A Última Diligência

I have also seen the 1939 version of "Stagecoach" starring John Wayne and enjoyed it as well. I have also seen a couple of other versions of "Stagecoach". I don't find it difficult to enjoy watching different versions of the same movie or story. Sometimes they are not quite as "good" as earlier or later versions, but they are still fun to watch. Each version of a story has it's own unique qualities and features. Two features that I really, really enjoyed from the 1966 version of "Stagecoach" was it's theme song, sung by Wayne Newton, and the other was the beautiful paintings that Norman Rockwell did of the cast members that were shown at the end of the film. They were magnificent (I would really like to know what was done with them). I remember when "Battlestar Galactica" aired and a lot of people were downing it as not being as good as "Star Wars" and "Star Trek". Needless to say, that upset me a great deal. I like all three of them. Each has their own unique qualities. I just wish people could enjoy each film or show as it comes along and not compare it to death with others.

Stagecoach is a remake of the 1939 Jon Wayne film. It has an all-star cast of Ann-Margret, Van Heflin, Bing Crosby, Mike Connors, Bob Cummings, Red Buttons, Slim Pickens, Stephanie Powers and Keenen Wynn. But oddly, the only cast member not well known then or now is the film's main character played by Alex Cord. As "the Ringo Kid" in 1939, John Wayne was a powerful presence, dominating the screen and making the Kid seem like the strong, feared, but ultimately good character he was intended to be. Cord seems to play the part as if he's brooding. Maybe trying to be James Dean. He mumbles and seems distracted. Makes you wonder why anyone would fear him or even why Ann-Margret's character would give him the time of day.

This film has much better production values than the 1939 version. The chase scenes and gunfights are well done. The acting is first rate by everyone except Red Buttons, who woefully overacts in a supporting role and Cord, who brings the movie down with his poor acting in the starring role. Overall, the film is worth seeing as an entertaining western. Just be prepared to cringe at Cord's performance.

Similar cast of characters as its 1939 namesake. But only Bing Crosby as Doc Boone really shines among the passengers on this stagecoach journey. Van Heflin as the sheriff tried, but was disappointing. Silm Pickens as the stage driver always fits neatly into any western like a well fitting glove. Alec Cord as Ringo was rather wooden in his performance. Ann-Margaret seemed uncomfortable in her role. But to me she has always been a heart-throb. She fits all her other film roles like a smooth silky glove! Just watching her is akin to an art connoisseur staring with total appreciation at any of the world's most beautiful paintings!

But this movie does have something that Ford's 1939 production lacks. And that is crisp outdoor color photography. And let's add to that, Norman Rockwell's excellent portraits of the main characters, which would have been better served with the opening credits instead of at the end. To me, Norman rockwell's paintings are always enjoyable to look at, anytime.

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.

Although the 1966 remake of Stagecoach is not quite of the caliber of the 1939 version, this well done and very entertaining western is well worth a look, if only to see the beautiful color scenery in Cinemascope.

Particularly notable among the cast is Bing Crosby, for once in a non singing role. His portrayal of the disgraced doctor with a taste for whiskey is a solid one, it proves that despite some of his later work (Say One for Me - 1959, etc), that the popular crooner could actually act.

Alex Cord, (who is remembered for Gray Eagle - in which he portrays a Native American) is here to be seen as Ringo, and pulling a gun on the marauding "Indians" chasing the stagecoach, while trying to keep the sheriff from shooting him as an escapee, and he is in top form. Cord has not the screen presence of his predecessor in the role, John Wayne, but he carries the role off with a believable grittiness that is convincing, nonetheless.

Not to demean Robert Cummings, whom I respect very much, and once worked with in films, I don't "believe" his character as the dishonest Banker, he has the right stuff, but doesn't seem able to show it off. His portrayal is nonetheless competent and does not detract from enjoyment of the film.

The scenery is outstanding and Gordon Douglas and his cinematographer, William Clothier have done a fine job of giving this film an expansive and authentic look. The music is very good evoking the mood of the film as it changes from tense to exciting and back to tense. The final scenes were a trifle bloodier than the original film, and could have been less drawn out, but overall, the film works well.

Just a word about the supporting cast. Ann Margaret is, as always, very fine; Red Buttons (See "Red" in Poseidon Adventure" for comparison) adds a certain comical manner to his role, which was a weak spot in the 1939 version. Mike Connors is convincing and gives the film a "familiar" feel (due to his many television roles, no doubt). Van Heflin is his usual solid self, giving his role all you would expect, but with a hint that given more to do, he would have pulled that off too.

All in all, a satisfying if not top notch film, any western buff should find it very enjoyable. If you like Ernest Haycox's book (on which this film is based) "Stage to Lordsburg", you will love seeing his story in color, it really helps.