Sunday, March 04, 2007

Tears Of The Black Tiger

Tears of the Black Tiger
I have a couple problems with this still from "Tears of the Black Tiger". Starting on the left -- what's that ring on the base of the butt of the revolver wielded by Cowboy #1? I did extensive research and found that this is for the securing of the firearm by a cord which is tied to the wearer's belt so that, should the weapon fall out of the holster, it won't go far. Well. What cowboy would allow their Colt 45 to 'fall' out of their holster? Certainly, any self-respecting cowpoke would not remove his six-shooter (or allow it to accidentally fall) from his holster unless he intended to shoot some low-down snake that had it coming. So, the silly ring is an egregious historical error.

Point 2: What's with the shoulder holster? What kind of fancy-pants cowboy would use a shoulder holster? Did we even have shoulder holsters in the Old West? I think not.

Point 3: Check out the grip Cowboy #2 is using. I'm sorry, but that grip was not used in the Old West. Not, at least, the one immortalized in movies like the ones John Ford made...with actors like John sir! Not on your life. You held your weapon, firmly and steadily, in one hand. Every Red-Blooded Cowboy knew that. The two-handed grip was, well, too duded-up for most and if you used it you weren't welcome around the campfire. This grip is more suitable for Hong Kong cop-action movies or anything with Tom Cruise.

Tears of the Black Tiger

Okay, what about this frame? Is this the way Ford would shoot a shootout? Between the legs?

Compare this with the approach seen below in Sergio Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West".

Once Upon a Time in the West

As you can clearly see, there is about to be a shootout and we are not viewing it from between anybody's legs -- classical and good.

"Tears of the Black Tiger" has a super-saturated colorized look, deft acting, and is an over-the-top parody that looks like a lot of fun. Seattle Times reviewer Jeff Shannon says:

...It's also encouraging proof that unique movies will always find their audience. After wowing critics at Cannes in 2001, "Tears" languished in distribution limbo until Magnolia Pictures stepped up with a nominal release. Cinephiles who've been drooling over the film's Day-Glo publicity stills will now discover that the festival-circuit buzz was justified.

Despite my silly (and believe me, [just in case there's someone out there who took me seriously], tongue-in-cheek) above-cited aesthetic gripes, I plan on seeing this movie.

No comments:

Blog Archive