A cowboy finds himself betrayed by his best friend and must choose between bringing him to justice and alienating the pretty schoolteacher he is in love with.A cowboy finds himself betrayed by his best friend and must choose between bringing him to justice and alienating the pretty schoolteacher he is in love with.A cowboy finds himself betrayed by his best friend and must choose between bringing him to justice and alienating the pretty schoolteacher he is in love with.
- Awards
- 2 wins & 1 nomination total
Jim Rattai
- Nebrasky
- (as James Rattai)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
...as said, the film was shot in Alberta, Canada... and it's simply beautiful. I've only seen 2 other remakes of The Virginian and this film is up there with the best of them. The acting is well done by just about everyone. It's a good TNT Original and a great start for Bill Pullman's directing and screenplay debut.
Also for those of you who don't know, his children & father-in-law cameo in this film as well.
Also for those of you who don't know, his children & father-in-law cameo in this film as well.
...but quite different from the book. I saw this film first, then read Wister's novel, which was reminiscent of the better Zane Gray tales, in their portrayal of the real West and what westerners were like.
Bill Pullman did a fine job, as star and director, but I have to wonder why they made a number of pulp western-y changes. The shootout in the book was simple and powerful, compared to the film's version. The book had examples of rude horseplay and one-upmanship that was the basis of Trampas' hatred for the Virginian, and went deeply into what kind of a man you had to be to survive out in the West of that time.
In some way this gives you the best of both media: see the film first, for the enjoyment it provides, and then dig up a copy of the novel for an interesting, considerably different version of the story.
Bill Pullman did a fine job, as star and director, but I have to wonder why they made a number of pulp western-y changes. The shootout in the book was simple and powerful, compared to the film's version. The book had examples of rude horseplay and one-upmanship that was the basis of Trampas' hatred for the Virginian, and went deeply into what kind of a man you had to be to survive out in the West of that time.
In some way this gives you the best of both media: see the film first, for the enjoyment it provides, and then dig up a copy of the novel for an interesting, considerably different version of the story.
Just about the time I think Bill Pullman couldn't do any better.......along comes another diamond.....this one not the least bit in the rough. Beautiful authentic adaptation of Owen Wister's book...marveously cast, and the scenery a feast for the eyes. Even though the Canadian scenery was extraordinarily beautiful, I would have liked to have had the movie filmed in the U.S.A.
The female lead was a bit wooden, but she can be credited with giving a passable performance. I venture to ask.....why would a Vermont straight laced, proper lady venture out into the wilds of the untamed West and still demand an eastern gentleman's manners? A cowboy's manners are every bit as appropriate as any other gentleman's for a lady....and Bill Pullman's Virginian was every bit a gentleman. He needed no educating from Molly 'in that regard'.
I do take pleasure viewing Bill's father-in-law as an extra in Bill's films. A nice gesture.....typically Pullman. His children must have had fun being in Dad's film also. What a guy!!!!!!!!!!!
The female lead was a bit wooden, but she can be credited with giving a passable performance. I venture to ask.....why would a Vermont straight laced, proper lady venture out into the wilds of the untamed West and still demand an eastern gentleman's manners? A cowboy's manners are every bit as appropriate as any other gentleman's for a lady....and Bill Pullman's Virginian was every bit a gentleman. He needed no educating from Molly 'in that regard'.
I do take pleasure viewing Bill's father-in-law as an extra in Bill's films. A nice gesture.....typically Pullman. His children must have had fun being in Dad's film also. What a guy!!!!!!!!!!!
Released in 2000, "The Virginian" was the fifth movie version of the 1902 novel by Owen Wister. Bill Pullman directs and plays the titular character, a cowboy promoted to foreman on a remote Wyoming ranch. He falls for a schoolmarm newly-arrived from back East (Diane Lane) who's shocked by the "uncivilized" violence and justice she observes. John Savage plays the best friend while Colm Feore plays the main villain. Harris Yulin and Dennis Weaver are on hand as the big ranch owners.
This is the only film version of the story I've seen and, I'll be honest, it's a hard movie to catch a grip with. To appreciate it you have to bear with the first half, paying close attention to the mumbling dialogue, which paves the way for a worthwhile second half. Also keep in mind that this isn't a rollicking shoot-'em-up Western; it's more of a realistic drama in the Old West with flashes of Western staples, like hanging rustlers and saloon confrontations. It has the look and tone of 2003' "Open Range," but lacks the budget, since it was made-for-cable (TNT). While I love rousing Westerns when they're done right, like 2002's "American Outlaws," I prefer the more realistic approach, like 1990's "Dances With Wolves" or 1992's "Unforgiven." "The Virginian" is similar in tone and locale to these movies, but is hampered by its TV-budget.
The good news is that the locations, cast, cinematography, score and plot are all top caliber; unfortunately, the low-budget is glaring at times. For instance, there's a scene where the cowboys are forced to bring some horses down a steep hill and the entire sequence comes off awkward. I'm sure director Pullman felt the same way and tried his best to make it make sense in the editing room. With a higher budget he could've taken more time shooting that particular scene or done reshoots, but with the limited funds he had to make do with what he had. There are other scenes where I had to stop and think, "Okay, what's really going on here" and was eventually able to figure it out. This occasional lack of clarity was probably the result of cramming a 300-page book into a 95-minute movie.
The above explains my relatively low rating (6/10), but I'm still giving it a marginal thumbs-up because the movie's very worthwhile if you're willing to put in the time and effort. Somewhere during the second half I stopped TRYING to like it and was involved with the story and appreciated the filmmaking (photography, music, actors, etc.); I was just focusing on understanding the dialogue.
The schoolmarm and the government agents represent the encroachment of civilization to tame the West and men like the Virginian. The former succeeds while the latter can't handle the sometimes savage environment and suffer accordingly. While the protagonist understandably falls to the charms of the former the failure of the latter leaves him no recourse but to carry out justice, Western style.
The film was shot in Alberta, Canada.
GRADE: B-
This is the only film version of the story I've seen and, I'll be honest, it's a hard movie to catch a grip with. To appreciate it you have to bear with the first half, paying close attention to the mumbling dialogue, which paves the way for a worthwhile second half. Also keep in mind that this isn't a rollicking shoot-'em-up Western; it's more of a realistic drama in the Old West with flashes of Western staples, like hanging rustlers and saloon confrontations. It has the look and tone of 2003' "Open Range," but lacks the budget, since it was made-for-cable (TNT). While I love rousing Westerns when they're done right, like 2002's "American Outlaws," I prefer the more realistic approach, like 1990's "Dances With Wolves" or 1992's "Unforgiven." "The Virginian" is similar in tone and locale to these movies, but is hampered by its TV-budget.
The good news is that the locations, cast, cinematography, score and plot are all top caliber; unfortunately, the low-budget is glaring at times. For instance, there's a scene where the cowboys are forced to bring some horses down a steep hill and the entire sequence comes off awkward. I'm sure director Pullman felt the same way and tried his best to make it make sense in the editing room. With a higher budget he could've taken more time shooting that particular scene or done reshoots, but with the limited funds he had to make do with what he had. There are other scenes where I had to stop and think, "Okay, what's really going on here" and was eventually able to figure it out. This occasional lack of clarity was probably the result of cramming a 300-page book into a 95-minute movie.
The above explains my relatively low rating (6/10), but I'm still giving it a marginal thumbs-up because the movie's very worthwhile if you're willing to put in the time and effort. Somewhere during the second half I stopped TRYING to like it and was involved with the story and appreciated the filmmaking (photography, music, actors, etc.); I was just focusing on understanding the dialogue.
The schoolmarm and the government agents represent the encroachment of civilization to tame the West and men like the Virginian. The former succeeds while the latter can't handle the sometimes savage environment and suffer accordingly. While the protagonist understandably falls to the charms of the former the failure of the latter leaves him no recourse but to carry out justice, Western style.
The film was shot in Alberta, Canada.
GRADE: B-
I've seen many of the VIRGINIAN movies over the years from 1924 to the present and this one is more descriptive and the acting is great by Bill Pullman. Naturally with newer settings and color it is better, but the older ones, 1929 with Gary Cooper and 1946 with Joel McCrea had their merits.
Did you know
- TriviaThe 1901 novel on which the movie is based added the iconic "Smile when you say that" to American slang (the quote is actually "when you call me that, smile" from the book). The "that" is "son of a bitch". In the era in which the story occurs (~1875), one did not call someone else an SOB without expecting to be punched out. It was, however, acceptable for friends to call each other SOBs, in good humor. Hence, "Smile when you call me that."
- GoofsWhen Molly and the Virginian are talking about kings and queens while sitting in the grass, her shawl appears and disappears from around her shoulders as the camera angle changes.
- ConnectionsVersion of The Virginian (1914)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- The Virginian
- Filming locations
- Drumheller, Alberta, Canada(rolling hills and prairie grassland)
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content