Western Retrospective: The Naked Spur

Hey, this is Greg Berger and you are listening

to the geek cast radio network Hello and welcome

to episode 248 of the cinema geeks I am one of

your cinema geeks optimus solo and joining me

as usual is the comic concierge. Hello, Dan Hello,

how are you? I'm doing well. We're back at it

again for more Western fun in our Western retrospective.

This is the last in our three -film block that

we called Overlooked Westerns. We've already

covered some John Ford, some Spaghetti Westerns,

some remakes versus originals, and this is the

end of our Overlooked section where we covered

McCabe and Mrs. Miller, Johnny Guitar, and now

today, The Naked Spur from 19... 53 we went in

reverse chronological order at this time from

71 to 54 that's okay because it's leading us

back towards the classics which is going to be

another classics block next so i guess it all

makes sense so um dan remind people you know

i know we talked about at the end of that last

episode but just in case i didn't listen remind

people of what your history was with the naked

spur going into this um and we'll kind of lay

the groundwork before we get into the facts Well,

it'll be quick because I had none. I honestly

never even heard of this movie before we started

doing this and like just looking at films to

select. And this was one that was brought up

as like, you know, we wanted to do not just the

obvious ones, but maybe some off the beaten path.

And this one was named a lot as one of the more

underrated watches wise in this section. So.

Tried to stay as blind as possible going in.

I just knew Jimmy Stewart was in it. Didn't really

know the story. Didn't really know who directed

it. So, yeah, this was as fresh as a movie from

1953 movie experience could be for me. How about

yourself? It was the same situation. I knew nothing

about it until I pulled up the poster and saw

that Jimmy Stewart was in it. And that's about

all I knew going into it. So I had no, this is

one of the other ones too. Like there's been

some other blind spots that I haven't had experience

with or didn't really know much, but like, you

know, the name or, you know, you know, the title

or, you know, the poster or, you know, like a

famous line or, or something about like, I don't

even know if I'd ever heard of this film before

we started doing research. about like which ones

to cover. Like this was as blind of a blind spot.

Like this is the definition of blind spot. That's

the only way I can think about it. So it'd be

intrigued then to see what your take is on it.

But before we get to our opinions, as usual,

we're going to let Dan lay some groundwork and

give us some facts about the Naked Spur from

1953. And then we'll come back after watching

it and give you guys our thoughts. As the 20th

century poet Stone Cold Steve Austin once said,

DTA. Don't trust anybody, as this week we continue

our western retrospective with a look at The

Naked Spur. The film follows Howard Kemp, a hardened

former rancher who has lost everything after

the Civil War. but is determined to rebuild his

life by claiming the $5 ,000 bounty on unwanted

murderer Ben Vandergoot. Deep in the Colorado

Rockies, Kemp tracks down the charming but manipulative

outlaw who is also traveling with a young woman

named Lena Patch. Realizing he cannot transport

the dangerous fugitives alone, Kemp reluctantly

joins forces with two unlikely companions, Jesse

Tate, a disgraced Union soldier hoping to restore

his honor, and Roy Anderson, a grizzled prospector

eager to share on the reward. As the group makes

the difficult journey through the rugged mountain

wilderness, the trip becomes less about reaching

civilization and more about surviving each other.

Ben uses psychological manipulation to turn the

bounty hunters against one another, exploiting

their greed, fears, and personal regrets. This

fragile alliance begins to fracture as suspicion,

betrayal, and violence escalate. Kemp gradually

reveals that his obsession with the bounty stems

from losing his ranch and fiance after the war.

It left him emotionally isolated. and consumed

by his bitterness. During the journey though,

Lena begins to see beyond that rough exterior

while Kemp slowly learns to trust someone again.

The story builds to a tense final showdown high

in the mountains, where Ben makes one last attempt

to manipulate those around him into killing one

another. Kemp ultimately defeats the outlaw,

but the experiences change him. Rather than remaining

consumed by revenge and financial desperation,

he chooses a future built on hope and companionship

with Lena, suggesting that the emotional redemption

is worth more than the bounty that first motivated

him. This was actually the fourth collaboration

between director and to the man and Jimmy Stewart.

Rather than accepting his usual salary, Stewart

negotiated a deal for a percentage of the film's

profits. It was an unusual arrangement in the

early 50s, but proved to be lucrative after the

film was a success. Stewart did it earlier with

the contract for Winchester 73, and it changed

the way major stars negotiated with studios for

decades later. Unlike many westerns of the era,

this was not shot on studio backlogs, but rather

on location in the Colorado Rockies, which made

for a difficult shoot for both crew and the cast.

You may be wondering why exactly is the movie

called The Naked Spur? Well, it is a phrase that

refers to a barren ridge on a mountain, which

is fitting for much of the story, but also a

fitting metaphor for Kemp's emotional state.

Despite that, studio executives weren't so keen

on the name, worried that audiences wouldn't

understand. understand the metaphor or worry

that they didn't realize it was a western phrase.

Mianna insisted on keeping the name and it ended

up being the right choice. It was both a success

financially and critically earning around four

million dollars but also earning an academy award

nomination for best screenplay which was not

common for westerns at the time. But what do

Kevin and I think? are we fans of it like those

original critics or does it not stand up to the

test of time back to us to discuss all right

thanks dan for the facts there on the naked spur

as we talked about we had not heard much about

this and it's obviously one of those films that

doesn't get mentioned as often as shane or high

noon or even like the searchers or stage coach

and things of that nature yet many western fans

do hold it in extremely high regard it has a

hundred percent on rotten tomatoes so dan do

you think it deserves to be talked about more

or do you think it's rightly so that this one's

kind of been uh left unmentioned for the likes

of some of those other big name films what was

your take on the first watch of the naked spur

The other thing it deserves to be talked about

more, like going into this, I didn't, you know,

I didn't know much about it. Like our only thing

I had back in my mind was, you know, seeing Jimmy

Stewart. We watched the way back when we started

doing this in the John Ford section, when he

watched the man who shot Liberty Valance. So

I had that performance in the back of my mind.

And so I'm like, Jimmy Stewart as an actual Western

star. And I know he's done a bunch, which I haven't

watched. So, but. I was intrigued, and one thing

I kept actually thinking back to was something

like the original 310 to Yuma, in the sense of

both are generally a pretty simple story. This

one, we see a bunch of individuals who kind of

come together by means that they weren't expecting

to transport this prisoner to another location

for the hopes of reward money. and that's the

story there pretty much. So there isn't like

plot wise, it's pretty straightforward, but what

makes it intriguing is just like the way it looks

at the psyche of man, the greed, the seeing people

get manipulated along the way. I mean, it has

five actors and that's it. Like it's just five

individuals. There's no extras outside of maybe

the horses and stuntmen. And in a way like this,

like I could, I never watched like Gunsmoke or

any of those classic TV shows, but it feels like

it could have been like an episode of that, because,

you know, where they not in a bad way that it

felt like it was TV level, but it was kind of

generally episodic. It was a general story that

was pretty. Basic in its execution, like even

like. when I say direction wise, I don't, you

know, when we looked at some of these previous

films that were so well made, this was, you know,

this wasn't necessarily poorly made. It's not,

but it's not like to me on a level of something

like we've watched with John Ford or something

of that nature. But I thought overall, what made

it work were the, was the cast, you know, was

it with it only being these five individuals,

seeing them play off of each other pretty well.

And then like the mind games that happen, you

know, James Stewart, of course is James Stewart,

but. robert ryan really i think was a linchpin

like he was almost like the you know like the

the joker that wanted to get caught in some ways

and seeing him try to play the games of different

individuals and the back and forth between him

and james stewart who you don't know much about

and you learn more do you learn more more about

that like maybe he isn't such an upstanding individual

so i didn't enjoy it like how it was plotted

and how it kind of played with your expectations

a bit so I do think it definitely deserves to

be talked about more, discussed more, very much

agree that it is underrated in the sense of the

fact that I knew nothing about it and do think

it needs more attention in that reign. Is it

up there as one of the best westerns we've done

in this retrospective? I don't necessarily think

so. More so to go back to some of those elements

where I wasn't necessarily wowed by the direction

or anything like that. was effective at what

it was attempting to do. And I'm glad I watched

it. And I do think it's one of those I would,

it's almost like an entry Western because it's

so, you know, it's easy to get into. It's, you

know, it's very, you know, new user friendly

in that way. But what were your thoughts on it?

So this is, I've mentioned a couple of times

that I was just curious. So I had asked chat

GPTD to rank the ones that we were going to watch

the rest of the way. This was before we added

some of them, but it, uh originally in this block

it thought that i would not like mccabe and mrs

miller i thought i would not like the quiet spur

or the quiet spur the johnny guitar yeah and

it thought that um they thought that naked spur

would easily be my favorite and i get why it

thinks that it does check a lot of like my boxes

when it comes to like typically stuff that i

go for right like very limited cast we have five

people that's it like that's you that usually

works for me because it usually forces the movie

to be much more of an exploration of those characters

and their arcs and their motivations and like

the psychology of things like it generally tends

to go there and like i generally like like a

limited set film right like something that doesn't

have to be all grand and things of that nature

where it kind of hones in on things like we've

talked about with some of the other ones. Like

you said, the original 310 to Yuma definitely

came to mind a number of times where we have

specifically two individuals in that one that

are really feeling each other out when it comes

to the mental gymnastics of what's going on.

And I feel like we obviously get that here with

Jimmy Stewart and Robert Ryan's characters. So

I think like it has a couple of those things

going for it. I think like some of the stuff

that maybe didn't work as much for me on the

rewatches of some of the modern ones that we

watched where it becomes, you know, very Hollywood

style where it's big and bold and grand and there's

a lot more action and like set pieces and things

like that. Like I like the fact that this doesn't

have all of that. So it like checks a lot of.

The boxes that usually make a film work for me.

And I was generally surprised that this film

doesn't get talked about more when a lot of the

classic Westerns get listed off. And it's usually

not one that I see mentioned as much, obviously,

like we talked about. So I am surprised a little

bit about that. But I do think there was aspects

of this one that just didn't quite hit me or

go. quite far enough to like wow me in some respects

not that it's trying to like necessarily wow

you but there was something missing i felt i

don't know if it's something missing or if it

just didn't quite have like the the chutzpah

to to like get me a hundred percent like all

about it like i enjoyed my time with it i'm glad

i watched it i'm glad we added it to the series

i think there are some definitely good parts

about it i really enjoyed millard mitchell as

jesse tate like i thought that character was

decently fun to watch throughout the the whole

thing almost like holds it all together i guess

for the crew and so i do think it has its moments

i do think it has its things that we can talk

about that are that are positives i does it reach

the level of the original 310 to yuma even though

it has a lot of similar things to it no i think

i would i would take the original 310 to yuma

over this you know almost every single time and

i don't know i'm left wondering why it just didn't

quite reach that level for me but overall i was

i was generally entertained and enjoyed my time

if that makes sense yeah i think we're pretty

lockstep with this and since i think if there

was one thing i thought it was missing compared

to 310 to yuma like 310 to yuma had so much tension

and i felt like you had this really complex moral

question at the center of it what it what it

means to be a man things like that and there

are like some elements of that with james stewart's

character because obviously like he gives up

his farm to like you know someone he's gonna

marry and how that how that all doesn't work

and him trying to over overcome that issue but

i don't think it necessarily had the intensity

there in in some instances it didn't feel like

at any moment this could explode and i can't

really put my finger on like what exactly that

is because it had ingredients there of course

you have you know this this best convict couple

that are could do you know clearly have many

ideas in their back pocket of what they're trying

to do but i guess in a way it felt like maybe

it was just a bit it didn't have that uh fear

that like this in the sense of like i i like

he was you know charismatic and he like i liked

seeing him like play off the other actors but

he didn't have that element of fear to that character

where you like you felt like these individuals

were scared that he might you know wake up one

night and slit their throat like and maybe then

that's necessarily not what the direction they

were going which is fine i think in the sense

what you lost because his character almost felt

a bit he like in the sense of he was just hoping

things would go wrong like he had a few things

he was trying to do but he didn't feel like someone

that wasn't ever fully in control he was just

trying to hope he would get it i think that's

where that intensity never really fully kicked

in and and we had some instances maybe like you

mentioned with like at the end especially when

we see what happens with milan mitchell's character

and how he kind of falls for you know what he's

going after and like the tragedy that happens

there i thought that was well done but as we're

going on this adventure i never felt like at

a moment like okay like things could explode

at any time uh so like it was entertaining but

like you said if you're comparing it to some

of the best things we've done i think that that

was the one thing it was missing for me yeah

no i i definitely agree with that and i know

that you have throughout this western retrospective

made a few wrestling analogies so to speak one

or two i try to think of one for this but i kind

of kind of come up with one so based on our based

on our conversation so far this is i guess what

i'm going with and i don't know if it's going

to be as good of an analogy as you used before

and it might be something that puts me definitely

in the minority or I don't know, maybe it's a

hot take as a kid. Do they still say that these

days, or am I already too old where that's not

a thing anymore? Anyways, to me, this is like

the wrestler that has the body and has the technical

skill and has all of the pieces of being a good

wrestler, but is just missing that it factor.

It's missing something that makes people excited

for their matches. And part of me really feels

that it's because of our main two characters.

I think part of my problem is Robert Ryan and

Jimmy Stewart. Really? I know that's weird to

say because I know Jimmy Stewart's held in very

high regard. And I like him in a lot of things.

i don't know if i liked him in this one though

like i feel like this is the nwo if horace hogan

and ed norton or scott norton were like the two

main leads on the nwo like i don't think that

works right like you needed holland nash or hogan

like the regular hogan not horace hogan uh so

like i and i'm not trying to compare jimmy stewart

to like that that level but like i was struggling

at the beginning like i literally had to stop

and look up jimmy stewart's filmography because

i was somehow convinced that this was like his

first film even though it's not even close like

i'm not saying he was like bad bad but like he

didn't feel like i felt like he felt so much

more at ease in his character and the man that

shot liberty valance and i know he doesn't play

like a lot of these dark morally complicated

pseudo villain anti -hero roles maybe I don't

know I'm not an expert at his filmography by

any means but something about it and this might

not even be him it might just be like him in

this setting in this story or against these other

actors but I I thought that I much preferred

Janet Leigh and Ralph Meeker and Millard Mitchell

who are arguably the three lesser build characters

or actors in this film and i felt like for some

reason the main two there jimmy stewart and um

what i've already forgot his name i like him

so much um the main villain vandegard i think

is it yeah robert ryan like yeah yeah i felt

like those two just didn't quite work as well

for me and i don't know maybe you disagree and

maybe you really like jimmy stewart but I liked

the other three characters better than Vandergroot

and Kemp. I didn't have an issue with Stewart's

performance. I know he's done, he did other things

with the director. Westchester 73 was another

one. So I'd be interested to see how his character

is different in that. But I thought what Stewart's

really good at is his reaction to things. acts

within a scene especially like going back to

the beginning he does feel a bit off he does

feel a bit like he's hiding something because

he is hiding something he's always yeah i think

he's supposed to feel a bit uncomfortable because

this is he doesn't really belong in this situation

he's just a guy who is a is a farm hand i mean

he's got some experience of course because he's

a soldier uh and perhaps relying on that but

i think he's well he's well out he's out of his

wheelhouse within much of the situation and think

he's trying to play a part rather than be a part

i think i i get that in stewart's performance

especially do you think john wayne could have

played that part better uh not not this part

i think he wouldn't be able to i'm trying to

think of someone we watched i'm trying to like

recast him but i don't know who from any of the

other films that we've watched that i would recast

him with like do you think like no i think i

think uh the reason why John Wayne wouldn't work

is because like he he he can't be the real deal

and I don't know like if Wayne cannot John Wayne

could never do that where he's Playing like he

where are you supposed to be able to see the

facade? I feel like Robert Redford or like Paul

Newman or thank you Paul Newman Robert referred

Paul Newman could do anything. So It's like my

favorite American actor. Okay uh so i would say

yes he could he could certainly do it um but

they obviously they came they were like in yeah

well i mean they started newman started not that

long after could carrie grant have done this

i'm just kidding i would you know what like has

carriage grant done a mustard i don't think so

i think he did no none that i saw uh but i didn't

see all of them i didn't see 48 yeah but which

is kind of crazy when you think about it but

yeah considering how big westerns were at the

time and his career was just too cool for that

i don't know i guess so i guess it was like doing

the equivalent of doing a marvel movie some people

didn't some people didn't right um he couldn't

do james bond he probably wasn't wasn't up for

westerns either yeah but yeah i i guess i never

had and to me it was jimmy stewart being jimmy

stewart so i never necessarily it didn't feel

off to me in that way uh But, and, and I liked

Robert Ryan. Like he, I guess in the sense of,

I thought he was, he played a good foil and he

seemed like he was having a good time. But like

I said, I think the one element that was missing

from his character was that element of menace.

And not that I hadn't, like Janet Leigh was,

was good. Like I do think the one area where

it was weak was like Janet Leigh and James Stewart.

I guess going back to our review of. a vertigo

and how we thought like yeah like i just i their

connection to me didn't feel very strong and

like considering how i think it's true in the

i think it's true in philadelphia story too did

we have that same comment i believe so so it

just i don't know i don't know feel like it just

it doesn't connect that well it uh luckily with

some other things it didn't necessarily matter

as much but yeah but yeah i don't know to me

he just he felt like a Jimmy Stewart doing his

role I do if there are some scenes that didn't

fully work it's more so when we see some of the

his like dream sequence not dream sequences but

he's waking up in like clearly dealing with like

PTSD you know at a time when that wasn't really

a term but he's dealing with like bad dreams

from what happened in the war and he reacted

to those those I felt like weren't super effective

they felt a bit you know over the top per se

to bring us back to the last film we talked about

but in general I thought he was pretty good I

was wondering, did you notice that there was

no costume changes by any of the characters in

the entire film? I know with the Naked Spur,

one thing we talked about was that I know one

thing I noticed a lot with the Naked Spur was

that there was elements where you can tell it

was on location and then it would go back to

be more on set and that was a bit more jargon.

I just felt like it was pretty much, for the

most part, always on location. like how did that

impact you at all it's feeling like you were

in the locations in general like the journey

element of this in the sense of you know unlike

and it's a different type of journey because

we've done a lot of desert movies and this one

was more was more in the forest that was the

desert well it was i think it was in the rockies

and so we got like a little bit of mountainous

and some trees and foresty areas valleys and

or not valleys but like that type of thing and

I thought that was good. Like obviously man has

a much different take than like the John Ford

where John Ford does a lot of, you know, monument

Valley and deserts. And I read somewhere that

like he was, man was specifically trying to give

more of like a, he called it a Daniel Boone atmosphere

where he had more of that. And I thought it helped

in this regard because the story here needed

elements that were going to help with tension.

and i know that there can be some tension when

you're crossing the desert because you're you

got no water and stuff like that but like from

a danger standpoint you have much more when there's

falling rocks and you're climbing on cliff -like

structures and like doing all of this back and

forth and you can't see what's coming around

the corner and things of that nature and you

also have horses involved and things like that

so i think not only did it add a little bit of

tension that would otherwise have been like sorely

missing i think it was just fun to see another

side of the quote -unquote west like yeah the

west is not just deserts right like so i thought

it was an interesting take and i appreciated

that and i definitely noticed that and i thought

you know from a i don't know i guess a cinematography

or like a shooting standpoint it helped draw

the paint the picture of this world for me what

did you think yeah i think it led to a lot of

like interesting shots too like we didn't like

when you had the the indians the americans like

um kind of scoping them out and utilizing how

they would utilize the mountains in the sense

of being able to like see them in the distance

and it was very different in how like uh they

had to traverse the land because you know you

couldn't just it wasn't always like you know

a singular location you had a you had all these

and how they also like we had that kind of the

poetic start with him on top of that like rocky

terrain and then we end in a very similar situation

you know early parkour with them climbing up

the hill and then you know and the follow -up

to it as well so i thought it utilized the setting

well and both like i would along the plot as

well as how it kind of set up some action sequences

and you know getting gave you a good idea of

location or like what they were trying to accomplish

and like something to overcome because you know

you had to go up this hill and like you had with

rocks going down so there was it was a good variety

of different threads that were like you mentioned

that wasn't always just the same thing of like

we're running out of food or running out of water

which after a while those stories can get a bit

tedious yeah i'm curious too um i know you talked

a little bit about not feeling quite as tense

as some of the as some of the other films that

we've watched even though like it is trying to

go for some of that like i'm curious when it

comes to some of the psychology because it obviously

is a big part of this with only five people and

it almost sets it up right from the beginning

where our vandergroot character i'm just gonna

say that name as many times as i can during the

rest of this podcast um he has a camera and his

first name is just ben like that's the best part

about that but he's having a conversation with

howard kemp jimmy stewart's character at the

very beginning and he kind of alludes i'm not

gonna quote it like verbatim because i don't

remember the exact words but he basically says

something about like this is a long trip or something

like i'm gonna have more time to mess with your

guys' minds, basically, is kind of what he's

getting at. I don't remember exactly what he

says, but he's basically like, this is just the

beginning, and now I'm going to have all this

time to find a way to turn, not turning you against

each other, but basically find a way out of this.

And so it kind of sets the stage for that psychological,

I don't know if warfare is probably too strong

of a word, but we get a little of the fact that

all of these characters maybe with somewhat of

the exception of of janet lee's character i guess

you can sort of lump her in too but like all

of the characters have a little bit of a moral

gray area right like maybe vandergroot's not

as much gray he's a little bit more black and

white on but but we're not sure at first right

like he's claiming that he's innocent and that

he didn't kill this person that basically jimmy

stewart is trying to collect I don't know if

you said that in the facts but you know Jimmy

Stewart's the bounty hunter he's trying to bring

this murder to justice he's saying he didn't

do it so like he's trying to propose that there's

a little bit of gray area we do get Jimmy Stewart's

character with the whole kind of greed or obsession

of like getting him in so that he can right a

wrong from his past and there's a little bit

of gray moral ground with him and then we get

the other two characters where one of them is

more gray because we just don't know. Roy Anderson's

Ralph Meeker character comes in kind of out of

nowhere and is just added to the group, and we're

like, can anybody trust this guy? Not that he's

necessarily done something or is accused of doing

anything. We do see, though, his dishonorable

discharge from the armed forces and things of

that nature, so we kind of see that there's something

there. Outside of that, we're not given any necessarily

things that he is acting on too much. But he's

kind of an unknown, so he's got a little bit

of a gray area. And then we get Millard Mitchell,

Jesse Tate, who doesn't come across as overly

bad, but he is also motivated a little bit by

greed and the fact that he's seen all his...

all these other people that he's come across

that have struck gold or made a life out of him

and he's always the one that doesn't so he's

got a little bit of a chip on his shoulder to

try to right that wrong how did you feel like

the psychological aspects between all of the

characters and kind of the gray area that they're

all playing in like how did that either work

or not work for you i thought that was the strength

of the movie for sure and i i liked each character

was very distinct you had a good idea of what

was driving them they clearly were all individuals

that had some sort of like you mentioned like

no one felt like a white hat you know like the

classic white hat black hat we've mentioned how

in a lot of ways people brought up spaghetti

westerns and how they made things a bit more

complicated i think what we're seeing here especially

as we're going back throughout a lot of these

that i think it's a it's a false dichotomy of

like what these westerns did because this one

i would think like no one here is necessarily

uh like a morally upstanding citizen they all

kind of have their issues they're all are under

false pretenses like we james stewart his first

big action is lying right because he tears off

the thing of the poster for the reward i'm trying

to get get one over and everyone so i i think

what was done well is that we see up front these

are all flawed individuals they all you know

their entire kind of foundation of getting together

is somewhat built on a bit of a live shaking

foundation and then you see robert ryan and then

him being well aware of that and then trying

to give him plenty of opportunity to take advantage

of it so i think in the sense of like that didn't

get me invested and interested in the overall

play and journey because it's like okay you have

plenty of things to take advantage of and i can

you know you get why he wants to make this journey

go on much longer because you already don't trust

each other they already have clearly intentions

to like they just want the money themselves.

Like they're, they have no trust for one another.

Really. They're just hoping that they, their

shared interest will be enough. And then obviously

with everything with like, uh, Roy Anderson and

his loose connection to reality. And clearly

he's like the, uh, every time we learned something

new about an individual, although I think Jesse

Tate's the one that we don't learn all that much

about. Uh, it's, it just shows that, that. Clearly

they're even worse than you thought in most ways.

So I thought that was clearly to me the strength

of the film and how it used that, how it set

up these characters pretty well. And although

it didn't necessarily in the sense of like have

that intensity per se, it was intriguing. And

that's what got me interested. I think too, I

think it did a good job of not necessarily creating

a bunch of like filler or just like. things that

didn't like every conversation i felt like you

were listening to because you're trying to learn

more about somebody you don't know much about

so i feel like every line in every conversation

you were kind of bought into like paying attention

and there wasn't really much wasted uh scenes

or or moments per se when it when it came to

that did do you think roy anderson's character

could not read would is that your reading of

that that he keeps handing jimmy stewart this

paper that clearly says he's dishonorably discharged

because he doesn't know that's what it says or

do you think i didn't even think about that but

that is that's a i think that's a good reading

of that of that scene i didn't i i took i didn't

i i took it more so like he was just showing

it because hey it shows that i was a soldier

and that's what he cares about most but him not

being able to read that actually ends up adds

an element to it that i was not thinking so that's

a that's a i like that idea for sure yeah i was

like at first i didn't think that but like i

think it was like the second time that he handed

it to him a second time or he read it a second

time or unfolded it or something and i was like

wait a second like why is he so okay with just

keeping like you would think that would be something

somebody was holding tight or close to the vest

like you know what i mean like we've already

seen howard kemp cut off the the bottom of the

uh the bounty poster you you'd think like roy

anderson's character would have done the same

for that like i'm just gonna like rip off that

part that says dishonorably yeah discharge nobody

can see that apparently this was a sergio one

of sergio leone's favorite westerns and i i think

i can't remember which character but i i know

he tried to cast one of these actors in a couple

of his films and i don't think he was able to

i don't know if it was roy anderson or which

one but he tried to get somebody involved because

apparently this was one of his favorite westerns

which i thought was interesting are you surprised

at all by that or by the 100 rotten tomato score

or the fact that this was nominated for best

original screenplay which didn't happen a whole

lot for for westerns are you or are you more

surprised that it got all of that type of stuff

but then ended up seemingly untalked like not

being discussed much when people talk about the

best westerns i the screenplay thing i i understand

a bit i mean i have to go like look at that year

and see like what was the i can't mind knowledge

of 1953 is not great uh lucky for you dan i am

i am right here and uh it was nominated amongst

here's the let me find best writing for screenplay

i don't know most of these films take the high

ground the desert rats the bandwagon and then

the winner that year was titanic wow i went all

the way back then too uh so um Yeah, I don't

think I know any of those, so maybe it just wasn't

a strong year. The best picture for that year

was From Here to Eternity, and then Julius Caesar,

The Robe, Roman Holiday, and Shane. Okay, well,

I'm actually surprised Shane didn't get a nomination

for best. Maybe it was adapted, I don't know.

But I don't know, I think the script, like I

said, was one of the strengths of the overall

film, so I don't... have an issue with that or

have i i do think it's interesting seeing it

get those accolades but like you mentioned it

doesn't get considering like shane for example

another western that came out this the same year

is one that i think gets referred to far more

and i think that's one we're going to cover i

think later so i would be intrigued once once

we enjoy more but yeah i i don't know what it's

about why that happened maybe just because game

story did so many westerns you know and it is

a generally like scope of it isn't necessarily

super grand or like it's it's like we said it's

pretty simple and that's in its simplicity i

think it's it's a future not a bug i mean it's

only 90 minutes and it makes well use of that

90 minutes so i don't know maybe maybe just simply

was also maybe because it's one that wasn't on

tv and sometimes that is a big driver of what

gets people i think people's attention and has

staying power but i don't know it's a good question

well the box office too it made almost triple

its budget uh when it came to that as well so

seemed like it was pretty well you know it checks

a lot of boxes for something that seemingly goes

uh on unmentioned i do want to just say i didn't

get to say a lot but i i did he might not have

been developed as much but i did really like

jesse tate's character like i thought yeah the

fact that this guy's just like hanging out and

like gives the guy directions on where this uh

campfire was and then just immediately becomes

part of the gang and it's just like yeah the

stuff that he's willing to do to with these complete

strangers i would have been like all right i'll

see you later yeah he he is he fell he does have

that like father figure role and you know and

you know he he's got he's the most likable of

the cast for sure yeah Unfortunately, it doesn't

do him well, as it doesn't do a lot of folks

in this film well. Which is probably why his

fate is his fate, because he's the most likable.

He makes the big mistake. I do like his I'm dead

and I know it moment. He's like, oh, well, I

deserve it. He was very... He owned up to it,

so give him credit for that, at least. Any final

thoughts, Dan, on The Naked Spur from 1953? Like

I mentioned, I do think it is a good entry Western.

especially if you're looking to get into westerns

of this era and like those three -hour epics

feel too much i think this is a good watch i

feel like this is a movie that you know what

back in the day would be on like on a saturday

afternoon and you just kind of will get you lost

in watching it on like tnt or something like

that yeah back in the day so um i am intrigued

and because like i mentioned this there's like

winchester 73 was another one that with a lot

of the similar cast and crew so i might check

that out um seeing how you know how it compares

to this that came out like a couple years earlier

but i think two things i think i think it's a

good like you said a good intro into westerns

i think this and like stagecoach um would probably

be two that i would probably suggest to most

people if they want to like watch some classics

and like get familiar with like a lot of things

that come on i think too like you could almost

put this on a list of like jimmy stewart like

essential stuff like i know i wasn't as big of

a fan on him but like i feel like if you're trying

to see some of his westerns like i know we there's

other ones that he's been in but it seems like

you know the man who shot liberty valance and

the naked spurs should be like two of the ones

you watch if you're trying to like get a feel

for some of his westerns definitely so yeah all

right Um, do we want to talk about what we're

getting into next week? Yeah, absolutely. So

I'll let Dan go over the specifics, but we're

basically entering a new, we covered some quote

unquote classics, I guess, with the John Ford

block with stage coach and the searchers and

the man who shot Liberty Valance, but we're going

to do another look at some classic Westerns.

And we have four films kind of outlined for that.

Dan, do you want to go through kind of what they

are and what we're starting with? Sure. And we

mentioned one already with Shane, which came

out the same year. And we're going to this the

next block we are going to do earliest into latest.

We're kind of going kind of like a yo -yo or

something. Yeah, like a valley in time and back

out, back out again. But we're returning to other

actors that we've seen with next week. We're

going to do Red River from 1948, which stars

John Wayne, of course, who we've. seen a few

times within this retrospective from true grit

to stagecoach when we started off of it but any

any history with you in red river no not at all

okay i didn't even know john wayne was in it

yeah well spoiler uh alert there so yeah he is

in it uh and funny enough i was we were talking

before we started i actually did watch this a

few months ago because just it was I was in a

Western mood for some reason, but it's been a

bit, so I'm looking forward to watching it again.

But next, after that, another classic Western,

and this one's exciting because it's only 85

minutes. I think it's the shortest film of the

entire retrospective from 1952, just a year before

this film, High Noon, another classic. Any experience

with that at all? Nope. I've heard of it. Nice.

I watched it about... over 13 14 years ago so

it's been a long time and then the aforementioned

shane will be the film after that i heard that

one was one of the best pictures of the year

it came out yeah i've heard i heard they heard

that recently as well so and then lastly we'll

finish up with rio bravo which is one i have

not seen um but how about yourself any no are

these all so block is blind spots and like the

whole next block except for one is going to be

so like i'm going through the next like 10 films

having seen one of them i'm pretty sure and then

it'll change a little bit once we get to the

other ones and then we're going to get to a bunch

that i've seen after that so yeah it'll be it'll

be fun yeah i'm looking forward to this section

too because like i mentioned didn't watch red

river and as i was watching it i'm like i actually

wish this was part of the retrospective and i'm

like oh yeah we can do that we have that power

so now it is so i love it talk about a talk about

that next week all right so if you want to get

some more western uh talk you can tune in to

when we talk about red river you can also go

back if you've missed any of the other ones like

we've talked about stagecoach and the man who

shot liberty valence and the 310 to you i know

we mentioned all those so we have episodes on

all those that you can go back and check out

as well if you're not a western fan and you've

listened this far that's confusing but uh we

also have some counter programming going on for

you where we're going to be taking a look through

the planet of the apes franchise all 10 films

i believe i have the right number there so we're

going to be going uh one by one through all of

the planet of the apes films and every once while

we throw a modern take of something we've seen

or some looks at the films that are coming out

this current calendar year so just keep on the

lookout for all of that type of stuff you can

pick and choose what you want to listen to for

sure but uh You can search out myself at Optimus

solo or Dan at the comic concierge, or you can

search us at the cinema geeks or cinema geek

cast. We also have our new Facebook page. So

if you want to search that out, it's just Dan,

what's the title? What's the name on the Facebook

page? Cinema geeks podcast. I think it's the

cinema geeks podcast. So you can check that out

and we'll be posting some stuff on there. Well,

that does it for this episode. Tune in next time

for another chance to listen to more of the cinema.