South of Heaven, West of Hell

South of Heaven, West of Hell is a dimension of David Lynch proportions. The story takes place in a purgatory of sorts between life and death. Amazingly, however, this Western setting is extremely accurate, capturing the complete mood of that time. The film is very fresh on several other levels as well. The black humor and ghost like characters are very new to such a well done Western scene. South of Heaven is definitely genre bending and creative.

The acting throughout the film is superb from beginning to end. Every actor gives a world class performance. Vince Vaughn and Bud Cort had to have been in mind during the writing. Dwight does a great job himself, especially considering he wrote, directed, stared, and did the music for the movie.

The movie works on so many different levels that if you have a chance, see it. Do yourself a favor and stick around till the end. This movie is by no means conventional. It wanders through a story with seemingly no structure. It can be hard to watch when you can not figure out why the leading man is MIA for 30 minutes. There is quite a bit to think about. Watch it with an open mind and an open ear for Dwight's jazzy score, and notice the Gray production value. Superb.

Having viewed this film three times now, I think I finally have enough together to write a decent review for it. First off, I waited a long time to see this (over two years) and it definitely did not dissapoint. Mainly because I knew the direction that Dwight Yoakam was moving in on this one. He wanted to create a western that was a bit different than the standard shoot 'em up and he wanted to create a story that mirrored a lot of events from his own life while ,at the same time, not spelling everything out for the audience and letting them think and decipher for themselves. While he certainly succeeded in doing this, he also manages to use the ensemble cast for all its worth by bringing in the biggest mix of oddball and eccentric characters I've seen since Jim Jarmusch's "Dead Man".

"South of Heaven, West of Hell" uses the pretty basic story (seemingly) of a man, Valentine Casey (Yoakem) who has been raised by an adoptive family known as the Henrys. The Henrys are led by none other than western vet Luke Askew who seems to have the most level head of the gang. His socio-path son Taylor (Vince Vaughn) does most of the running while his cronies (Paul Reubens and Michael Jeter) follow him around like whipped puppies. Natalie Canerday (Linda from Sling Blade) plays Sissy, the child like sister of the brood who is desperately in love with Valentine. At some point, before the story starts, Valentine dissowned the outlaw family who raised him and fought in the Spanish American war, later becoming a sherriff.

All is peaceful for Valentine, living the life of a sheriff in a town where nothing happens, until the Henrys come riding into town raising all manners of hell and pulling a "wild bunch" style attack. A few people are killed (the Henry's must not be much for target practice since they fired over a hundred rounds) and a couple more are shot. Valentine waits about a year, then retaliates. That's all I'm going to say in the way of the story, but there's a lot more than that.

Let's talk about the characters for a minute. Ol' Val is about the sanest one of the bunch. He's a mild-mannered, likeable guy who is tough only when he has to be. His side kick is an "odd bird" who has a thing for wearing dresses. Bo Hopkins plays Doc Angus Dunfries, a blacksmith. A barely recognizable Billy Bob Thornton comes into town as a traveller named Brigadier Smalls. With him is his travelling buddy, the nearly mute Babcock (Warren Zevon). They are escorting Adelyne (Bridget Fonda), Doc Angus's niece, and Val's soon-to-be love interest. Paul Reubens (looking very much like he did in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer) plays one sick puppy here, as one of the twisted members of the Henry tribe. One of my favorites was Bud Cort, playing a government agent with some papers that strongly suggest that Valentine was killed in the war. He gets off the train, whining about the heat and a toothache. It's pretty clear that this guy is here mainly for comic-relief. He appears to have the worst luck in history and the belt scene had me in stitches.

It's easy to see why this only got a limited theatrical release. "South of Heaven, West of Hell" isn't necessarily the kind of film that the masses will flock to. I think Yoakam made the film with that in mind, knowing that it would find it's intended audience on video. It's true that the majority just won't get it. To enjoy this film, you have to go into it with an open mind and sort of block out everything around and that's something that a lot of people just aren't capable of. It's hard to explain just what kind of movie this is but I think Vince Vaughn summed it up best, in an interview, by saying that it is the "punk rock of westerns".

I enjoyed this movie a lot and I'm sure it will probably go down as one of my year's favorites. There is a lot here to enjoy and one viewing is not enough. There is a lot of black comedy that I didn't pick up on the first time around and there is also a lot more going on with and between the characters than what is going on on-screen. It's not just "worth a viewing". It's worth several.

It was surprising to me to see that 1/3 of the people who had voted for this movie gave it a 1! I thought this was one of the best Westerns to come out of Hollywood for a LONG time. The story and acting is superb, and so is the cinematography. These three things are what make a great movie. You could argue the forth being controversy/making you think, but it is not absolutely necessary. This is a great film. So don't listen to the others because they have no sense of taste. If you like Westerns and Independent films, check this one out. It is obviously an overlooked gem.

Last night I rented SOUTH OF HEAVEN WEST OF HELL on dvd. I was expecting the typical western. It wasn't. It seems as if Dwight used the early 1900's and the traditional western theme as a structure for telling an interesting tale. While he pays tribute to a few classic western films, he didn't make yet another western.

Overall, I think Dwight and company did a fine job. I have read many reviews here at IMDb of people who hated the film, and, from the voting, it looks like there are many others who share that feeling. I am not sure what people find so bad. Granted, the movie was not perfect, but it was good enough that I think Dwight has a potential in writing and directing.

The story is interesting...if you get it. The filming was good, and it had plenty of beautiful Arizona scenery. Vince Vaughn and Luke Askew make a darn good bad guy, so good, I was cheering for them instead of Dwight. And, if nothing else, the comical parts of Agent Otts and U.S. Christmas make the movie worth watching.

I thought the movie was very entertaining. It had a David Lynch like feel which I enjoy: It was very aware of the absurd. Unfortunately there were a couple of scenes that were annoying to the point of nearly spoiling the entire film. Dwight excessively smooches with not one, but two pretty girls. (Are you beginning to get the feeling that I don't like him as a lead actor?) Each of the Dunfries brothers has an emotional breakdown and ruins otherwise splendid scene.

One of these tantrums is during what could have been one of my all time favorite movie scenes. Billy Bob Thorton, Briget Fonda, and Dwight Yoakam are having what Dwight called a dada conversation. Billy Bob is presenting a key piece of information in riddle like form, and Burl Dunfries is carrying on like a lunatic on PCP. The overbearing acting does not lend to the chaos, but instead, overwhelms it.

For what it's worth. I gave it 8 out of 10. I do not see how anyone could give it less than five stars. Not a perfect movie, but there are many quality pieces in it.

I love Dwight Yoakam's music and songwriting, he's surely one of the best singer/ songwriters out there but I think he should leave the screenwriting to professional screenwriters. This film looks beautiful, but the plot leaves a lot to be desired and the dialogue is often very dull. It also makes no sense that I can decipher. Dwight has some positives in this, as bad as it is. For instance, he looks great on a horse, but he looks uncomfortable in front of the camera here, which is unusual for him, given his other movies. The characters are interesting enough, but not given enough development that we can see. I don't think Dwight should give up directing entirely, but I would not recommend seeing this. The beautiful scenery and cinematography make it watchable. The horses are beautiful, too.