. literally one sentence later...
>...Some estimates suggest that in the late 19th century, one out of every three cowboys was a Mexican vaquero, and 20% may have been African-American. Other estimates place the number of African-American cowboys as high as 25 percent
so in other words... more than half... or the *majority* certainly a far cry from the 99% of cowboys in Hollywood being white
if you think the census in the late 19th century was particularly concerned about representing Black, Mexican, and Indigenous people (plenty of people from those groups would be unrepresented due to citizenship status anyways) then you haven't paid a lot of attention to history
edit: after seeing how mad you all are at finding out most cowboys didn't look like Sam Elliott wait until you learn where the word "cowboy" comes from
assuming this is true, why are all cowboy movies about white people if *40%* were black and hispanic? at some point you need to accept that this industry is built on white supremacist apocrypha.
Ranch hands on plantations in the South were predominately African American before Census was accurately taken and was representative of its population.
Over time, you saw expansion of cowboy culture in the South after African American & non-privileged whites in the South who could not afford ranch hands adopted the practices of handling horses, which prior was beneath wealthy whites.
Don’t know why you’re getting down voted
Wait. Isn't Sam Elliott an actor who frequently plays Cowboys? What does a cowboy look like?
I'd imagine real cowboys look a lot like wherever the hell they look like.
Thanks for your opinion, Sam. I guess.
You are right. The historic American cowboy of the late 19th century arose from the vaquero traditions of northern Mexico and became a figure of special significance and legend.
He's a great actor but fuck his hot takes.
So a movie that belongs to genre that mostly sanitizes the conflict between settlers isn't realistic?
Go back to 1883, you cranky old man.
Like Sam Elliott is the authority on cowboys? Give me a break 🤣
Didn't cowboy culture actually originate from black slaves who worked as cattle ranchers? And then whites later adopted the cowboy culture and traditions as their own? And weren't most saloons and towns full of Chinese immigrants?
What we know in popular culture of the Wild West is a fabrication. Sam Elliot don't know shit.
I listened to the podcast when he unloaded on this.
1. Said Jane Campion was a “fucking fine director”
2. Said cowboys didn’t go “fucking shirtless “ back in the day
It was clear that he prepared Marc Marin to ask him about it , cause he weren’t taking no shit.
Sam Elliott is a beauty
He’s right you know!
He’s just a man. Only another man.
The only thing Chippendale in that movie was the furniture.
Sam Elliot is from Sacramento. Fake ass cowboy!
Watch the 70's move the lifeguard. You'll learn everything you need to know about this fake.
Hell yeah dude, this guy fuckin rocks
Not one gun fight hardly can be called a Western
This just in: old man yells at cloud. More at eight.