TownRootGuy
And Eastwood belting out sappy love songs is an 11! This is a must see show. It has outstanding tunes, a great cast AND you will shake with laughter in your golden calf, ankle, thigh and upper half.If you're looking for something different, here it is. I mean, here it is! It's really all about the soundtrack for me but you have to see the show at least once. I can watch this every year but I can listen to the soundtrack daily.
dworldeater
To be quite frank, I hate musicals in general, so the chances of me liking a movie of this type is slim to none. However it does have legends Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood teaming up for this one time engagement that caught my interest. I can understand why these guys chose this project as a departure from the tough guy roles they are normally cast in. However, if you are a fan of either star's work, Paint Your Wagon is a painful 3 hour experience that I wish on no one. Paint Your Wagon is an inane big budget flop that is pretentious, dated and criminally stupid. I'm sure the studios wished to court a more arty audience with this crap, but failed to generate success at the box office or receive acclaim from critics. Essentially Paint Your Wagon is lowbrow entertainment for a highbrow crowd. Any way you slice it, this film is crud. This western/comedy/musical was intended to be a huge hit by the studios. Paint Your Wagon is epic in scope with a huge cast, enormous great looking sets and great cinematography. On the technical end of things Paint Your Wagon is pretty solid. The epic treatment does not make up for the other film's faults, or why they even considered making this at all. The storyline is about as dumb as it gets and a cast of hundreds of extras and the frequent need to break into song can not and does not compensate for a story this bad. Clint, Lee and French actress Jean Seberg do their best to carry this garbage and make it somewhat watchable. Paint Your Wagon is an epic failure, disappointment and waste of time. While these guys are best known for their work in the action genre Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood are talented actors and artists. In fact some of Clint's left turns are some of his most interesting films. Either way, it worked out okay for those involved. Jean Seberg got a free trip to America, Lee Marvin got drunk and Clint Eastwood got to bang Jean Seberg. Plus they all got paid, however this is a bad film and watching this film is a complete waste of time.
russellalancampbell
The film has its detractors because of its running time and the quality of the singing from non-singing actors such as Eastwood and Marvin. Nevertheless, I always find a lot to enjoy when I watch the film. Strangely, when I saw the stage version of PYW, I was quite bored by the story and the songs which were sung by "better" voices but with a lot less character. I am sure Josh Logan knew that Lee Marvin's voice was not the note perfect baritone expected in a stage performance but it was the voice of a dishevelled and disillusioned yet crustily resilient gold prospector of the Californian gold rush.I love Marvin's work in virtually every film he did - although I think at times he hammed it up just a little too much in this film. For most of PYW though, his comic timing is perfect and his wryly philosophical "arias" are funny with the ring of a human truth.Perhaps my enjoyment of PYW is increased by my interest in gold rushes. Many of the key elements of gold fields life and gold diggers although perhaps not faithfully reproduced are nevertheless explored. Solid citizens like Eastwood's Pardner are transformed against their better judgement by gold fever into opportunistic and greedy scramblers for gold. Egalitarianism of the gold fields. People from all backgrounds and nations lived together as equals - except for the Chinese who were always the outsiders on the field. Women were scarce and men did come from miles away just to see a woman. Men often fainted at the sight of a woman on the fields. Who wouldn't have walked a mile or two to see Jean Seberg? And, of course, prostitution flourished.I am still thrilled at the moment that Harve Presnell steps up into frame and hits the line "Way out west.." Logan was right to get a real singer to do the one song that truly needed a powerful voice. The drama and pathos of the song is helped by the chorus of miners dolefully singing as the rain and wind exacerbates their alienation from the comforts of home and of female companionship. "They Call the Wind Mariah" in this film is a gem of sound and vision.I also love the scene in which Ben attempts to corrupt Horton, the young newcomer from a pious apple farming family, who unexpectedly and hilariously takes to drinking, cigar smoking and finally sex like a duck to water.Paint Your Wagon is not a classic but it is fun and has some excellent moments. Enjoy the good parts and try to forgive some of its excesses.
dimplet
While "Hello, Dolly!" is a movie that some viewers feel compelled to admire, "Paint Your Wagon" is a movie some viewers feel compelled to criticize. I don't feel compelled to do either. What counts is whether you enjoy a movie, not whether you are "supposed to" admire a movie. I did not enjoy "Hello, Dolly!" despite giving it my best try several times. But I have enjoyed watching "Paint Your Wagon," even with several viewings over the years. I enjoy musicals. As a kid in the Sixties I would borrow the LPs of the Broadway cast or movie soundtrack from the library, before there were VHS or DVDs. I enjoyed listening to the great songs. But now we don't have to limit ourselves to just the music excerpts. This provides a clue to the difference between these two musicals. "Hello, Dolly!" had some very good music, of a Broadway sort, so we assumed it was an equally good musical. "Paint Your Wagon" had musical roots going back to the Fifties, and was a musical non-entity."Hello, Dolly!" the movie has lots of good Broadway songs and incredibly lavish sets and dance numbers, which are its raison d'etre. But the movie has a plot that is astonishingly weak, in light of its Broadway success. Watching a fleet of dancing waiters performing absurd acrobatics is not my idea of fun."Paint Your Wagon" has some decent musical numbers, and some almost feeble attempts at dancing, but no one in their right mind would see it just for its music and dancing. So judged on that score, alone, it would rate a flop. But it's got a reasonably interesting story and very good acting, including a fine comic performance by Lee Marvin (!), not to mention some memorable croaking that passes for singing. If you snipped out all the singing and dancing, "Paint Your Wagon" would still be a film worth watching."Hello, Dolly!" on the other hand, has acting that varies from mediocre to miserably atrocious, and a story line you wouldn't pay more than $100 for someone to write. If you cut out the music and dancing, the audience would walk out. The sore point with "Paint Your Wagon" is its budget. Reviewers relish reminding people of its $18 million budget. But "Hello, Dolly!" cost $25 million, and they both came out in the same year (although Dolly was filmed earlier and shelved). Because so much money was wasted on Wagon, we are not supposed to enjoy it. While it is easy to put down the musical side of Wagon, it should be pointed out that Lerner and Lowe, Nelson Riddle and Andre Previn are hardly slouches. And Clint Eastwood acquits himself remarkably well. With Wagon, the producers wisely picked actors who were right for the part, and dealt with the singing later. What I find most curious in comparing the two, is that Dolly seems two or three times as long as Wagon, even though it has faster pacing and is 146 minutes long, to Wagon's 158 minutes. Dolly is rushed, and painful to watch, while Wagon has a relaxed pace and is fun to watch. It is nice to see a movie that is not in a hurry, though Wagon could fit its story line into a shorter movie.Part of the problem with Dolly is that it is a comedy that just is not funny. With Wagon, the humor is built into the awkward situations and odd characters, so it works with repeated viewings. But it is those situations that may provide the real clue to Wagon's hostile reception: it's menage a trois. It was rated "M," or "R" today, just because of its implied three-way sex. It is something viewers hardly notice today, but in 1969, Wagon must have been viewed as sneering at religion and all morality (which is about right). This may be why I like it so much, but it is also undoubtedly why some people despise this movie, even today. Wagon is the original louche musical.For some people, musicals are supposed to embody family values. Wagon ridicules them. It makes a mockery of marriage, while glorifying prostitution, drinking, cigar smoking, violence and thievery. Dolly, on the other hand, couldn't be more old- fashioned and square. You cannot imagine, in your wildest dreams, Matthau and Streisand having sex, and yet Matthau, out of the blue, proposes to her, without even a kiss. Now that's family values. Wagon certainly is not one of the great musicals, but it is still a fun movie worth watching when you have a long evening and a lot of popcorn handy. The bottom line: I find "Paint Your Wagon" entertaining, but "Hello, Dolly!" pretentious. Watching Wagon, or even just recollecting it, brings a smile to my face.
