• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Who killed the Western?

Alex Richards

Lifetime cathedrals built: 8
Patreon supporter
Published by SLP
Location
Derbyshire
#2
I do wonder whether the 80s were just the point where the Western passed far enough out of living memory to just not have the mass appeal anymore. The people who'd been hearing about stuff like the death of Butch Cassidy in 1908 or the touring circuses which still had some of those outlaws on them until the late teens, early 20s would have been getting into their late 70s or 80s at that point.

The recent revival is, in essence, the people who's childhood memories are growing up with the films made by the people who had memories of the actual events.
 

Coiler

Connoisseur of the Miscellaneous
Published by SLP
Location
Nu Yawk
#3
One thing I've heard (and agree with) is that the classic Mad Max/Fist Of The North Star style post-apocalyptic story is in many ways like a Western. That could be another factor-you can, with those, use a broadly similar story in a broadly similar rough environment without having to fall back on something that was, at least at the time, overly familiar and (I suspect) regarded as increasingly stuffy.
 

SenatorChickpea

The Most Kiwi Aussie of them all
Patreon supporter
#4
I think there's also the extent to which the Western became associated with your boring right-wing dads. That's not fair, of course, but still.

The revival in the late 2000s and 2010s has in part come about due to an increased focus on diverse leads- look at the more female-driven True Grit reboot, the Indigenous Australian stories of Sweet Country, The Tracker and to an extent The Proposition, the ethnically diverse remake of The Magnificent Seven and so on.
 
Last edited:

Burton K Wheeler

Old Dirty Burton, Live and Uncut
Location
garbage can
#6
Ryan is wrong.

The fundamental problem with the Western is that no one since the 1970's has understood the genre, which is why most successful post 70's westerns are deconstructionist. The genre was healthy when a ton of stuff was being put out, 99% of it crap. Now there's very little coming out, so it doesn't say much for the state of the genre even if that very little is good.

I could type a novel-length post on this topic.
 

Hendryk

Nothing ever ends
Published by SLP
Location
France
#7
When Stagecoach hit movie theatres in 1939 it was a complete reinvention of the genre because ,at the time, big budget Westerns were out of vogue. Ford struggled to get the film produced and all the studios objected to Wayne as a leading man, but Ford stuck to his guns and one of the most famous pairings of director and actor was born.
Does this mean that, absent John Ford, the Western wouldn't have been given a second chance after the advent of talkies?
 

RyanF

Abbot of Unreason
Patreon supporter
Published by SLP
Location
Falkirk
#9
One thing I've heard (and agree with) is that the classic Mad Max/Fist Of The North Star style post-apocalyptic story is in many ways like a Western. That could be another factor-you can, with those, use a broadly similar story in a broadly similar rough environment without having to fall back on something that was, at least at the time, overly familiar and (I suspect) regarded as increasingly stuffy.
True of a lot of science fiction from the 1960s onward, there is something wonderfully ironic about youthful audiences rejecting Westerns as old hat but flocking to post-apocalyptic or science fiction action films that lifted Western themes wholesale (Escape from New York being another example).

Bollocks!

I'm running around today, but I'll type a longer response later that is actually constructive instead of dismissive and rude (sorry Ryan)
Fair enough!

The fundamental problem with the Western is that no one since the 1970's has understood the genre, which is why most successful post 70's westerns are deconstructionist. The genre was healthy when a ton of stuff was being put out, 99% of it crap. Now there's very little coming out, so it doesn't say much for the state of the genre even if that very little is good.

I could type a novel-length post on this topic.
Hasn't every successful post-70s Western been deconstructionist or revisionist one way or another? Did Eastwood understand the genre with Pale Rider and The Outlaw Josey Wales but forget it by the time he did Pale Rider and Unforgiven? The fact it was such a sheer drop in numbers from the 70s to the 80s would say that there was something more at work than filmmakers suddenly not understanding the genre.

I'm not sure I understand entirely the distinction drawn between a healthy state with almost all of the output being crap, being made by people who understood the genre vs. very little output tending towards good but no one understanding the genre. I'm interested in this because it is a complex take, but while there is a distinct difference between the mentality of the people making the films 70s and before compared with since, I don't see how this points to a lack of understanding since the 1970s being the major issue in the decline of the genre. Unless what you're actually taking exception to is the assertion at the end that Western films are looking in a healthier state than they have done in decades?

Does this mean that, absent John Ford, the Western wouldn't have been given a second chance after the advent of talkies?
It certainly wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility, but I see you've created a thread for this so will give deeper thoughts there.
 

Tabac Iberez

Impetious
Published by SLP
#11
Part of the problem was saturation, part of the problem was changing expectations. Considering the Western was built on the duel tableau of a simple system of characters and an open-ended story that didn't have an airtight third act, there was a finite number of stories you could build around before the square-dance of production started eating toes. Once that happened and the genre became stagnant, you couldn't really argue things could keep it alive- especially with the influx of new blood that poured in after the deaths of the end of the Golden Age. That, I think, was the final nail in the coffin- people with the resources to tell different stories and present different styles pushing out the grandfather of their standing.

Now that every johnny-come-lately has finished their howl at the wall, though, there's a place for the questions of a frontier. When the empty spaces and related problems come up, though, the modern creater and his audience don't understand the void of humanity that created the frontier environment. They understand that the first item is taking out the human element, though, and the good creators can reverse-engineer the rest. Thus, the post-apocalypse: or rather, the enforced creation of a frontier.
 
#12
I think the Western peaking in 1969 is important for another reason. Namely, it's the first year the Hays code isn't in effect. While I'm not an expert on the topic, I've heard you could get away with a lot more content-wise in historical films. I think it's entirely plausible the decline of the Western was the market returning to equilibrium after an artificial factor propping the genre up was removed. Don't look at Star Wars. Look at the Godfather. A story of outlaws, revenge and honor but done in a contemporary setting that the code never would have allowed.
 

Charles EP M.

Well-known member
Published by SLP
#13
True of a lot of science fiction from the 1960s onward, there is something wonderfully ironic about youthful audiences rejecting Westerns as old hat but flocking to post-apocalyptic or science fiction action films that lifted Western themes wholesale (Escape from New York being another example).
It probably doesn't help the Western that science fiction can so easily lift the themes, the tropes, the iconography etc and marry it to more contemporary settings or more fantastical ones. The Western remains 'old'. Similar,y Film Stories #1 had an article on the brief spurt of truckers films in the mid-to-late 70s, arguing these were taking the masculine symbol of the cowboy & the empty frontier imagery and preserving them in a way that seemed more relevant to the time.
 

RyanF

Abbot of Unreason
Patreon supporter
Published by SLP
Location
Falkirk
#14
I Think Vietnam and Watergate made people less patriotic maybe that is why.
I don't know about patriotism, but I do think those two things contributed to a change in US culture that was well underway after the former had begun but before the latter. Things became grimmer with the malaise that was setting in, one early victim of the rural purge, Gomer Pyle, USMC, was on the air from 1964 to 1969 on a modern marine base yet the ongoing War was never mentioned - perhaps says something about how out of touch it was felt by the chattering classes and the powers that be that wanted their dollars.

I think those two major events were so paradigm shifting that the cultural effects played a part, but I don't think it was a question of Westerns being seen as some patriotic thing. Look at the spaghetti Westerns or The Wild Bunch from around that time, but there might be something to saying that the modern day was seen as being just as wild as the Wild West.

I think the Western peaking in 1969 is important for another reason. Namely, it's the first year the Hays code isn't in effect. While I'm not an expert on the topic, I've heard you could get away with a lot more content-wise in historical films. I think it's entirely plausible the decline of the Western was the market returning to equilibrium after an artificial factor propping the genre up was removed. Don't look at Star Wars. Look at the Godfather. A story of outlaws, revenge and honor but done in a contemporary setting that the code never would have allowed.
An intriguing line of thought! It goes even further than The Godfather look at the likes of The French Connection or Dirty Harry. Perhaps there was a knowing reason they sought John Wayne and then eventually settled on Clint Eastwood for the lead role in Dirty Harry. Running this into an AH idea I've had where a successful Reagan assassination leads to a new Production Code this might herald a return of the genre. Most intriguing.

It probably doesn't help the Western that science fiction can so easily lift the themes, the tropes, the iconography etc and marry it to more contemporary settings or more fantastical ones. The Western remains 'old'. Similar,y Film Stories #1 had an article on the brief spurt of truckers films in the mid-to-late 70s, arguing these were taking the masculine symbol of the cowboy & the empty frontier imagery and preserving them in a way that seemed more relevant to the time.
It's true that science fiction so easily can lift Western themes and also lended itself to using the same Southern California locations so favoured by Westerns - look at Vasquez Rocks for instance. Interesting point about the trucker movies, certainly Smokey and the Bandit has certain elements to it and after all when Sam Peckinpah failed at a couple of Westerns in the 1970s the film he attempted to return to commercial success was the trucker movie Convoy! based on the song of the same name.


Is there parhaps another element that practically every film started to take cues from the Western in the 1970s that they just faded away? Science fiction had lifted its themes, road movies had lifted its vistas, modern action films had lifted their violence?
 

Charles EP M.

Well-known member
Published by SLP
#15
I

Is there parhaps another element that practically every film started to take cues from the Western in the 1970s that they just faded away? Science fiction had lifted its themes, road movies had lifted its vistas, modern action films had lifted their violence?
That surely can't help, as then the Westerns will be perceived as only having the specific period setting