Hacia los grandes horizontes

The original 'Stagecoach' from 1939 was, and still is, a benchmark of the western genre, and a wonderful film in its own right too. Considering the generally dodgy track record of how remakes fare in quality, was honestly expecting this 1966 'Stagecoach' to be an insult and with no point or merits.

Expectations that were mostly proved very much wrong. Yes, it is a far inferior film to 1939's 'Stagecoach' (whereas the original is a masterpiece this is just fair), and, yes, one does question the point of it with so much of the content already seen previously and with much more impact. However, it does have a lot of merit, with it being made with competence, with respect being shown and with attempts to bring some freshness or build on what was seen previously (characters like Plummer being richer in characterisation here).

Starting with the faults, not all the casting comes off. Mike Connors sleepwalks through a role in need of so much more intensity than what actually came off. Stefanie Powers is an attractive but rabbits-in-the-headlights blank, but coming off worst is Alex Cord as a pivotal character crying out for much more charisma and personality than what was given in Cord's very wooden and vacuous take on it.

Gordon Douglas' direction is competent with a keen visual eye, but, in terms of momentum and storytelling, it's a case of everything done pleasingly and correctly with nothing offensive but with some lack of invention or oomph and with a sense of routine-ness about it all. The story is actually a good one and the characters are still interesting on the most part, but apart from a few scenes much of it has already been done before and with more excitement.

However, it's a great-looking film. While the scenery doesn't have the magnificence of Monument Valley it's still sweepingly beautiful and the cinematography is similarly striking, especially in the aerial shot and the chase sequence. Production, set and costume design register strongly too and who can't help love those paintings. Jerry Goldsmith's score is rousing, atmospheric and extraordinary in instrumentation, while the theme song is very much a memorable one.

Meanwhile, it's nicely scripted, and there are sequences that register strongly, especially the chase sequence (the highlight), the storm on the cliff and the opening massacre. Also appreciated an ending where what happens is shown with more clarity and less ambiguity. The cast are fine generally, Bing Crosby plays his boozy-doctor-with-a-heart role perfectly in his final screen appearance, while Van Heflin is similarly terrific, Slim Pickens brings some welcome humour and Keenan Wynn is frightening (even though not on screen long).

Ann-Margaret shows how to be an alluring presence while also being able to act with sass and compassion, while Robert Cummings is good enough (he has been better though) and Red Buttons shares a strong touching rapport with Crosby in a remarkably subdued performance.

Overall, inferior and maybe pointless but nowhere near as bad as expected. A lot is done right and nothing offends, but at the end of the day even whether compared to the 1939 film or out of context it just felt a little bland. 6/10 Bethany Cox

Dudley Nichols wrote a great screenplay for a great film - 1939's Stagecoach, that is, directed by John Ford, not the 1960s remake we have here.

As the Ringo Kid, Alex Cord lacks the menace, dynamism, and screen presence of the young John Wayne - meaning that the focus of this Stagecoach has to be on other participants. Ann-Margret is very good as Dallas (the part originally played by Claire Trevor); while Stefanie Powers makes her mark as Mrs Mallory. Bing Crosby is the boozy doc with a heart (not a patch on Thomas Mitchell's turn thirty years earlier but Crosby was always worth watching); while Red Buttons is disappointing as the liquor salesman with eight kids (far better was the twittery Donald Meek).

Using the 1939 screenplay, this film is pretty much a straight remake, but in standard class. Slim Pickens does a fair imitation of Andy Devine as the hapless coach driver, and Bob Cummings is just plain irritating as the crook who has a mysterious case he won't let out of his sight.

So, 'Stagecoach' is OK as a time-filler, but was not needed - why bother when the film has already been made and stands as a classic. Liked the end portraits of the cast though, and always good to see Keenan Wynn, however brief a role he has (and it is pretty brief here), although pivotal.

The original version of this story (made in that year of years, 1939) stands as one of the all time great westerns for many people. Therefore, a remake can only hope to come close to the original's heights and, in this case, it doesn't quite make it. The fairly straightforward story of nine people en route to Cheyenne, Wyoming (in the title mode of transportation) during an Indian uprising isn't exactly monumentally meaningful or complex. It would seem hard to mess it up too badly and this version is OK. It just isn't able to shine as brightly as its predecessor. Boozy doctor Crosby and baby-voiced, skyscraper-haired saloon girl Ann-Margret are driven out of town (after two men, literally, kill themselves trying to dance with her!) They join slick gambler Connors, liquor salesman Buttons, sticky-fingered banker Cummings and pregnant soldier's wife Powers on the coach. Fretful Pickens and determined Marshall Heflin ride on top, eventually picking up Cord along the way. On the plus side, there is some gorgeous scenery, lots of great music, the legendary Norman Rockwell portraits of the cast at the end and good performances from Crosby, Buttons and Pickens. Detriments would have to include the lackluster work of Connors (walking through and never fully realizing his part), Powers (mostly blank and uninteresting) and Cord (alternately wooden and over-dramatic.) Cord (what? was Michael Parks busy?), in particular, is a let down in that he lacks the physical presence to really stand out as the hero of the story. Most of the cast can hardly get a close-up in since so many are devoted to Ann-Margret (who, at 25, was already getting the gauzy, fuzzy treatment in them.) She does an adequate job throughout, though she really only sparkles in her catty scene with Powers when the coach is delayed by a fallen tree. There are certainly worse westerns out there, but this can't begin to approach greatness. Too many of the actors are just marking time and the direction isn't particularly creative. Also, what was revolutionary and trend-setting in 1939 was already becoming cliché by 1966, so the whole thing comes off as a little reheated.

After seeing this version on AMC a few days ago, I took out my copy of the original from 1939. It's the difference between a classic western and a routine action film.

Director Gordon Douglas probably because there is an unwritten rule in Hollywood that no one is ever to shoot a film in Monument Valley but John Ford, shot this thing in Colorado. It's not badly photographed, but you really miss the sweeping vistas of the Arizona desert. The Apache become the Sioux here and instead we have Geronimo jumping the reservation it's Crazy Horse instead. One of the great moments of cinema westerns in the original Stagecoach is when the cavalry sweeps by the passing Stagecoach to engage the Apaches in the rescue. John Ford liked it so much he used the same gambit in Fort Apache. In this version you have to believe that the passengers fought them off themselves and then made it into Cheyenne on three wheels with less horses. No way, Jose.

Poor Alex Cord, a competent actor, is no John Wayne. Of course who is and Cord tries his best, but you can't forget the Duke. Michael Connors as Hatfield lacks fire in his portrayal. John Carradine created a real air of mystery about the gambler. Nothing like that here.

This is one of Bing Crosby's few non-singing roles and he got some deservedly good reviews for reprising Thomas Mitchell's Doc Boone. In fact some of his scenes with Red Buttons as Peacock the whiskey drummer are faintly reminiscent of Crosby's work with Bob Hope. Buttons is not Donald Meek and he plays the part differently. Meek was a man with a Dickensian name and he played mostly parts that fit that name perfectly. After the Indian attack, Buttons is a man with a few drinks under his belt ready to lick the world. It's different, but nicely done.

Another musical performer in this was Ann-Margret. For the life of me I can't figure out why with two people like Crosby and Ann-Margret, they didn't give her and him a song or two, a duet maybe. Especially since in the plot line here, Crosby takes a fatherly interest in Ann-Margret as well as in Alex Cord. Her role of Dallas is as a saloon girl so a musical number would not have been out of place.

The rest of the cast performs adequately. Bob Cummings's Gatewood is more fully developed a character here and a bigger rat. Van Heflin and Slim Pickens are able substitutes for George Bancroft and Andy Devine. Stefanie Powers as the pregnant cavalry officer's wife is adequate. The part itself is as thin as the original version with Louise Platt doing it.

The gunfight between the Plummers and Ringo is more fully developed here. You actually don't see it in the 1939 version. Keenan Wynn as Luke Plummer is also more fully developed than was Tom Tyler. Tyler with a minimum of dialog suggested the menace of Luke Plummer. But Keenan Wynn is one evil man here.

In fact whole pages of dialog are taken from the original. Interesting that 20 years later another version was done. But this Stagecoach is a perfect example of why classics should just be left alone.

You see Bing, Red, Ann, and so forth, and you might skip this, but if you ignore the "fading star" thing and just enjoy it as a little play put on by some true pros, you'll enjoy this. It has one of the best chase scenes ever, with Indians and Helicopter shots of the racing horses and stage, it has a great performance by Bob Cummings and Kennan Wynn, and I actually felt the hair coming up on the back of my neck during the storm on the cliff, even though I knew it was just a process shot against a painting. It's not Shakespeare, but hey, it's a fun 1960's good ole American film just as TV production values and over lit sound stages were taking over film making and as the last reviewer said, just before the Anti Hero revolution.