CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

jazerbini It takes courage to make a new movie based on a story so well developed in 1939 by John Ford and starring John Wayne so magnificent, but Gordon Douglas decided to take the project forward and the result was not bad. The cast except Mike Connors and Bob Cummings (bad bad bad) is very good, especially Bing Crosby and Ann-Margret. Alex Cord is not up to John Wayne did not disappoint. It has good stage presence and fulfills its role. The final scenes, so different from its predecessor are explicit, while in 1939, John Ford chose to hide details of the final confrontation. Finally a movie is interesting and should be considered. It has more positives than negatives.

Michael_Elliott Stagecoach (1966)** (out of 4) Ann-Margret, Red Buttons, Alex Cord, Mike Connors, Bing Crosby, Stefanie Powers, Van Heflin and Slim Pickens star in this (first) remake of John Ford's 1939 classic. The storyline is the same as a group of people are traveling across Apache territory trying to put up with one another and fighting off the Indians. Having now seen all three versions of this, I think this one here is the weakest but neither remake can come close to Ford's original. There are some good moments in this film but there's just not enough to really make it worth viewing. There are some noticeable changes here including the fact that this one is in color and comes in a full 2.35:1 ratio, which makes for some interesting cinematography. The color also allows for some great visuals to jump off the screen. Another major change is that we get quite a bit more violence including a terrific opening where some men are attacked by the Indians in a full-on force that includes some surprisingly violent moments including one guy taking a fatal axe to the face. With that said, there's not too much else that works here. The performances are all a mixed bag and that includes Ann-Margaret who is great to look at but she does very little in the role. Buttons and Crosby fit into their roles well but the screenplay really doesn't give them much to work with. Pickens and Heflin add some minor charm but, again, the screenplay offers them very little. The biggest problem with the film is Cord playing the role originally done by John Wayne. I certainly didn't expect him to equal Wayne but his performance is just so wrong for this role and the lack of any real energy or chemistry with Ann-Margret pretty much kills everything. The final couple action scenes aren't too bad but in the end you do have to question why they bothered remaking the film and not trying to do a bit more with it.

Jim Although the 1966 remake of Stagecoach is not quite of the caliber of the 1939 version, this well done and very entertaining western is well worth a look, if only to see the beautiful color scenery in Cinemascope.Particularly notable among the cast is Bing Crosby, for once in a non singing role. His portrayal of the disgraced doctor with a taste for whiskey is a solid one, it proves that despite some of his later work (Say One for Me - 1959, etc), that the popular crooner could actually act.Alex Cord, (who is remembered for Gray Eagle - in which he portrays a Native American) is here to be seen as Ringo, and pulling a gun on the marauding "Indians" chasing the stagecoach, while trying to keep the sheriff from shooting him as an escapee, and he is in top form. Cord has not the screen presence of his predecessor in the role, John Wayne, but he carries the role off with a believable grittiness that is convincing, nonetheless.Not to demean Robert Cummings, whom I respect very much, and once worked with in films, I don't "believe" his character as the dishonest Banker, he has the right stuff, but doesn't seem able to show it off. His portrayal is nonetheless competent and does not detract from enjoyment of the film.The scenery is outstanding and Gordon Douglas and his cinematographer, William Clothier have done a fine job of giving this film an expansive and authentic look. The music is very good evoking the mood of the film as it changes from tense to exciting and back to tense. The final scenes were a trifle bloodier than the original film, and could have been less drawn out, but overall, the film works well. Just a word about the supporting cast. Ann Margaret is, as always, very fine; Red Buttons (See "Red" in Poseidon Adventure" for comparison) adds a certain comical manner to his role, which was a weak spot in the 1939 version. Mike Connors is convincing and gives the film a "familiar" feel (due to his many television roles, no doubt). Van Heflin is his usual solid self, giving his role all you would expect, but with a hint that given more to do, he would have pulled that off too. All in all, a satisfying if not top notch film, any western buff should find it very enjoyable. If you like Ernest Haycox's book (on which this film is based) "Stage to Lordsburg", you will love seeing his story in color, it really helps.

bombblasts I saw this version (1966) a few years ago and cannot find it available. I saw it on television. They continue to show the John Wayne version, which is good, but people want variety. Just because some people are so enthused with the Wayne , others should not be deprived of the 1966 movie. besides this version was in color. I owned a DVD of the Wayne version and at this point tired of it. The acting in my opinion is done very well and the characters they portray are very believable. I especially like Ann-Margret's character. and Slim pickens adds a bit of humor. The color and the western scenes are just beautiful. Let those of us who like the 1966 version have it, please. I cannot find it at Best Buy, Tower Records, or anywhere else. What's going on here? THAT'S ABOUT ALL that I have to say.