Rio Bravo

[The_Donster]

I'm in the market for this movie too and found this link helpful in tracking it down

[The Duke]

Originally Posted by ChiefSequatchie

Its likely just out of stock, WalMart.com has it for $28.98 with Free Shipping To Store.

Well, Amazon has been out of stock for some time. I had this on the dead red format and got rid of the last of them last year and have been looking to replace it on blu-ray but didn't want to pay 20 bucks+ for it, it's a very good movie but a run of the mill Warner release. I just got a sealed copy last week from the $10 or less thread in the trading forum here at blu-ray.com.

Deepdiscount.com has it in their current 25% off sale for $18.34 with free shipping, better than Amazon third party sellers.

[G:Box]

Originally Posted by The Duke

Well, Amazon has been out of stock for some time. I had this on the dead red format and got rid of the last of them last year and have been looking to replace it on blu-ray but didn't want to pay 20 bucks+ for it, it's a very good movie but a run of the mill Warner release. I just got a sealed copy last week from the $10 or less thread in the trading forum here at blu-ray.com.

Deepdiscount.com has it in their current 25% off sale for $18.34 with free shipping, better than Amazon third party sellers.

Target is going to have this release for $10

Originally Posted by AlexG

Classic Westerns on DVD and Blu-ray Sale:
Once Upon a Time in the West (1968): Blu-ray - $10
Rio Lobo (1970): Blu-ray - $10

more in-store

Source: http://www.examiner.com/dvd-in-new-y...-blu-ray-deals

[The_Donster]

I thought I had seen it there in the past MrGBox, thanks for link. Maybe I'll try and talk my wife into swinging by Best Buy so I can pick up The Searchers and City Slickers for $10 each. Glad I didn't pull the trigger on the more expensive RB online. Thanks again

[MifuneFan]

Those B&W images look amazing. I hope to god we get a new BD, and/or UHD of this.

[Geoff D]

It's time for Geoffy to state the obvious! Those images are from the OG negatives for the still photographs, not the movie itself.

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's time for Geoffy to state the obvious! Those images are from the OG negatives for the still photographs, not the movie itself.

Some of the shots look like still photos from set.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

It's time for Geoffy to state the obvious! Those images are from the OG negatives for the still photographs, not the movie itself.

Oh, the wording definitely threw me, as did the first few photos, which appear to be direct scenes from the film. Still hoping the film gets premium treatment from Warner one day

[Hintermann]

I know that various points have been discussed in this thread but I am still confused.

I understood that both the PQ and AQ of the original 2007-8 issue were dodgy. So what, if anything has improved for the 2015 re-release? Is it a remastered edition?

Am I right in thinking that the only UK release is the 2008 one?

[Shout92]

Anyone know a guaranteed way to order the 2007 Blu with the Howard Hawks documentary? I ordered it off the listing on Amazon, but received the 2015 edition in the mail.

[LMFAObros]

Originally Posted by Shout92

Anyone know a guaranteed way to order the 2007 Blu with the Howard Hawks documentary? I ordered it off the listing on Amazon, but received the 2015 edition in the mail.

Can order it from germany or the uk

[jacksonwalker]

Originally Posted by Shout92

Anyone know a guaranteed way to order the 2007 Blu with the Howard Hawks documentary? I ordered it off the listing on Amazon, but received the 2015 edition in the mail.

I have this disc with the Howard Hawks documentary, but I did not know that it was that special. In particular the soon to be released "Bringing Up Baby" Blu-ray features a somewhat "fuller" Hawks feature.

[captainsolo]

Give me the old snapper DVD anyday. It may be a bit of an older master and a bit washed out but at least it's not trying way too hard to look more vintage filmlike in terms of color. I have the BD reissue with the audio upgrade and it's merely bumping up the codec specs. It was a nice touch but like the upgrade on the Casablanca reissue doesn't do much if the source is filtered, EQd, de-hissed and the like.
I wish there had been a letterbox LD for RB but all we got was a 1.33 analog audio LD. I'm pretty sure the snapper case DVD master was originally intended for a final LD like The Cowboys got.

The remastering on RB seems to be from around the same 2006-2007 time of HD transition which also includes The Searchers and The Wild Bunch which both are in dire need of brand new from the ground up transfers.

I still hate that this enjoyable movie was cooked up as Hawks and Wayne's "response" to High Noon. RB is a movie pure and simple reveling in its unreality whereas High Noon is not just an intended parallel to the dark days of the blacklist but painfully aware of how an individual would be forced to go it alone in the face of overwhelming odds-and facing certain death for doing so. RB is a fun night at the movies and enjoys being a traditional Western-but one closeup of Coop's face in High Noon obliterates it.

[benedictopacifico]

Originally Posted by captainsolo

I still hate that this enjoyable movie was cooked up as Hawks and Wayne's "response" to High Noon. RB is a movie pure and simple reveling in its unreality whereas High Noon is not just an intended parallel to the dark days of the blacklist but painfully aware of how an individual would be forced to go it alone in the face of overwhelming odds-and facing certain death for doing so. RB is a fun night at the movies and enjoys being a traditional Western-but one closeup of Coop's face in High Noon obliterates it.

I understand that many people use the term "fun" to justify mediocrity in bad movies just because they like the genre or the plot. But wanting to use the concept of "fun" to attack a movie as brilliant as Rio Bravo is ridiculous, to begin with, fun does not necessarily means less important or less artistic, and the idea that in art just having certain concepts that are more complicated means these works are more valuable is why modern art has given us so many complicated "concepts" and such poor craftsmanship.

Rio Bravo has a great script, great acting, great photography and an amazing pace, everything on the production is just on par with High Noon and I would say that Rio Bravo is better directed by Hawks (but not by much), both were big financial successes, were well received by the audience and critics, and both are equally important to the genre.

Also, there is nothing more "important" thematically in High Noon, the two movies depict in their characters real high concepts like honor, friendship, love, respect, courage, beauty, etc.

Rio Bravo is a direct answer (from Hawks and Wayne) to High Noon, but it is talked about alongside not only because both movies are extremely similar in their starting point, but for why they are different, in what and how the characters act and what this means.

Both movies have the same basic plot of "one sheriff in a small town having to face an external threat", the interesting and valuable thing, besides the great craftsmanship of both films, is that they come from completely different points of view to begin with (something that seems it can no longer be done in Hollywood today) to Zinnemann and Foreman is about one sheriff needing help with this thread and showing most of the people in the town as indiferent and coward, something like a denunciation. On the other hand, Hawks and Wayne have one sheriff that doesn't need much help and a town of characters that are willing to help, like an aspiration, like something that should be.

I love Rio Bravo and High Noon the same, and I understand that everyone has different tastes and not everyone appreciates certain things, but saying that one film obliterates the other it's absurd.

[captainsolo]

I should clarify then. I wasn’t meaning to sound so absolute. What really bugs me is how Wayne would badmouth High Noon and insult Carl Foreman. I enjoy Rio Bravo like everyone else and it is a great film of its kind. But their idea that it was a more correct or appropriate telling of that kind of story is a bit ridiculous to me. I get their position and at least Hawks was diplomatic about it.

That’s what I should said earlier. I’m a Hawks fanatic so it’s just splitting hairs anyway.

[profholt82]

Originally Posted by captainsolo

I should clarify then. I wasn’t meaning to sound so absolute. What really bugs me is how Wayne would badmouth High Noon and insult Carl Foreman. I enjoy Rio Bravo like everyone else and it is a great film of its kind. But their idea that it was a more correct or appropriate telling of that kind of story is a bit ridiculous to me. I get their position and at least Hawks was diplomatic about it.

That’s what I should said earlier. I’m a Hawks fanatic so it’s just splitting hairs anyway.

I agree that both movies have artistic merit, and, while similar plotwise, have opposing themes. I don't necessarily rate one above the other. Perhaps High Noon is seen nowadays as more artistic, but Rio Bravo is an essential western. Zinnemann's and Hawks' direction in both movies is top notch. The real time motif of High Noon creating such tension, while using the clock was novel and works to perfection. And Hawks creates a growing sense of claustrophobia and tension while our heroes are holed up in the jail. But even smaller things such as the opening of the movie where the relationship between Chance and Dude is conveyed to the audience. That was a brilliant feat of direction because those first 10 minutes are completely without dialogue, yet the plot and relationship between the characters are established. Zinnemann and Hawks were about as good as it got in Hollywood during that era.

Regarding Wayne's condemnation of Foreman, I hear you, but I will say that you have to weigh the context of the era while looking back on such things. Tension with the Soviet Union was at an all time high between the space race, spies infiltrating both nations and the looming threat of nuclear war. Foreman had been an open member of the Communist Party during the previous decade, and he, along with many other Communists and suspected Communists alike, was being ostracized because of that. While much of the fear of Communist propaganda being spread through the media was overstated, the fact remains that this was a divisive time in the nation's history, and it really created an ideological split in Hollywood. And Foreman's High Noon was in contrast to the traditional western lawman who goes it alone and instead asks for help.

It's easy to look back now with historical context, and say that it was a witch hunt, and certainly politicians like Joseph McCarthy got overzealous in their pursuit of outing suspected Communists. I mean, it takes more than an actor or screenwriter to make a movie, so to say that propaganda was being used to subvert American values would mean that an entire studio or industry was in on it, and that just wasn't the case. It's a shame that some people lost their livelihoods over their political views, but that was the nature of the time. There was a legitimate fear of the Communist threat during that period, and certainly many people must have felt that by exposing and denouncing Communists, they were doing their patriotic duty.

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by profholt82

There was a legitimate fear of the Communist threat during that period, and certainly many people must have felt that by exposing and denouncing Communists, they were doing their patriotic duty.

The ironic richness being, of course, that Wayne fervently avoided participating in the war when his "patriotic duty" was most needed.

...despite that, Rio Bravo is my favorite western.

[Richard--W]

Originally Posted by profholt82

I agree that both movies have artistic merit, and, while similar plotwise, have opposing themes. I don't necessarily rate one above the other. Perhaps High Noon is seen nowadays as more artistic, but Rio Bravo is an essential western. Zinnemann's and Hawks' direction in both movies is top notch. The real time motif of High Noon creating such tension, while using the clock was novel and works to perfection. And Hawks creates a growing sense of claustrophobia and tension while our heroes are holed up in the jail. But even smaller things such as the opening of the movie where the relationship between Chance and Dude is conveyed to the audience. That was a brilliant feat of direction because those first 10 minutes are completely without dialogue, yet the plot and relationship between the characters are established. Zinnemann and Hawks were about as good as it got in Hollywood during that era.

Regarding Wayne's condemnation of Foreman, I hear you, but I will say that you have to weigh the context of the era while looking back on such things. Tension with the Soviet Union was at an all time high between the space race, spies infiltrating both nations and the looming threat of nuclear war. Foreman had been an open member of the Communist Party during the previous decade, and he, along with many other Communists and suspected Communists alike, was being ostracized because of that. While much of the fear of Communist propaganda being spread through the media was overstated, the fact remains that this was a divisive time in the nation's history, and it really created an ideological split in Hollywood. And Foreman's High Noon was in contrast to the traditional western lawman who goes it alone and instead asks for help.

It's easy to look back now with historical context, and say that it was a witch hunt, and certainly politicians like Joseph McCarthy got overzealous in their pursuit of outing suspected Communists. I mean, it takes more than an actor or screenwriter to make a movie, so to say that propaganda was being used to subvert American values would mean that an entire studio or industry was in on it, and that just wasn't the case. It's a shame that some people lost their livelihoods over their political views, but that was the nature of the time. There was a legitimate fear of the Communist threat during that period, and certainly many people must have felt that by exposing and denouncing Communists, they were doing their patriotic duty.

I don't hear John Wayne's disagreement with High Noon being quite as absolute
as some of you do. To his everlasting credit, Wayne's political convictions evolved
over the years. By the mid-1970s he had become vocal in his support of a liberal
democrat running for president. He endorsed and voted for Jimmy Carter.

Rio Bravo was being re-written as they shot it, and largely improvised on the set.
It's a loose goose of a film. The point Wayne and Hawks were trying to make gets
lost along the way, I think. I enjoy it and love the look of it (Old Tucson in its heyday
a place I know well), but I wish it were as focused, lean, tight and tough as High Noon.

[garyd97]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

I don't hear John Wayne's disagreement with High Noon being quite as absolute
as some of you do. To his everlasting credit, Wayne's political convictions evolved
over the years. By the mid-1970s he had become vocal in his support of a liberal
democrat running for president. He endorsed and voted for Jimmy Carter.

Rio Bravo was being re-written as they shot it, and largely improvised on the set.
It's a loose goose of a film. The point Wayne and Hawks were trying to make gets
lost along the way, I think. I enjoy it and love the look of it (Old Tucson in its heyday
a place I know well), but I wish it were as focused, lean, tight and tough as High Noon.

Not sure in what world endorsing Carter would be considered evolving. People are still losing their livelihoods over political views.

[LeSamourai.]

I'm very late to the game but want to buy this film. Can someone please clarify which version is better/problems with each version:

- The US Blu-ray
- The UK Blu-ray
- The UK version as part of the Westerns 5-film collection

On the other hand, is it worth waiting for a new release and just buying the DVD for a few pounds (I've never seen this film)?

Thanks!