La Diligence vers l'Ouest

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.

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.

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.

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

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.