Whenever I’ve participated in the Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathon, I, more often than not, review a movie from the Western genre. Since I review Western genre films so infrequently, this blogathon serves as a good opportunity to expand my cinematic horizons. For the 2024 edition, I decided to select a title that has been recommended to me. Suggested by J-Dub from Dubsism, I am reviewing the 1966 film, El Dorado! Years ago, I saw pieces of this movie. At the time, I thought it was boring. But I was willing to give El Dorado a second chance, wondering if my perspective had changed. I also have seen very few films from John Wayne’s filmography. So, reviewing this film gave me a chance to check out more of his movies!
Things I liked about the film:
The on-screen chemistry: Relationships in movies, whether romantic or platonic, can come across believably on screen if there is a strong sense of chemistry between the actors. This is what happened in El Dorado! Toward the beginning of the movie, J.P., portrayed by Robert Mitchum, meets up with Cole, portrayed by John Wayne, to talk about a potential job opportunity. Cole and J.P. carry no-nonsense demeanors, but their cordialness to each other shows the respect between them. The scene’s mood becomes lighter when Maudie, portrayed by Charlene Holt, shows up. Her friendly, playfulness emphasizes the friendship these characters share. When Maudie talks about her late husband and Cole with J.P., the empathetic reflection indicates how much she cares about both Cole and J.P.. Not only was there strong on-screen chemistry among the actors, this strong on-screen chemistry was consistent throughout the film. The on-screen relationships were interesting to watch because of these factors!
The dialogue: One of the most important components of a movie’s script is the dialogue. Through dialogue, characters can memorably stand-out, important information can be shared, and characters’ problems can be solved. The quality of a script’s dialogue depends on how well written it is. While watching El Dorado, I took note of the cleverness of the dialogue. After a son from the MacDonald family dies, Cole visits the family to share the sad news. The patriarch of the family, Kevin, asks what happened, with Cole telling him how he got “a boy to do a man’s work”. Later, when Cole returns to El Dorado, he reconnects with J.P.. When J.P. asks Cole what he’s doing back in El Dorado, Cole tells his friend, “I’m lookin’ at a tin star with a…drunk pinned on it”. Dialogue like the two examples I provided show how cleverly words were used as well as the eloquent ways intended points were phrased.
Breen Code Era moments: As I’ve explained before on 18 Cinema Lane, the Breen Code was a series of guidelines studios had to follow between 1934 and 1954. El Dorado was released in 1966, a decade after the Breen Code Era ended. However, there were moments sprinkled throughout the movie that felt reminiscent of the Breen Code Era. Before Cole leaves El Dorado, he kisses Maudie. The kiss itself isn’t shown on-screen because Cole’s hat is blocking their faces. When Mississippi, portrayed by James Caan, is first introduced to the audience, he uses a knife in self-defense against a man he claims killed his friend. As Mississippi retrieves his knife, the aforementioned man is hidden behind a table to prevent some of the violence from being shown on screen. The way these moments were written and presented were thoughtful presentations of an era gone by.
What I didn’t like about the film:
A prolonged conflict: Before watching El Dorado, I had seen two of John Wayne’s films: Stagecoach and Allegheny Uprising. In those movies, the story revolves around an overarching conflict some of the characters are consistently trying to resolve. While there was an overarching conflict in El Dorado, it primarily resided in the film’s second half. The first half of the movie consisted of a series of loosely connected vignettes. These vignettes, more often than not, contained low stakes. El Dorado’s first and second halves felt like they belonged in their own separate movies.
Inconsistent sense of urgency: Like I just said when talking about El Dorado’s prolonged conflict, the first half of the movie was a series of loosely connected vignettes, while the film’s overarching conflict resided in the story’s second half. Within the second half of the movie, scenes containing low stakes were woven into the production. One example is Cole addressing a back injury he received earlier in the story. El Dorado’s two halves and the low stakes scenes from the film’s second half are two reasons why this movie’s sense of urgency was inconsistent.
Enabling the Sheriff: J.P., the Sheriff of El Dorado, develops an alcohol addiction due to a romantic relationship gone wrong. When Cole and Mississippi go to El Dorado, they, as well as Bull, try to help J.P. overcome his addiction. Mississippi even creates a liquid concoction to sober J.P. up. But hours after receiving Mississippi’s concoction, J.P. is looking for alcohol. Bull tells J.P. exactly where a bottle of alcohol is located, in the upper left-hand drawer of his desk. Later that evening, Cole allows J.P. to go to the local saloon by himself, where he not only purchases a whole bottle of alcohol, he’s also laughed at by the film’s antagonists. J.P. does eventually become sober in order to help his friends. But toward the end of the movie, J.P. shares a shot of alcohol with Bull. If a screenwriter is going to incorporate a serious topic like addiction into their script, they need to be mindful about how that topic is included in the film. In my opinion, the way addiction was addressed in El Dorado could have been more thoughtful.
My overall impression:
El Dorado is not only the third film of John Wayne’s I’ve seen, it’s the second film of John’s I’ve reviewed. Out of these three films, Stagecoach, Allegheny Uprising, and El Dorado, I haven’t found a title that’s left a strong impression on me. Looking back on Stagecoach, I think the movie is just fine. Allegheny Uprising was ok. Now that I’ve seen El Dorado in its entirety, I feel the 1966 project is also ok. The two halves of this movie and the low stakes scenes woven into the movie’s second half are likely the reason for El Dorado’s inconsistent sense of urgency. The topic of addiction could have been handled in a more thoughtful way. However, the movie does have its strengths. Some of these strengths are the on-screen chemistry among the cast and how well the dialogue was written. Personally, I found El Dorado to be a mixed bag. Hopefully, the next film of John’s I watch and review will be stronger than this one.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen El Dorado? Which film from John Wayne’s filmography would you like me to review? Let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
18 Cinema Lane 