1883’s Sam Elliott hated Power Of The Dog, but definitely not because it was made by a woman, no sir
Oh sure, his problem is just that it was filmed in New Zealand
Aux News Sam Elliott
It’s fun when a celebrity just totally steps in it. It seems to happen rarely these days, outside of celebrities who are active on social media, but that’s one thing that the podcast boom has been good for. Everyone, at some point, is going to be asked to sit in front of a microphone, and there’s only so long you can stay afloat with the network-approved talking points before your start going off the cuff. So, apologies if you have any particular fondness for generally lovable cowboy man Sam Elliott, because he stepped in it.
It happened on this week’s episode of Marc Maron’s WTF podcast (via IndieWire), during which Maron asked Elliott—who currently stars on Yellowstone prequel 1883—if he liked Jane Campion’s Oscar-nominated The Power Of The Dog. “Fuck no,” he responded, explaining that he read an article about how the movie is an “evisceration of the American myth” and how it was being promoted with images of “fucking cowboys” wearing “chaps and no shirts.” He also noted that there are “all these allusions to homosexuality throughout the fucking movie.”
If you’re not picking up on the stepping in it just yet, Elliott did us a favor by digging even further than complaining about “allusions to homosexuality.” Regarding Campion, who is from New Zealand, Elliott said, “what the fuck does this woman—she’s a brilliant director by the way, I love her work, previous work—but what the fuck does this woman from down there, New Zealand, know about the American west?” (Here’s a tip: If your argument hinges on the phrase “what the fuck does this woman know?” you need to do some rethinking.)
Elliott also complains about the fact that Campion filmed the movie in New Zealand as a stand-in for Old West Montana, as if there isn’t a very famous and beloved legacy of Westerns made by people who both aren’t from America and didn’t film their movies in America—which he, as someone we earlier referred to as a “generally lovable cowboy man” is definitely aware of. So that raises the question: What’s different about Sergio Leone making his movies in Italy and Jane Campion making this movie in New Zealand? Hmm. HMMMM.
292 Comments
I’m not sure if he meant the “woman” part in a disparaging way – it seemed like he was using the word because he couldn’t say “this guy.” More concerning is the fact that he’s had just about enough of those homosexual cowboy fellers.
He liked Brokeback – just not as a Western. I think he’s mostly just being a nerd about what is and isn’t a Western while ignoring that Cumberbatch’s character was essentially a rich kid cosplaying as a cowboy. “Are we to believe he wore chaps while not riding a horse? I hope somebody got fired for that blunder!”
I never got the impression that the movie meant to depict Cumberbatch’s character as “cosplaying.” He’s genuinely good at being a cowboy. He has the respect of all the people who work on the ranch. He also seemed to love doing it, if only because it reminded him of his mentor/boyfriend, who taught him all of the tricks. His character flaw was being closeted and lashing out at people due to his loneliness, not being a fake cowboy.
I haven’t seen it yet, but I’ve heard it’s very good, great even, but that if you go in expecting a Western, you’re going to be disappointed.
I refuse to accept anything set after 1905 as being a Western without some kind of qualifier. Yes that includes The Wild Bunch, I don’t care.
Old Henry was great movie.
It was not a western. The story is summed up by the protagonist in his first narration. (I don’t know if I’m phrasing that correctly) Since you haven’t seen it I won’t spoil it.
thats what i got, a quote that they seem to leave out is that he said he watched it with some guys from the west and they all were confused as to how these guys were cowboys. its less like he was going at her because she was a woman and more because she was trying to depict a very specific group with customs and norms and she seemed to not really capture them correctly. kind of like this was a “great wall” about cowboys, with Benedict as the matt damon. so yeah, i’m not even a particular fan or detractor of his, but this seems to be trying to draw something out of a comment that was not really saying it when you look at its context.
“all these allusions to homosexuality throughout the fucking movie.”
how dare the straight white cis 77 year old male not enjoy watching films with queer content!*pearl clutching intensifies*
How dare homophobia be criticized! Who’s the real pearl-clutcher here?
whos the real pearl clutcher?
everyone here, its a comment section of a shitty news media site.you want to criticize homophobia no one is stopping you. If you’re upset people arent upset by his comment, i dont know what to tell you other than ‘too bad so sad’
You don’t have to be upset about it to avoid being dismissive of homophobia. And if you’re not having fun here, feel free to hit the road, bud.
Ill be as dismissive as i want about his comments, as many of us in this comment section have. If you don’t like it take your own advice.
Yes, many people here are part of the problem by giving straight men a pass at being homophobic. Imagine being proud of not caring about gay people.
Edit: I pass.
Except plenty of people have mentioned, even *quoted*, his appreciation for Brokeback.
He actually said he liked her other work. I listened to the interview and did not pick up on any anti LGBTQ comment, when I saw the article I thought, what did they listen to? Just that it wasn’t realistic to call it a Western, and that a comment in a newspaper riled him up about eviscerating the American myth. Like him or not, Sam Elliott knows a thing or two about playing cowboys. His character was the best thing about 1883. And tbh, I like the cast, but this movie sounds depressing AF. Maybe it shouldn’t be classified as a Western?
But was it classified as a Western? I missed that part (which isn’t surprising if it was), and after seeing the movie it was not a Western, it was simply set in the West and was about cowboys. That does not a Western make, imo.
The description says “charismatic rancher”, so it would leave you to believe that. Maybe Sam and his pals thought it was a Western. The trailer has a cattle drive and cowboys and teaching Kirsten Dunst’s son to ride, etc. Did catch a glimpse of a cowhand shirtless in chaps. So it is presented as a “Western”, but I think it’s more a psychological drama set in the Old West. It’s not Silverado, or even 1883, which I liked much more than I thought I would. It certainly is better than Yellowstone.
It’s not even the Old West. The book and movie take place in 1925. There are cars. Elliot thought he was watching a cowboy western, but it’s really “psycho-romantic drama where a few of the characters happen to own cows”
I would not have watched it if I thought it was a Western, so apparently at some level it was presented as something other than that.
That take sort of misses the point, though, where a core theme is that Phil and his “cowboys” are imitating something they learned from a man who was himself imitating something he felt he had to be. The movie is definitely meant to subvert the Western genre and themes. To say “they aren’t real cowboys” is to call out the very point Campion is making: there’s no such thing as a “real” cowboy outside of a toxic masculinity concept and all attempts to be or depict one are toxic in and of themselves.
His actual comments about Brokeback were a little more ambivalent than just “liking it”:
Box Office Mojo: Did you see Brokeback Mountain?
Sam Elliott: I
did. I went with my wife [actress Katharine Ross (The Graduate, Butch
Cassidy and the Sundance Kid)] and I didn’t really get what all the
to-do was about. It is a beautiful film and I was thrilled for Ang [Lee,
who directed Elliott in Hulk], but it isn’t a Western. For one thing,
it’s about a couple of sheepherders, not cattlemen. The whole homosexual
thing was interesting—they stepped over the line—but Katharine and I
both looked at it and thought, ‘what’s the big deal?’
Box Office Mojo: Some conservatives claim it denigrates the cowboy. What do you think?
Sam Elliott: I do not think it’s anti-cowboy. I have tremendous respect for Ang as a filmmaker.
i dont disagree with him, a film about ranchers (or people who actually heard cows)is not nessicarly a Western
There is a fantastic Glenn Ford western about a funny rancher that I just thought of and the genre to be honest is full of those. Thing about western is that Europeans love classic Ford/Hawks/Mann while north Americans nowadays only seem to know spaghetti.
I don’t think that bolding is quite as effective as you think it is.
I mean he said it
He also said “What’s the big deal?”, which you also could have bolded. I mean, he said it.I wouldn’t say there’s nothing there. I wouldn’t say there’s much there.
You seem weirdly frosty about this
I don’t know that I do. It’s certainly not a hill I would die on. If someone said “Sam Elliott is a hateful homophobic misogynist”, I would likely raise a serious eyebrow. He’s an old white man who has long bought into his own cowboy persona. That often brings with it some biases, which I have no problem criticizing. Just not to the degree you might prefer.But c’mon, ol’ recognitions. You and me have had our share of interactions like this. I’m not as strident as you.
I mean I haven’t even said anything like that though? But I think it’s pretty obvious the guy has some hangups and the way people are being dismissive about that in here and calling it a “nothingburger” or clickbait or whatever is gross
(Hands up) Okay, buddy. You go your usual hyperbole route. As always, I think your heart is in the right place, it’s just your super judgey “everyone but me is awful” attitude that makes me ruefully sigh.
Yeah, you’re blatantly exaggerating everything I said to try and make me sound as unreasonable as possible for some weird reason
I mean I’m fine, you seem to be the one with the issue of the two of us
Nobody: You: EVERYTHING EVERYONE SAYS TO ME THAT ISN’T 100% AGREEMENT IS GROSS AND TERRIBLE AND THEY ARE BAD PEOPLEBae, you are fucking exhausting.
Do you want to actually tell me specifically what I said in this post that you objected to?
No. Because you are literate and I refuse to repeat myself for your amusement. Or whatever need you feed by making shitty mountains out of the stupidest of rhetorical molehills.Ex. Haust. Ing.
I’m sorry, is someone making you reply? And I mean “making shitty mountains out of the stupidest of rhetorical molehills”; you’re the one who’s apparently outraged over me saying that Sam Elliott said some homophobic shit. Or whatever mysterious thing you’re actually mad about.
This is your rhetorical gambit every time. EVERY time. I’m not outraged over your statements over Sam Elliott. I’m not “outraged” over anything. I’m *frustrated* by the fact that you ALWAYS turn a conversation or argument or debate away from the actual subject of the exchange towards a personal judgment of the people having the exchange with you. I couldn’t have been clearer that I agree with criticizing Sam Elliott, I just don’t take as *strident* a position on it as you do. And because I’m not in lock step with your strident position, I’m “gross” or “dismissive” or whatever other personal judgment you want to attach to that minor difference of opinion. I find it DEPRESSING that you are so often the platonic ideal of a concept I hate, which is “blah blah the left is eating itself blah”. I hate that concept because it seeks to remove all accountability from allies. It completely flattens the nuance of often difficult and complicated subjects. I think we *need* people LIKE you to keep progressives honest. But I think what YOU specifically do WAY TOO OFTEN is turn what should be a matter of accountability into a matter of shin-kicking. You are the bluntest of hammers smashing everyone’s thumbs instead of the head of the nail. And it’s just so very tiresome. Look at all the time and effort we both have wasted on this exchange. And you want to pull this fucking “Is someone making you reply?” bullshit, which is 100% you, 24/7/365. Is someone making YOU reply?All that said, I’ll happily take you over some asshole who spends two days straight shit-talking Ray Fisher’s emotional stability or insisting that Dave Chappelle and JK Rowling and Joe Rogan are totally lovely human beings who have never said anything wrong in their lives.
I mean you’re the one who’s complaining about how exhausting I am. Except you still somehow managed to write an entire ranting paragraph about how I’m a bad person or whatever without managing to provide a single example of what I might have said or done that you’re objecting to. What exactly is so “strident” about what I said about Sam Elliott? And how does it justify the level of fury and rhetoric in your comment?
Nah, we don’t get to use “he was being a nerd” as a pass. Nerds are notoriously racist and misogynist, then use “I’m just a nerd about this stuff” as their shield.
Yeah, this is a nothingburger.
Barsanti? Trying to stir drama for clicks? Nooooooooooooooooo. Say it ain’t so.
Yeah, this is a nothingburger.When has that ever stopped AV Club before?
This sums up every Barsanti article…
Funny thing is homosexuality and cross-dressing were really common in the West and not necessarily the taboo we’d expect.
Yup , its a Barsanti article so manafactured outrage due to a misreading of the situation is a given.
Yeah getting mad at a movie for being too gay is totally not stupid and hateful
Wait, IS there gay stuff in the movie? Because that would take my interest in seeing it from zero to a solid 20%.
Cumberbatch’s character is very clearly a repressed gay man.
If you’re interested in half-naked men frolicking in lovely scenery, and lots of beautiful homo-erotic imagery, you should see it. I enjoyed it for many reasons, that was only one.
Queerbaiting is WAY different than actual queer content. Just some of the non-spoiler reviews alluded to some plot point and I didn’t know if that was it. Because if it was, you know, good for them. But if it’s all just longing looks and hatred of femininity, there’s enough of that in every OTHER cowboy movie.
There is no queer content per se, but the antagonist is a closeted homosexual, and the film shows this to us in many ways.I don’t think that’s queer baiting either. It’s simply a device to show us the story instead of just telling us the story. I’m not a Western or queer movie fan, so I don’t have anything to compare. To me this was ultimately a movie about a son and his concern for his mother. Everything else was peripheral to that.
id be more shock if a straight cis white 77 year old man was like ‘yes more gay cowboys films please’
Of course he meant it in a disparaging way. AV Club wouldn’t stretch the real meaning behind something to generate outrage. They’re above that sort of thing.
Amazing how many AV Club commenters can’t see homophobia when it’s blatantly staring them in the face
your right, sam elliott should want to see more gay cowboy films. how dare he not enjoy them!
He might have said “this director.” Too many men say “this woman” when they really mean “that bitch.”Dudes getting more fragile every day.
Meh. I can see saying “this guy” if it was a male director. Especially when it’s not a pre-scripted point he’s making.
Even if Person A has a valid criticism of Person B, constantly pointing out that Person B is not white/male/Christian/is gay/is trans etc. whenever Person A is mad at them, even when it’s completely irrelevant to whatever they did, is a sign that the person is probably hateful in some way. I have relatives who do this too, and it drives me nuts.
Good point. I should add that women are as bad when it comes to maligning each other.
Having severely misogynistic female relatives/family friends who regarded all other women as competition made coming out as a bi woman very difficult/confusing. I wasn’t used to thinking of women as anything except “snarky bitches who stood in my way of getting a man” or whatever.
But you survived that, and now there are twice the number of people available to love you. Sounds like you’re in a good place.
Oh shut up with your “reasonable interpretation.” This is the AV Club, we want context-free outrage!
Yeah, this reads like it was written very quickly from another site’s reporting rather than actually listening to the segment and then writing from an understanding of the wider context. Unfortunately, the wider context is that Elliott only has a problem with gay themes in Westerns.
The Western movie genre has become this avatar for a certain type of American masculinity which has been apparently very pervasive and toxic in American culture. So the movies have been a way to interrogate gender stereotypes, men told not to be emotional and show affection to their loved ones, dominating others ( especially minorities), and boundless ambition and greed caused by colonialism and capitalism. I don’t know how true this type of masculinity has been in the lives of American boys and men for decades if not centuries—I hope it’s been overcounted—but using the Western to talk about it seems a good, honorable artistic effort. In other words—come on, Sam!
just watch any of those Alaska shows on nat geo and its the same dumb bullshit.
SO BRAVE
Ronnie Reagan was in westerns. I think that about speaks for itself.
yup very much like how Nazism promotes vegetarianism. I think that speaks enough about vegetarianism (or Nazis depending on ones perspective)
He was also in other genres? Many left wing actors and directors were doing westerns? What?
He leaned hard on that western image, which is in many ways a fanciful myth. A romanticized era that tends to depict stuff like Manifest Destiny in a good light. Yes there are left wing actors in westerns, but Reagan represented all the negative aspects.
It’s not overcounted, I guess you don’t live in America and pay little attention to the happenings here.
And it’s been pointed out elsewhere that Sam was a psych major at a relatively liberal college and has done a fair bit of classical treading the boards. I think he’s probably not as weirdly macho as he seems, it’s just become part of his persona to lean into. Like he’s played cowboys or tough guys so long it has seeped into him. I always think of his hilarious anti-Ron turn on Parks & Rec whenever people talk about his cowboyness.
Goddammit, Sam Elliott, don’t be the milkshake duck. Why? WHYYYYYYYY??????
.
Yep. No history of directors from other countries knowing anything about the American West. Italians, the Spanish. Surely they’ve played no role in creating decent cinema about the American West.
Australia is still the American West in parts of it.
Maybe he figures that since Americans don’t know anything about other countries, people from other countries don’t know anything about America.
The “American West” is like a dozen distinct biomes. New Zealand is a good match for several of them. If you dropped 99% of Americans in Rotorua, it would take less than five minutes to convince them it was Yellowstone.
Now that you bring it up, it would be pretty cool to see a Western set in a Northern California rainforest. Bunch of soakin’ wet cowboys gettin’ terrorized by Bigfoot or some shit.Ah, hell, I’ll write it myself.
Greenlit.Also that’s a good name for it.
What’s different about Sergio Leone making his movies in Italy and Jane Campion making this movie in New Zealand?The difference is that Leone was actually paying homage to a long cinematic tradition of American Westerns — to the point of actually going to Monument Valley to get essential shots that could not be achieved by filming in Europe.Campion, on the other hand, seems to think that she is “eviscerating the American myth” by showing shirtless cowboys wearing their leather chaps in bed.
Ok, but how much of the latter is actually present because I’m not seeing anything when I did a Google Image search for the movie. I gotta know for research purposes. Timestamps are acceptable too.
Or the former. Leone and many others shot mainly in Spain, maybe there is one or two monument valley shots in all his movies?And well, Martino, Corbucci etc also made westerns and some westerns were shot in Mexico and Australia has a long western tradition and I don’t know why I am writing these obvious statements refuting something as absurd as “westerns are shot in Monument Valley for respect to the genre”
Absurd?Then tell me, genius… what reason would Leone have to move his production 10,000 miles to get those unique shots (for a movie called Once Upon A Time In The West) if it wasn’t in tribute to classic John Ford films like Stagecoach and The Searchers, which inspired his story in the first place?
Who cares. Guy didn’t like the movie. God forbid someone doesn’t like art for a subjective reason?!?!?! The horror. I didn’t think much of Power of the Dog either…wasn’t much there, there for me. The book was better.
Were they filming in New Zealand because of Covid-19 on top of everything else? Namely the director being from New Zealand, well established film industry and so on.
I don’t know if I’m hateable for it, but I thought this particular movie sucked, and do not comprehend all the awards attention it’s been getting, AND I’m a fan of Campion. (The underseen “The Sisters Brothers” did a similar story so much better just last year. as did, sort of, “Cow”.)Even the greats have their misfires. Boo, hiss, me.
You didn’t say why you hated it. If you hated it because you thought it was overlong, tedious and/or none of the characters were sympathetic to you, you are in the clear. If you hated it because it was “too homosexual” or “the director was a foreigner with a vagina,” then you may want to be choosy who you express that opinion to given today’s social climate.
Right, if he hated it because subjectively the movie sucks balls, fine. f he hated it because he’s a bigot or a xenophobe, boo. But isn’t that true about most things in life, which is to say you don’t really need to make that distinction.
Fortunately it was the former, but “sympathetic” characters aren’t any requirement for me, as an adult. The acting takes selected were generally OTT (all of the actors are very capable of much better) and I found the plotting to be pretty obvious, even condescending.
Different strokes for different folks – glad you enjoyed it.
Just as an aside, I’ve found the older I get as an adult, the less of my time and patience I have to devote to watching stories about characters I find distasteful or unlikable.
That’s odd – I find that to be the case with *actual, real* people, but have no problem with the fictional, as they have absolutely no practical effect on me IRL, being fictional and all.
It’s true that no fictional character has any practical impact on my life, but I have a finite amount of free time to devote to entertaining myself and I find that I’ve wasted some of that time if I’ve devoted it to consuming the story of characters that I find uninteresting or dislikable.
Actually it was sadomasochistic and homophonic. The gay characters were all either abusive haters or psychopathic. Campion is not progressive if you take any time to examine her work. She’s a god damned moral scold AND sadomasochist.
I hated it because the allusions to homosexuality were hamfisted and tedious. It felt like it was made fifty years ago. I can’t fathom how anyone who watched it (rather than had it on in the background while looking at their phone or folding laundry) could have thought it was deep, complex, or even had a plot twist.
I was completely underwhelmed by The Sisters Brothers, which was a really fun read despite the serious nature of the material and something I was looking forward to (especially once I saw the cast). Then the movie skipped all the fun.
The main problem with “The Sisters Brothers” is that the trailers sold it as a dark comedy. I enjoyed the movie, but it was not what they advertised.
Yeah I wasn’t totally clear with my original comment – the book was very much a dark comedy as well, which gave it a bit more more than your typical caper/revenge movie. I liked it as well, but relative to the promise of the novel it was a bit of a letdown. Plus you’ve got the raw material with a very comedy-capable cast.
I’m less concerned with your bad opinion and more with the fact that you think The Sisters Brothers came out last year and First Cow was called Cow. I didn’t really care for the former and liked the latter quite a bit, but I don’t see how either has much relation to The Power of the Dog beyond the setting.
Apologies for the brain farts and especially that they troubled you so. It was an admittedly vague “category”, but “recontextualized modern themes visited in a post-modern, revisionist Western of struggles to adapt to industrialization and rugged capitalism” oughtta do it.
I have been starving for quality movies over the past couple of years, and was excited to see this. It bored the shit out of me. I wish I was speaking literally, because at least there’s entertainment value in crapping oneself. However, I found it tedious and painfully dull. That’s not to say that I didn’t appreciate the direction or the actor’s performances. Just was a movie that didn’t land for me in any way. To Sam Elliott’s comments… They seem vaguely controversial, but I’m not shocked that a character actor, known for playing cowboys and is an old white man in America, has those potential views.
I was underwhelmed throughout most of the film, but slowly and surely, it started sneaking up on me. By the end, I was thinking “that was pretty good, but it took a long time getting there”. As time goes on though, I find myself thinking more and more about it. The movie has layers, and is subtle almost to a fault.In short, I find myself liking the movie very much, but 100% understand why someone wouldn’t.
I thought it was sort of unwatchable as well. I mean there were as usual for Campion beautiful sweeping scenery and lovely closeups, etc and some good performances. But, well, I don’t like Campion. Don’t get me started on that abysmal film the The Piano. Her stories are all the same. The same beleaguered pacing, the same scene chewing, the same romanticizing of abusers, the same dirt bags, the same sadistic twisted view of sex and ultimately there is no “there” there. And sorry but everyone’s favorite Benedict Cumberbatch is fucking tiresome to just watch sweat and be mean.
I liked “viciously homophobic character turns out to be gay” better the first time, when it was called American Beauty.
To be fair, the book that Power of the Dog is based on came first.
I think they were both good – in very different ways!
Yeah, this movie was just so much horseshit and pretty poorly done.It came across as a cartoon made by someone who doesn’t know much aboutRanchingCowboysToxic masculinity (both in this specific setting and in general)Conveying gay themes in anything but the most blunt termsThe American westThere is no way I could buy Benedict Cumberbatch as a cowboy, let alone a scary, badass cowboy. I have cousins, barrel riding, calf roping girl cousins, that could snap him like a fucking twig. The men in my family? Don’t ask, but since you did:Toxic masculinity? Pile up every instance of it in this movie, multiply it by 1,000 and you’d have an average weekend afternoon around my dad and male relatives.I don’t know where they got the idea that this is what ranching is like, or this is what western people are like. Everything about this movie was off and did not jive with reality.
You don’t have to like the movie but lookie there, you did it without being a raging homophobic misogynist…..easy peasy
Agree.though it is time for Dunst to get an oscar.
Notice how you were able to say you hated the movie without blaming it on “this woman” and crying about “allusions to homosexuality.” That’s the difference.
Yeah, I was pained sitting through the movie because I thought the characters were largely unsympathetic, and in many cases underdeveloped. And while the twist was kinda clever, getting there was such a slog for me I just didn’t like the movie overall.But I have zero problem with female directors, filming in New Zealand, gay cowboys, or so on. I just didn’t like this particular movie.And I really don’t think anyone is saying it is a general problem not to like this movie. But of COURSE your reasons why are going to say something about you, and sometimes it might not be such a good something for some people.
So you’re saying a woman from New Zealand shouldn’t direct movies about gay cowboys? (Actually, I was disappointed in it, too.)
I feel the same way! I thought it was super pretentious. Long, not a clear “center” to latch onto, poor or no character development. Really just went nowhere. I have been pretty amazed at the attention it’s getting. Almost every person I’ve talked to in real life, didn’t really like it. I’ve only see praise online.. Also I could care less about the homosexual themes or toxic male culture. I got what it was going for, I think, but it doesn’t just make it a good movie.
Weirdly, I felt like Power of the Dog was a well-made but rather inert spin on the Western, with a “get it? THEY ARE GAY ACTUALLY” reveal that is completely predictable nowadays (certainly not back when the novel was written, I grant you). And when it ended, my sense of “that was it, huh” was fueled mostly by how little controversy I expected it to receive. Well, I uh, guess my estimation of it has gone up a bit today…maybe it’s good, if it’s pissing people off?
I think the general public response has been indifference. Closeted gay cowboy? Wasn’t Brokeback 15 years ago??
And Season 2 of South Park 7 years before Brokeback.
…I said it in the review thread for the film, but we came so close to this being a reality!(During the meal with the Governor, the dessert appears to be some manner of pudding….only Cumberbatch’s character skips out on the whole thing.)
Actually James Mangold’s excellent remake of 3:10 to Yuma has Ben Foster playing closeted cowpoke Charlie Prince. His eyes gives away the crush he has on Ben Wade (Russell Crowe).
Yeah, I caught that too. Foster’s straight-up amazing in that movie, just mesmerizing.
The other characters in the movie know he’s gay. He’s referred to derisively as “Charlie Princess” at one point.
He’s called that early on (“Well, I heard of a balled-up whore named Charlie Princess. That you, missy?”) by McElroy the Pinkerton guy chasing the gang, so Charlie shot him. During the course of the film Charlie’s mannerisms towards Ben Wade clue us in why McElroy said that.
I don’t think you were supposed to be shocked that the characters are gay. They pretty much give that fact away in the trailer.
I didn’t even get that BC’s character being gay was such a big deal, but that he was so cruel because of his self hatred.
Exactly. The “shocker” was that the closeted gay cowboy was killed by the supposedly weak guy after the viewers were led to believe that a very different ending was coming.
Prince (Foster) is killed by Wade (Crowe), not by Evans (Bale), whom I’m assuming you’re referring to here as the “weak” character.
I added the movie to my queue, but it’s in the category of something I may or may not watch someday. Based on the trailer, when I described it to my wife to see if she had any interest, I said that it looks like Benedict Cumberbatch is a self-hating gay cowboy who has an unrequited love for Jesse Plemons, so he’s mean and abusive toward Kirsten Dunst and probably has rough sex or somehow rapes another guy as a “punishment” for himself.I don’t know if any of that is actually in the movie and as though I’ve thought about watching it once or twice, there has always been something more fun and light available, but that’s what I got from the trailer.
You guessed incorrectly on most of that. While it’s far from a fun, lighthearted movie, it’s not as depressing as your version would be. I found it to be far less dour and dark than The Piano. Though that’s a low bar I realize.
You guessed incorrectly on most of that. While it’s far from a fun, lighthearted movie, it’s not as depressing as your version would be. That’s good to know because I am not really eager to watch the movie I imagined.
You missed the spin, then. They were clearly shown as gay in the trailer, and if you hadn’t seen that, Cumberbatch is looking at gay porn like 15 minutes into the movie.The spin was (SPOILERS)that Kodi’s character was not a weak impressionable twink being manipulated by this powerful and charismatic older man…but in fact the reverse – he had Cumberbatch in the palm of his hand all along and was carefully unfolding a machiavellian scheme to murder him. When they revealed the anthrax rope, it was like an “oh shit!” heist-movie moment for me.
Yuck. Did he at least say who his guys are?
That’s what all these f – – king cowboys in that movie looked like. They’re all running around in chaps and no
shirts. There’s all these allusions to homosexuality throughout the f – –
king movie. I mean, Cumberbatch never got out of his f – – king chaps. He had two pairs of chaps — a woolly pair and a leather pair. And every f
– – king time he would walk in from somewhere — he never was on a
horse, maybe once — he’d walk into the f – – king house, storm up the f –
– king stairs, go lay in his bed in his chaps and play his banjo,” he
said. “It’s like, what the f – – k?I just came from Texas where I was hanging out with families — not men — but families. Big, long, extended, multiple-generation families that made their living
and their lives were all about being cowboys. And,
boy, when I f – – king saw that [movie], I thought, “What the f – – k?
Where are we in this world today?”why is he so obsessed with cowboy chaps……
He mostly grew up in Portland, OR where young people go to retire.
Imagine thinking you’re awesome for dunking on some actor on social media. None of this matters. It’s just adding to Western civilizations decline.
its almost as if hes an actor
To be fair, Power of the Dog sucks ass, it’s boring, slow, mean and ultimately just leaves you feeling kind of pissed off. I get it that Hollywood’s been tripping over its balls to praise it as one of the few “real” movies out there these days, but it’s pure shit, hated it top to bottom.
Clint Eastwood shot Unforgiven in Alberta. ALBERTA!!! That’s not America!
Quite a few Albertans disagree with you…
Unfortunately true.
Eh, not the same. I lived in Alberta for quite some time. The landscape is indistinguishable from Montana because it’s all part of the same geographic area. This is why it’s used in so many Westerns and also because it’s cheaper to shoot in Canada. And there is a HUGE cowboy culture there. I still think Sam’s outrage is a bit much but I can understand someone not being convinced by the New Zealand landscape passing for the old west.
Colter Wall!
Wait until people discover how many westerns were shot in Spain…
Wait ‘til people discover there’s always been a big cowboy subculture in Germany. And if you think those straitlaced Germans can’t get down and funky with a lasso, well, you should go see for yourself.
Yup. Leone was Italian but the movies were shot cheaply in Almeria, Spain. You can still visit the cemetry from the final shootout of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
Her name is Alberta…
Lance Storm would very much agree.You know, as soon as he stops jerking it over the Reacher show.(Deep cut for fans of wrestling and Lance Storm in particular.)
There are literal multiple tag groups on FB to debunking those right wing Sam Elliot memes, ex. “This is not what Sam Elliot represents”.Guess it was what Sam Elliot represents after all.
It might surprise you to discover there are liberals and progressives with super shitty takes on things.
Sometimes, there’s a man.
Hey, that’s something Sam Elliott said!
I listened to this yesterday. It sounds worse than it was. First he made sure to say he just felt personally attacked, because he was so tied up in westerns as an actor. Second, he said he spends a lot of time with actual cowboys and their families in Texas and resented the portrayal in the movie as not realistic, especially since it’s a female New Zealander who filmed this not in the west but in NZ. Third he said he loved and adored Jane Campions films, just not this one. Marc did bring up that this is just the story of one singular person/event and he acknowledged that.
Very few westerns present a “realistic” portrayal, and modern-day “cowboys” live a very different life than their counterparts from over a century ago. If this wasn’t labeled a “western” would Sam Elliot suddenly be ok with it?
That’s a good question. I think yeah, if everybody had New Zealand accents and they just made it a weird cool story from the NZ back country 100 years ago he might have liked it more!
“he just felt personally attacked, because he was so tied up in westerns as an actor.”That’s insane.
I don’t think it is that insane! I think he’s just wrapped up in it and considers himself to be a part of that world.
Which is insane. lol
Everyone got pissed about the original Star Wars trilogy because it did not “look and feel” like a star wars movie. Westerns are sort of the same. They have to fit a specific mold and hold onto some degree “reality” or universe building that people come to expect.This is what allowed West World to work on HBO in both the meta and real sense. Mandalorian is more of “Western” than this movie and I think that is Sam’s point.
I agree that “insane” is a bit much.Buuuuut it IS a little much on HIS part to take it so personally. Especially when, as others have pointed out, he grew up around Portland, went to a liberal college to learn psychology, and now lives in southern CA. To use pro wrestling terminology, he’s a mark for his own gimmick and seems stuck in kayfabe.
I didn’t know anything about Sam Elliott’s political viewpoint, but now I’m suspicious. Please tell me he’s not a MAGA person!
He said nothing disparaging about the director being a woman. Nice try tho’ with trying to trigger people with
***sexism***
Now that all the real writers are gone, the AV Club is gonna be leaning hard on Barsanti for his signature outrage-based clickbait.
i though the real writers left like a decade ago
Nope, unacceptable. You may only hate things made by white cis male men. Sorry Sam…you cancelled.
shutup
Is that really your takeaway from the last few years, or all of American history? That’s your actual, real takeaway? Like, you’re serious?
You mean like…are you actually…are you seriously…are you ummagawd…are you like totally…are you…?
I’ll take that to mean you are serious. That’s really a shame, but not unexpected, based on my many years of living in this country.
Preach it, sheeple.
Yes, and you keep preaching screeds against this nonexistent “cancel culture” whose sole purpose is to unduly punish the poor, put-upon white men of America.
Saying that “cancel culture” doesn’t exist in 2022 requires an insane amount of cognitive dissonance.
You’re right. So many people have been “cancelled” and never heard from again, and definitely didn’t just receive a bit of bad press for shitty stuff they did and then move on with their lives. My bad.
You don’t have a thought in your skull, do you?
I do. All my thoughts are about how hard life is for white folks. I share your deep concern about them, and all the many, many poor white people who have been “cancelled.”
I like Sam Elliot a lot but damn that’s a take. Sometimes a foreigner has a frankly more interesting take on country then a native citizen. Spec Ops the Line was written by Germans and frankly they were closer to the pulse then most. Also I’m not touching the loud part about homosexuality, he does know Brokeback Mountain was a thing right?
“…he does know Brokeback Mountain was a thing right” Indeed and he is a fan as mentioned in the same WTF podcast.
He does. And he mostly appreciated it. Seems like his biggest gripe with it was that they were sheep herders instead of cattle guys. Which is also a dumb complaint.
As someone who loved “Power of The Dog” and loves Sam Elliot.
And listened to the WTF episode in full.
I have to say this an example of people editing what someone said in order to be out raged.To take and quote “what the fuck does this woman know?” which is only a fragment of a sentence, as a definitive statement is some piss poor journalism.Between the above quote Elliot explains, using many full sentences, as to why he doesn’t like the film before getting on to “the fact that Campion filmed the movie in New Zealand as a stand-in for Old West Montana” As I said I loved “Power of The Dog” so I don’t agree with Elliot’s dislike of the film but you should at least fully outline why he doesn’t like it.
On the internet? Devil you say….
Barsanti? Never!I wish he would go on strike with the Gizmodo, Jalopnik, and Lifehacker writers.
I was really disappointed when I didn’t see him in the list of AV Club staff leaving.
Hey, would you give up a gig this cushy?
Barsanti performing wokeness to generate clicks again. You gotta hand it to him, he’s got a voice. The minute that I feel all the nuance and wit being sucked out of the room, I know whose article I’m reading.
Welcome to the AV Club.
“To take and quote “what the fuck does this woman know?” which is only a fragment of a sentence, as a definitive statement is some piss poor journalism.”Whaaaaaaat?!?!? Someone took a partial quote and used it to strengthen their argument? In 2022? GTFOH!!!
it sort of felt like he barely watched the movie, like missed the whole point it was about queer cowboys lol
you mean to tell me that the avclub cherry picked lines from an interview to incite outrage ? in this economy?
‘you should at least fully outline why he doesn’t like it.’
Aint nobody got time for that.
You could tell in an instant it was shot in NZ, because all the world-famous unmistakeable landmarks of Montana were missing! Like um, “hill with sagebrush on it” and “scrubby tree beside road”!
oh you misunderstood. They can’t create a mini-furor and move Sam Elliott onto the list of “bad dudes” here at AV if they don’t creatively edit his comment to focus on the part they want outrage and twitters over. So, yeah, that’s why. 🙂
I promise you that the dipshit who wrote this just copied and pasted quotes and outrage cues from wherever he found it. These are not real people.
Eh, I listened to the full interview. I don’t think the context helped as much as you think it does. Yes, some of his criticisms are just that – it’s long, it’s slow, they wear chaps without shirts too much (I guess?). But the homophobia and misogyny permeating a lot of his other comments coupled with the fact that he does seem oblivious to the fact that many of our most memorable Westerns were not made by Americans in America were not great. At best, he seems to have completely missed the point of the movie possibly because of said homophobia and misogyny.
To take and quote “what the fuck does this woman know?” which is only a fragment of a sentence, as a definitive statement is some piss poor journalism.I mean, look at this article’s subhead. It acts like Sam Elliott was beating around the bush with his criticism when he most certainly was not.
There is a little known modern western from 1998 called The Hi-Lo Country, starring Billy Crudup, Woody Harrelson and Patricia Arquette. It carries some obvious gay subtext between the two leads, it’s directed by Stephen Frears, a Brit, and in one major supporting part, you have… Sam Elliott.
Well done. Best rebuttal so far.
Which I think is an excellent argument for why Sam just woke up on the wrong side of the bed that day. It’s worth tutting at him for being a dumb old white cis grouchy but nothing worth the vitriol this article seems to want us to feel.
He’s also a Danny Masterson defender
Ew.
when did he defend danny masterson?
It sounds to me like his problem was the homosexuality, not the gender of the director.
Reading what Sam said, it sounds awful. What I took from Sam’s comments when I listened to the interview is… Cowboys should play cowboys. Montana should play Montana. In other words.. representation matters.
Yeah, but he’s the new mayor on Family Guy, so I’ll forgive him.
Eh, this is basically “ornery septuagenarian has Very Strong Opinions (that are rather retrograde) about westerns”. Which sucks a bit, admittedly, but can also pretty much be addressed using a Top Gear “oh no anyway” gif.
I would go further and say it’s very specific to this ONE Western because he seems pretty open about most others. Even Brokeback seems to ruffle him mostly because they’re not specifically cattlemen.
What an absolute nothing of a quote, desperately stretched into a bad article to try and make it sound awful.
God dammit, Sam Elliott, I thought you were one of the good guys. The full podcast is here http: //www.wtfpod.com/podcast/episode-1309-sam-elliott, if you might think it was taken out of context. It wasn’t. It’s a fairly sort exchange but it’s… bad.
He’s a 77 year old straight white guy with a Texas drawl (which I assume he got from his parents, since he isn’t actually from Texas) who plays a cowboy on TV. I am zero percent surprised that he isn’t progressive on the issues of homosexuality, foreigners, and lady directors.
i really want to meet the Sam elliott fan whos shocked by hi statements and ask them why they are so unaware of reality
The Power of the Dog isn’t bad because it has homoerotic content or because a woman directed it. It’s bad because it is listless, uninspired, and overwrought, and doesn’t have anything interesting to comment on regarding the topics it purports to examine. Cumberbatch’s central performance is just there, giving his talented co-stars like Dunst and McPhee little to do beyond quietly glower at him. I don’t understand how this movie is getting all the buzz it is getting, especially after watching The French Dispatch which, whatever you want to say about it, is beautifully crafted and fairly entertaining.
The French Dispatch kinda sucked aside from being beautifully shot imo.This movie has some really interesting things to say about queerdom and cowboy culture, and the fact that people like Elliott are upset about it is kind of the point of the movie. He’s totally indoctrinated into some of those toxic masculine tropes, which is fine, he’s an old man. But there is a sense of irony around the reason Elliott disliked the film.Also Dunst was amazing, totally heartbreaking performance.
I’m having flashbacks to 2005, I swear.
Well the best I could say about that rant would be it’s badly worded. I don’t know enough about Elliott to jump to any conclusions, but that sounds like something a bigot would say.Except the part about trying to make New Zealand double as Montana. That looked like no part of Montana I’ve ever seen before.
Power of the Dog is a thoughtful, interesting story about love and toxic masculinity wrapped around a toddler’s views on alcoholism. It was worth two hours, but I would never have thought of nominating it for awards, and if someone asked me for Western recs, it wouldn’t even make the top 50.Jane Campion is much better at television than movies. Top of the Lake was excellent.
Fk Sam Elliot. This homophobe and sexist doesn’t realize he’s not a real cowboy, he just plays one. The book however is written by a real cowboy. And, the best Westers were made by an Italian guy and Japanese guy. Also, my last day on AV Club because fk G/O Media.
Eh, I don’t really get too worked up over movies that use other Earth countries as a stand-in for the American Old West.What really twists my tentacles is when Earth locations are used to portray alien planets. I mean, what the hell does some human film director know about the surface of Kepler-22b?
Yeah well you end up accepting it as an abstraction, as all the alien planets in the Stargate universe looking like the same spot in British Columbia
“what the fuck does this woman know?” is a perfectly good thing to say if the situation warrants it. Does the situation warrant it? Apply some tests before becoming angry. Listen to your therapist.
Mmmmmm. Begrudgingly agree. I have no objections at all to Sam Elliott going on record and saying he’s not a huge fan of counter culture westerns that explore themes, sexual or otherwise, traditionally at odds with genre’s archetypes but they he’s going a long list of film industry veterans that voice their artistic preferences like they interpret all of cinema as confined to the verite’ sub genre. And it sounds foolish.
lol. only gawker could screw up a slam-dunk homophobic canceling by trying to turn it into a sexist canceling.
I dont find his aversion to homosexual cowboys disturbing in the least. I find it refreshingly honest and quite frankly I agree with him.
What an odd comment to make.
“ If your argument hinges on the phrase ‘what the fuck does this woman know?’ you need to do some rethinking”This is actually quite condescending. Feminism doesn’t require believing that half of humanity is always right. Artists disagree about art. You’re treating Campion like a fragile child because she’s a woman.
You made the same point Barsanti did. He’s not saying you should always assume women are right. He’s saying you shouldn’t assume they are categorically incapable of being right, which is what “what does this woman know” does.
It’s normal movie sh*ttalking. Treating it differently because the filmmaker is a woman is condescending. This is how people who care about movies talk.
“Treating it differently because the filmmaker is a woman is condescending.”Exactly. Nail on head. That’s exactly the point Barsanti was making.
No, it’s not.
I mean…it just clearly is, though, but okay. He literally never said a word about believing that all women are “right” or treating the film differently because it’s made by a woman. For the life of me I can’t even see how you got that.
What is this fascination with starting comments with “I mean,” or “Like,” or “Eh?” I dont know why it bothers me so much, haha. :)Sam Elliot is awesome and just his voice floods my basement. The movie is boring AF but it has a good twist at the end. Would have been an amazing 30 min “black mirror” type story.You dont have to be a real doctor, cowboy or fireman or veteren to critique poor execution of a genre film. I get irritated when Drs say insanly dumb incorrect things in movies. I mean, like, I get irritated when someone who knows nothing about cars (for example) writes about cars on Jalponik. Eh, enjoy the Kinja outrage porn.
I wouldn’t know. I don’t find it fascinating in the least and I don’t get the impression that anyone else does either, except you, I guess.No one said he couldn’t critique the film. I’m afraid I’m not sure what point you’re making, or how it relates to what I said.
Okay, but then he makes it very clear that he admires her work. Just not THAT particular piece.
Because how dare a woman try to make a western. These crazy wimmin only want to see dudes in chaps and no shirts.
“what the fuck does this woman—she’s a brilliant director by the way, I
love her work, previous work—but what the fuck does this woman from down
there, New Zealand, know about the American west?”
I’m going to go with his complaint having 0% to do with being a woman, and more to do with being from New Zealand. Now that’s dumb in and of itself, but to really suggest that his quote means he doesn’t like her because she’s a female director.
(Here’s a tip: If your argument hinges on the phrase “what the fuck does this woman know?” you need to do some rethinking.)
Here’s a real tip, women can be just as likely to not know things as a man. That was such a stupid line.
“Here’s a real tip, women can be just as likely to not know things as a man. That was such a stupid line.”That criticism only makes sense if he’s ever uttered the words “what does this man know about making a western.” Only using it when a woman is making a western 100% assumes that women have the monopoly on not knowing about making westerns.Second of all, if his criticism is just that she’s from New Zealand, did he ever say of Sergio Leone “what does this man from Italy know about making American westerns,” or is it just foreign wimmin (from countries with more in common physically with the American west than Italy has, no less) who can’t do it?
No, it makes sense without it. Because his emphasis in his statement was on her being from New Zealand, not on her being a woman. Misquoting him to make a bullshit outrage article is just stupid.
That’s an emphasis you’re reading into it, and again, if it was about where she was from, has he made the same criticism of Sergio Leone? Has he made the same criticism of his own upbringing in Oregon? If not, then what’s the difference between her and him and Leone?
It’s not an emphasis I’m reading into it. I’m literally taking his whole statement instead of cutting it up to make it into a sexist comment. He is being hypocritical to a degree, but it’s more involved than what the article makes it out to be.
But you’re not taking his whole statement, are you, because you keep ignoring the “this woman” part, and you keep ignoring that the criticism you say he’s making—location—is one he hasn’t made of male filmmakers filming westerns abroad. So, hypocritical to a degree…but in what way is he being hypocritical? In the way that he’s criticizing a woman for something he wouldn’t criticize a man for. That specific kind of hypocrisy is called sexism.
Surprisingly enough you can refer to somebody by their gender (or a pronoun) without it being important to the point your making.
Okay, so we agree that you have chosen to interpret his statement in such a way that allows you to ignore part of it, so you are not, in fact “taking his whole statement” and you are, in fact, “cutting it up” to make it say what you want it to say. I’m glad we’re clear on that, and that we’re clear on the fact that you have chosen not to explain why he hasn’t had similar criticism about foreign makers of western films who are male.
…I didn’t interpret his statement in such a way that allows me to ignore part of it. I said he’s using “woman” and “she” just to refer to a female as a female, without any other meaning attached to it. Nice try though. And I don’t know, I haven’t seen all of his interviews, it’s possible it was never brought up. In this case the interviewer asked Sam Elliot what he thought of the movie. But that can easily be reversed, why aren’t you listing all these amazing things he’s said about foreign makers of western films who are male?
But why did he need to refer to “a female as a female”? Why was that relevant to what he was saying if all he was saying is that she’s not American? And you’re the one who said he was being “hypocritical to a degree.” What did you mean when he said that?“And I don’t know, I haven’t seen all of his interviews, it’s possible it was never brought up.”LOL What an intellectually bankrupt dodge.
Because that’s how people talk. It’s seriously not that difficult of a concept. He’s hypocritical to a degree because he isn’t some born and bred midwestern cowboy. His knowledge didn’t come from first hand experience. “LOL What an intellectually bankrupt dodge.”So I take it you couldn’t find any of these damning examples you keep alluding to.
He mentions Ang Lee but never says “What the fuck did Ang know about ranchers cattle or otherwise, he probably shouldn’t have been the one to make Brokeback.” No he mentions that he worked with Ang and that Ang is a great director. Brokeback isn’t about ranching anymore than Power of the Dog is about ranching so why have criticism about Champion and not for Ang?Sam is probably a bit of a sexist, but who gives a shit what Sam Elliott thinks?
Sam Elliott certainly is the foremost authority on life in the Old West. After all, he grew up in Portland and has also spent several years living in the wilds of Malibu.
I have realized that it might be impossible to not like something for valid reasons, and to have any thoughtful discussion of those reasons cut off simply because people can’t get past their own knee-jerk reactions.First, he lauded Campion. Had she been a guy, it’s likely he would have said, “what does this guy know about the american west?”, but she isn’t, so he said “woman”. So, would it have been better if he used a neutral pronoun, or does her gender protect her from questions about her pre-production research?Second, it’s pretty clear that he was objecting to the characterization of the movie as a “western”. It’s not, not even close, and critiquing the “shirtless guys in chaps” as not really representative of cowboy culture isn’t all that problematic.Sam Eliot is on record as loving “Brokeback Mountain”, so it might be a bit of a stretch to call him homophobic – he seems to have a disagreement about the believability of the story, that wasn’t remotely realistic. In other words, call it gay wish fulfillment, not a western. He might be an actor, but he’s been immersed in period-correct stuff for much of his career, so it’s likely he’s done far more research into American cowboy culture than Campion. Allegations of homophobia are tough to get past. But, when we superimpose today’s values onto history, even in historical fiction, we distort our real, far less savory history. That we’ve (finally) reached a societal acceptance of LGBTQ people is a wonderful thing, but we all know how recent a development it is, and how very, very marginalized queer people have been. “Brokeback” was a far more accurate rendering of what being homosexual was like in an unenlightened time.
Old white guy can fuck off.Most of these movie-stars don’t know much more about film making than their audiences.
I would say some know less. Actors aren’t scholars generally.
One great gift Maron’s podcast (and celebrity interview podcasts in general) is the certainty that most famous people are at least a little bit dumb, and sometimes profoundly so.
Of course, most of them are
dumb as hell. Most are beautiful people and beautiful people have the ultimate genetic advantage and get extra special allowances for
being perceived to be intelligent.
I agree, although I have always really, really hated listening to Maron talk about film. His general view of art is very “iconoclast = good”, which annoys me, and he’s a fucking format fetishist. He loves to talk about film stock and lenses and ratios and blah blah fucking blah. Dude acts like filmmaking is basically 75% cinematography and 25% trolling squares. He’s a shitty art kid.
For me, it’s how he constantly harps on the idea that “Marvel movies are killing cinema” and yet somehow fails to bring that up when interviewing actor after actor who have starred in multiple comic book movie franchises. A little bit cowardice, a little bit hypocrisy, all shitty.
I’ve never listened to Maron’s podcast (or indeed, most celeb podcasts) – which celebs have come off as being particularly stupid? Are there any who’ve come off as being particularly smart?
Imagine, for just a moment, that Denzel Washington was asked about what he thought of a movie about african american culture made by a white person. What would you think if he said he hated it?
Seems like the way worse part was the stuff he said about homosexuality. I mean, Jane Campion is in fact a “lady.” Making that logical leap to sexism isn’t super far, but it does still require a leap. He openly complains about the homosexuality.
So Sam Elliot is a real cowboy hanging out with cowboys now, and not an actor who plays one and lives in Malibu?
‘Here’s a tip: If your argument hinges on the phrase “what the fuck does this woman know?” you need to do some rethinking.’
then its a good thing his argument doesn’t hinge on that.
Here’s a tip: if your article is just parroting what was said on a podcast then its pretty asinine and unnecessary. If your article hinges on misquoting something from a podcast, then you should really reconsider your choice in careers.
You have decided his comments were about something they were not. Shame you misunderstood him. If a movie portrayed a homosexual in a way that isn’t how they are, you might complain or have issues with it. This is all Sam was doing. He thinks it’s a crappy way to portray a western. And I agree.
What a shocker…a 78 year old guy from Sacramento doesn’t like movies about gay cowboys. Let me break out my *special* “clutchin’ pearls” for this one…Also, can we longtime WTF listeners acknowledge that Sam Elliott probably dropped the f-bomb more in this single episode than *any other guest* in the entire podcast’s history? That’s the real headline.
It doesn’t have to be a shock to be noteworthy, you know.
“Fuck no,” he responded, explaining that he read an article about how the movie is an “evisceration of the American myth” and how it was being promoted with images of “fucking cowboys” wearing “chaps and no shirts.” I’m wondering if Elliott even watched the movie. This doesn’t sound much like the film I watched.
Do the people who complain that the writer is just driving outrage for clicks ever explore anywhere else on the internet or do they only hate-read this site? Plenty of non AV Club internet people were talking about Sam Elliott’s comments.
I just hate read and ponder who the people are who comment here. Glad I know none of you wierdos in real life.
Filtering this publication from my aggregators. Let’s stop reading stuff like this em masse. It’s making people stupid and crazy. Cheers.
“what the fuck does this woman from down there, New Zealand, know about the American west?”I imagine she’s capable of knowing as much about the American west as anyone else who A) Didn’t live in that time, and B) Is willing to read about it.Does Elliot think that you need to be American to understand the American west?
This is really poorly written and the clickbait is focusing on the wrong thing. It’s not that she’s a woman he finds problematic, but that’s she’s from New Zealand. More concerning, is his issues with the homosexual content than anything.
Honestly, I think he is right. Power of the Dog used the “cowboy” setting poorly.
Thank goodness Scorsese grew up in Tibet so he could direct Kundun!
It’s pretty funny when movie stars begin to believe their own created images. As was often said, Cary Grant never forgot that he was really Archibald Leach, but John Wayne completely forgot that he was really Marion Michael Morrison. He began to play John Wayne offscreen as well as on. I’d say that Sacramento-born and Portland-raised Elliott is another case of an actor who believes he’s who he projects on the screen.
“…do ya have to use so many cuss words, Dude?”any one else finding themselves wondering to which earlier Jane Campion movies Elliott took a particular shine? I like to think he’s a big fan of “Holy Smoke”…
Wha? You left out the bit that apparently this was about a bunch of macho cowboys dressed like the Chippendale strippers–which is a movie I totally would see.
Dog was not a western, period. It had a car in it, for made up religions figure’s sake, I can’t even imagine what other professional cowboys thought of it while watching it with Sam, but I can’t imagine it being nice. Phil (Cumberbund’s character) went to Yale, and is a accomplished poet/philosopher. Nope that does not track. Westerns do not do introspective self loathing. Vengeance, Yes; wrath, yes; disgust, yes; even discovery/awe, yes; but self loathing and angst. No. That being said, if you like somber, kinda sad movies that are slow, and will make you think a bit, and talk with friends about the drive of people, LGBTQ stuff in other times, then hell yes you will like Dog, but make no mistake it is not a Western. It is a French arthouse film set in The West right after the Model T came out. (Great westerns: man with no name series, dances with wolves, 1883, Italian westerns – sergio directors, and pretty much anything with a horse, and guns from the late 60-70’s, and Young Guns – cause that movie is bonkers)
So. Shirtless cowboy dudes wearing chap and more homoerotic imagery? Well, I’m down for that. But other guys don’t have to like it – straight guys, for example. Should I be offended by their opinions? Because I’m not. I have no affinity for Sam Elliot – eh, whatever. His statements are not shocking, offensive or misogynist, either – unless you want to be offended and are determined to label them as such. “That woman” is the same as “that man.” What phrase should he use? He even knew enough to praise her – because of overreactions from leftists like this one. Who cares? I can’t stand lesbian crap in movies and on TV – because, you know, gross. But I don’t begrudge that shit to others and neither did Sam. Opinions, you know? People can have them. It’s true. Deal with it.
Absolutely hate that lazy crap likes this gets rewarded with clicks and engagement and gives SOME PEOPLE the misguided feeling they are somehow doing good work.
I mean the film did kind of suck ass. And y’all crap talk the David Sirota film, y0u gods’sdamned Neolibs. nah, we’re entitled to our own opinions, and if this actor man didn’t like it he may have not expressed accurately what didn’t jell for him. so uh, chill out qawker weirdos that a thing you had nothing to do with that you enjoyed that someone else thought was meh should be murdered in the street for wearing a cowboy hat or whatever… Also It seems like he just read something about gay cowboys but it was more about an gay cowboy being a dick to drunk lady from spiderman and her gay son… also the guy from Battleship is there being upset about it. but the scenery is nice.
He might have been a tool but the whole anger out of speculation thing is so tiring. I think I know it is and that’s a fact!Fight some real battles you can prove, not some mindghost like stop te steal people do.
I swear, lately this website stirs more shit than an exploding commode.I’m a woman and I too was disappointed in this movie and wondered why they filmed what was supposed to be an American Western in New Zealand. This is why we can’t have nice discourse.
You should be burned at the stake. How dare you!
I agree with Sam. Stop ruining everything with this “gay” slant stuff. Yeah, we know you all exist but, frankly, most of us straight folks (the majority) are just tired of this stuff. We don’t want everything “camped” up to suit your narrative. Most of us don’t give a rat’s ass about your sexuality – really – keep it to yourselves.
Honest question and not stirring the shit. We dont actually know if Kodi Smit-McPhee’s charecter is gay. All we know is he likes to make flowers, loves his Mom, and likes to kill and disect animals. I think it is heavily implied but its up for interpretation. While the super masculine dude (Dr Strange) is clearly into other dudes. Maybe that is the point – the flip of the stereotype.Here is is my question – isnt he a minor in High School? I didnt get homoerotic vibes from Cumberbatch – I got rappy pedo vibes and grooming vibes. What happened to Bronco Billy, did he consenually have sex in the woods with him or did he rape and kill him in the woods? Kodi’s charecter picked up on this too and used it against the much older adult cowboy (who also has power over Kodi and his mom- runs the ranch).Lastly – the wanking with the silk hanky is creepy even if he was thinking of a hetro doggy style sex in Dances with Wolves. I dont think its homophobic to dislike any of it but I think I like the movie more becuase of this silly Sam Elliot outrage. It made me think more deeply about it. Without a doubt it is boring as hell, though.
What I love most about this – Eliot’s cowboy bonafides in this case are identical to those of the people he is critical of… I did a movie once with “real cowboys.” I know this is going to come as a shock but playing a cowboy in the movies does not uniquely qualify one to comment on authenticity.
Oh sure, his problem is just that it was filmed in New ZealandUh, what? He specifically stated he was against the homoerotic subtext of Benedict Cumberbatch, and also that the film didn’t feel like the American West. Don’t act like he was trying to “Let’s Go, Brandon” his dislike of Power of the Dog by using coded language. He wasn’t. He was specific, if not a bit vulgar about it.
Like, I don’t agree with his comments, but man, that subhead is loaded.
The main problem with power of the dog is the fucking animal abuse.
I refuse to watch it because I heard it had fags in it and that is not a western at all. Because in the early parts of America they would have hung faggots from the nearest tree. That is the facts of the past. You faggots can not deny history and when times were better in America. Yes, I proudly hate faggots, no phobia as I am not afraid of your sick perverted fucks. People can hate you and in no way afraid of you. To make up it as a phobia is to protect your weak minds. It is and will always be wrong to be a lesbo dyke and a faggot. Do not care if you are offended or not by my posts as I hate liberal fucktards also.
Liberals claim to be for freedom of speech until it doesn’t agree with them. The facts are the minute you try to kill any speech your actions are Anti freedom and Anti American. Yes that includes speech you deam hateful. Liberals are Freedoms biggest threat because they are so weak minded they can’t take anyone disagreeing with them. Power of the dog is perverted and not a western and in no way true about America’s Western past. Gays were hung from the highest trees because American society held sickos accountable for their immorality.
I know I’m late to this but the Italian director, Sergio Leone, made all of his westerns in Spain. Because Spain has semi-arid regions that closely resemble the southwestern US.