La Diligence vers l'Ouest

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.

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

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.

I really enjoy this version, mainly because of the more up to date actors and actresses in it. I do not understand the nay sayers as it is enjoyable in its own right, and should be viewed only for its entertainment value - and as a comparison I just wish it was more readily available for rent or purchase...such as on Apple TV! Cannot figure out how they and other vendors can be so selective about which movies they offer...surely an any profit is better than no profit. There seems to be a multitude of movies that get little or no coverage that are just as good if not better than some offerings lately.

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.