Customer Reviews

Wild Bill [VHS]

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

It is uneven films like 'Wild Bill' that make me wish that Amazon allowed half stars. While it has some outstanding scenes that I would not have missed, and Jeff Bridges deliveres a five star performance in the title role, it hits too many false notes, and as a whole is far too unconvincing to merit four stars. But when it is good, it is very good, and deserves a three and one half star rating.
Jeff Bridges' portrayal of Wild Bill Hickok is simply outstanding. He delivers exactly the right mix of flamboyant swagger, no nonsense toughness, and world weariness to breath life into the legend, and is the primary reason to see this movie. The film's early scenes, where Bridges gets to recreate several pivital episodes of Hickok's legend are superb; had the movie continued in that vein, it would be a classic.
Unfortunately, 'Wild Bill' abandons both the history and legend of James Butler Hickok for the greater part of the movie in favor of its own inovations on the tale that simply fall flat. Most of the story is told in Deadwood, the boom town where Hickok was killed, and it attempts to give explanation and motivation to young Jack McCall's murder of Wild Bill. This is not only unnecessary, as the tale already had a fitting ending (an unbalanced young coward murders a legend hoping to make a name), but destoys the credibility of the film, by adding silly scenes such as McCall and a gang of hired toughs holding Bill and friends hostage in a bar previous to the murder.
The impressive cast, like the movie itself, delivers unevenly. David Arquette does a fair job as the twitchy Jack McCall. Ellen Barkin fails as Calamity Jane - her attempt at acting both rowdy tough and sweetly sexy is about as successful as mixing oil and water. John Hurt plays Charley Prince, an English gentleman who is friend to Wild Bill, and narrates much of the movie; both the charater and the narration seem out of place in the tale. Vetern character actor James Gammon plays California Joe largly through speaking loudly, and is a disappointment. Christina Applegate's role as hard bitten prostitute Lurline is both woodenly acted and utterly superflous to the story. Keith Carradine has a one scene, throw away cameo as Buffalo Bill Cody. Bruce Dern, playing Will Plummer, an angry old man in a wheel chair who calls Wild Bill out, delivers the most entertaining performance in the movie next to Bridges, providing one of the moments that make this film worth seeing despite its many flaws.
Had 'Wild Bill' stuck to the legend rather than inovating, or had it attempted to get behind the legend to the history, this could have been an outstanding movie. The scenes that did stay close to the legend were outstandingly well done, and give a hint of what this film could have been. As is, I would still recommend that you check out 'Wild Bill', but rent, rather than buy.

Theo Logos

If there was ever a psychedelic western movie, this has to be it. It's so bizarre, at least compared to most westerns, that it was tough to know where to start in describing this bizarre film.

I just found it great fun, an entertaining film that's always a kick to view, and what more you can ask? Being someone who is very much into visuals, great cinematography and unique approaches to camera-work, this film provided all of that and more, such as an interesting story with whacked-out characters.

I love narration and John Hurt's description of the goings-on here was just great to hear. He played "Charlie," an Englishman with a gentleman's vocabulary that was in stark contrast to the hardened outlaws, led by 'Wild Bill' Hickok himself, played by Jeff Bridges. Ellen Barkin plays "Calamity Jane," and few women of the 1980s and '90s played foul-mouthed, hard-but-sexy women as convincingly as Barkin.

In addition to Hurt, Bridges and Barkin, other fun characters included "California Joe," Hickok's gravel-voiced friend who doesn't say much but when he does, you hear some some of the longest sentences ever uttered. Daid Arquette plays a very strange villain, the man who became famous for shooting Wild Bill. He acts strange and talks as if he has a mouthful of marbles. James Remar, another mean-looking tough guy, is a hired killer. Christina Applegate, Bruce Dern, Margoe Gortner, Keith Carradine and assorted other characters all add to this strange tale, strange in its telling and even stranger in its visual style.

Some of the film is in flashback, which is seen in startling black-and-white and mainly features Diane Lane, who is flat-out gorgeous and maybe the most intriguing person in the film. One of the flashbacks has the film deliberately overexposed with wild dream-like images.

No western "purist" admits to liking this but I love the genre and I put this near the top of my list of favorite westerns. So, sue me!

Unlike the other reviewers, I can't vouch for the historical accuracy of this film. What I can say, however, is that I thoroughly enjoyed Bridges' portrayal of the rough and tumble Wild Bill. I lost the sense that I was watching an actor at work behind the moustache, twin pistols and gruff mannerisms that Bridges brings to the character. I found the central conflict of a very tough and manly man coming to terms with his own legacy poignant and interesting. I recommend giving it a look-see, and I plan on buying it when it comes out on DVD.

It goes without saying that the life of Wild Bill Hickok, along with several other frontiersmen, has become legendary to the point where it becomes caricature. Therefore, it is useful and informative to read some of the early accounts of these men's exploits - told before their stories were embellished unduly. When examining the lives of Hickok, Cody, and Custer the truth is more than enough. These men really were larger than life.

This film follows what seems to be a fairly typical pattern of telling considerable factual material, and then "completing" the story with invention. That is not my preference, because as mentioned above, the truth is more than enough. However, I'm glad just to have these movies made, and the Westerns of recent years are vastly superior to the "Classics" when it comes to authenticity.

Getting some feel for the real Hickok, and then seeing Jeff Bridges in the role with the artistry of modern Hollywood to create the character, left me agape. Surely, this is Hickok come to life! The people creating the time-piece sets and historic characters of these recent movies are good! Do yourself a favor and don't take this artistry for granted.

There is one scene in this movie I would like to single out for its exceptional artistry. That is the dream-like reminiscence of Hickok, along with California Joe, meeting a party of "Dog Soldiers," i.e. Cheyenne warriors. (The word Cheyenne comes from the French chien, meaning dog). The way in which these warriors and this meeting are portrayed creates a scene of haunting, mystical power.

The tales of the American frontier are stuff of great fascination. So much so that it was realized even back then, in "real" time. It is so wonderful to see these stories told with considerable authenticity that I can't begrudge the makers a bit of license with some facts, even though it just isn't necessary.

Just keep making these films. I'm far from tired of them.

I first viewed "Wild Bill" because it sounded like a great western, and at the time I was watching DVDs non-stop to help distract my attention from the extreme pain I was experiencing prior to surgery. I must have been more medicated than I remember, as I just watched the movie again, after purchasing it based on the fact that I "remembered" it as being a really terrific and enjoyable western, and I was appalled at the production errors and "historical bunk" in the film. Yet, while I did not enjoy it as much as I "remember" enjoying "Wild Bill," I still think that the film is terrific thanks to some truly memorable performances and crisp direction.

When I compare it to other films out there, and keep a "healthy thought" that "Wild Bill" is a movie about the "Legend" and not the "real, historical person," I find myself wanting to give the film five stars. Beyond a doubt, the film is one of Jeff Bridges finest performances; and the drama and action are awesome.

Then I remember counting the number of times Wild Bill fired his two pistols (which were pron to misfires) in the shoot out in the livery and I cringe. I cannot be certain, since the film does not actually always show Wild Bill's shots (you frequently just hear them, and see their effects), but I got a count of 29 rounds--more than double what he could have realistically fired. Nonetheless, the scene is pure excitement and deepens the "Legend" of Wild Bill. Conversely, I think the director did a marvelous job of editing in the great use of black and white "dreams" that help "recall" Wild Bill's "legendary life."

On the other hand, Charlie Utter, Hickok's friend and life-long companion is denigrated--or so I see it--into John Hurt's completely fictional character Charley Prince, an English gentleman who self proclaims himself, through Prince's narration of "Wild Bill," to be a fellow "drunk and gambler," who has become a "friend" (and traveling companion) to Wild Bill. While the funeral scene is better than many, it still failed to capture the true impact of Wild Bill's death on the community of Deadwood; and Charlie Utter's efforts to give the funeral dignity. Despite the fact that Wild Bill had been in Deadwood only a few days, according to historical accounts nearly every person in the camp--as well as many from elsewhere--attended the funeral; for even on August 3, 1876, it seems that "everyone" knew that a "true legend had come to an end."

Update--1 July 2008: If this review was not helpful to you, I would appreciate learning the reason(s) so I can improve my reviews. My goal is to provide help to potential buyers, not get into any arguments. So, if you only disagree with my opinion, could you please say so in the comments and not indicate that the review was not helpful. Thanks.

I have to agree with many of the other reviewers who feel that the movie is "spotty" - but Bridges is great..!

I've read quite abit about Hickok and the movie seems relatively accurate with respect to many of the historical incidents that pre-dated Hickok's arrival in Deadwood. In fact, it's the flashbacks that I enjoyed the most - the gunfight in the main square / street - with Dave Tutt / the accidental killing of his own deputy in Abilene / the "fight" with the soldiers in the saloon/ the gunfight with the McCandles crew and a few others.

I honestly don't know if Hickok really felt murderous when somebody mistreated his hat, but it was a nice touch.

And Jeff Bridges was great in the role. He talked the part and certainly looked the part (kudos to the wardrobe person who "dressed" Hickok - he/ she certainly did his homework - the clothes and hat were perfect..!). And the pearl handled 1851 Navy Colt revolvers tucked into a red sash around the waist was exactly Hickok's setup.

I think the movie captured the absolute fearlessness of Hickok. From everything I've read, the man had ice water running through his veins. His incredible prowess and marksmanship with his pistols - coupled with his complete indifference to the bullets whizzing by him during the gunfights contributed significantly to his legend. He was one of those guys who was truly a legend in his own time.

The movie dragged for me in the middle. The amount of time devoted to jack McCall - the twirp who shot and killed him - just seemed to drag on forever. Jack's inability to decide whether or not to shoot Hickok throughout the movie just seemed to be be stretched out to the point where I felt like grabbing a gun - entering the tv - and putting a windown in Jack McCall's skull.

Three stars might be a bit on the low side but 4 is probably too much - 3 1/2 is what this film is worth.

But if you love westerns as much as me, it's worth watching if only for Jeff Bridge's performance.

This fine portrayal of Bill Hickock's Times is a must for any adult whom enjoys a bit of fact mixed with fiction. Jeff Bridges does an Academy Award representation of the man feared by most during the 1870's.( That is, I would have given him the award.) His talk and demeanor bring you to the core of an uneducated man whom learned survival the hard way. Ellen Arkin also shines as Calamity Jane with her strong character and fears for Bill. The movies town set and other characters place you in the rough and tumble days at the end of the old West, when civilization was just beginning to open up the wild frontier. If you enjoy the sight of a crack shot with blazing guns and the acting of Jeff Bridges, you need to see this " hidden jewel ".

Could be good as a stand-alone Western; excellent sets, costumes, etc., but has very little to do with Wild Bill Hickok. While Jeff Bridges makes a great Wild Bill, the story loses all credibility as soon as he steps off the stage in Deadwood and is met by Jack McCall, who announces his intentions to kill W.B., then rides off to gather a gang of hoodlems to help him accomplish the feat. Absolutely no semblence whatsoever to reality, especially in the final confrontation at the No.10 saloon. Contains scenes that have become cliche in films, such as (my favorite) when Wild Bill shoots it out with McCall's gang, firing at least thirty shots from each of his cap-n-ball six shooters without reloading. If you are interested in the real Wild Bill, I suggest you read "They Called Him Wild Bill - The Life and Times of Wild Bill Hickok" by Joseph G. Rosa - available from Amazon. If you want a well made western, this isn't bad, just keep in mind that this is FANTASY. If you are interested in Wild Bill Hickok, give this one a MAJOR pass.

I popped this disc out with 20 minutes left to go, unable to bear the ludicrous turns of plot. This film started out well enough, with a gritty Western atmosphere and plenty of loud, smoky gunplay as Jeff Bridges' Wild Bill Hickok shoots down men by the roomful. Bridges is a scruffy, perpetually hungover and somehow likable Wild Bill Hickok. He chews the scenery like an out-of-control rock star. It's fun at first, but ultimately his character is hard to care for. That's important, because from the get-go, you know what's coming for Wild Bill at the end. For that reason, the filmmakers' biggest challenge was to make you care for ol' Bill. But Bridges and the scriptwriters fall wide of the mark. (In contrast, Keith Carradine sets the world-weary gunfighter bar high with his portrayal of W.B. in "Deadwood.") Sure, Bridges's Wild Bill is humorous and quirky, but his character does so many outrageous, over-the-top things -- punching, insulting, and generally running roughshod over folks -- that you can't help but think "Oh, he's askin' for it" or "No real gunfighter would do that!" The real Hickock was shot in the back of the head by Jack McCall, an no-account drifter who had lost to Hickok in cards. The Jack McCall of this film, however, is out to avenge his mother, a former lover of Hickok's who, her son thinks, was cruelly abandoned by the gunslinger turned professional gambler. But it gets even better: McCall -- SPOILERS AHEAD -- pays a motley crew of lowlifes a sum of one thousand dollars (today worth about, what, a million?) to kill Hickok. They catch him by surprise while he's -- get this -- coupling with Calamity Jane on top of a poker table. (For me, that's when the movie jumped the shark.) But then the bad guys, instead of killing Hickok right there on the spot (which is usually what hired killers do) force him and other residences of his hotel to play poker. Why they did this I never did find out, because that's when the screening of "Wild Bill" was cut short by the eject button. --MellowMonk.com

I couldn't wait to see this video, but found it to be a muddled mess of historical inaccuracy. It strives to be the story of how Hickcock, a major celebrity of his day, allowed himself to believe in his own legend, only to be reminded in the final hours of his life what he missed in trying to live up to it. It is a noble idea, but ultimately fails. I had hoped it would be along the lines of "Wyatt Earp", a sometimes plodding but at least historically accurate film, but it doesn't even get close.