I'm a fan of westerns.  I have about five Wyatt Earps (Kurt Russell, Kevin Costner, James Garner, Henry Fonda, and someone else), three or four Billy the Kids (Emilio Estevez, Kris Kristofferson, Paul Newman), a couple of James/Younger Gangs (Carradines/Keaches, and another, and expecting to get the new one when it hits DVD in the next few months).  I have all of Clint Eastwood's westerns ("The Outlaw Josey Wales" is a standout) and a number of John Wayne's ("Stagecoach" is dated and "She Tied a Yellow Ribbon" is really dated, but the Rooster Cogburn movies were OK).  I also have "High Noon", "Shane", "The Wild Bunch" and a couple others of the classics.  Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West" was terrific, and I have the entire "Lonesome Dove" saga, including the two years of the Canadian TV series.  I just watched "3:10 to Yuma" and found it better than acceptable, but not great.  I like the Sam Elliot/Tom Sellick "Sacketts" movies, and I thought "Quigley Down Under" was nearly as good as "Silverado" and "The Shootist."

I really do like the more recent ones better; higher budgets, better production values, and a quantum leap in the craft of acting over the last 50 years have all combined to make more recent movies much slicker and more believable.

So, how come all you Limpid Loungers hate westerns?

-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
======================================================================
Richard Hopley                                  Winston-Salem, NC, USA
      Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
.                    rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
  OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
.                     rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
======================================================================