When an actor or actress is celebrating a birthday, I will sometimes write about a project from their filmography and publish that article on their birthday. This has given me an excuse to check out a movie or television show I haven’t seen before. Because July 11th is Stephen Lang’s birthday, I found a perfect opportunity to finally see the 1993 western, Tombstone! This is a movie I not only have heard of before, I have heard the movie receive consistent praise over the years. It’s even earned the coveted title of “classic” within the western genre. Though I have covered some movies from this particular genre on 18 Cinema Lane, I had no idea how Tombstone was going to stand out among those other titles. Now that I’ve seen the 1993 picture, I found an answer to that question. But you have to read my review to discover what that answer is!
Tombstone poster created by Hollywood Pictures, Cinergi Pictures Entertainment, Alphaville Films, and Buena Vista Pictures Distribution
Things I liked about the film:
Historical accuracy: In my recent review of Young Washington, I praised the film’s creative team for effectively executing their project’s historical accuracy. Because of how well-done that storytelling element was, the creative team behind Young Washington successfully created an illusion of immersion. Tombstone also possessed the illusion of immersion due to the efforts of that movie’s creative team. From the construction of the town itself to the artwork on a wall at the Bird Cage Theatre, the appearance of the film and its finer details effectively reflect Tombstone’s respective time period of the late 1800s. An example of how this particular time period was brought back to life was through the characters’ wardrobe. In a scene where Wyatt Earp goes for a horse ride with Josephine, Josephine wears elegant yet practical riding attire. Sporting a black tailored jacket and a long black skirt, she adds a black and white polka dot scarf as well as a black top hat adorned with black and white ribbons. Finishing the ensemble is a pair of simple black gloves. Josephine even rode side-saddle, what would have been the appropriate way for a woman to ride a horse at that time. The example I presented in this review visually represents the research and attention to detail that went into Tombstone’s presentation!
Interconnected stories: Tombstone is a movie known for its large cast of characters. At the beginning of the film, the characters are shown engaging in their own separate part of the story. Whether it’s the Cowboys rudely interrupting a wedding or Doc Holliday winning a poker game, the first minutes of Tombstone let the audience know everyone who is featured in the movie has an important role to play. As the film progresses, each separate story becomes interconnected. Characters who may seem like strangers are actually revealed to be friends. The actions caused by one character greatly impact another character. And crossed paths develop consequences. These interconnections between characters allowed on-screen interactions to contain a strong sense of intrigue. That intrigue kept me invested in what was happening in Tombstone!
The acting: Because Stephen Lang is the reason why I’m reviewing Tombstone, I have to talk about his performance first. Though he appeared in the film for a limited period of time as Ike Clanton, Stephen’s portrayal was very memorable! This memorability was due to his expressiveness and animated reactions. Yet, Stephen’s animation never came across as over-the-top or too “cartoony”. Instead, he effectively utilized a variety of emotions which helped him stand out among the ensemble cast. One of Stephen’s best moments in Tombstone is when Ike is watching a play involving Faust, the confused look on Ike’s face appearing completely genuine. I also liked Sam Elliott’s portrayal of Virgil Earp, Wyatt’s brother. In a scene where Virgil receives bad medical related news, a combination of fear, anger, and sadness are present in his eyes, through the frown on his mouth, and even within the muscle control throughout his face. Virgil’s wife, Allie (portrayed by Paula Malcomson), is also upset by the news Virgil receives. Her tear-streaked face says so much without saying anything at all. Even as she yells at Wyatt, the anger in her voice holds an intensity that forces Wyatt (and the audience) to take her seriously. But besides these three performances I brought up, the cast as a whole gave solid portrayals throughout Tombstone!
Since I’m reviewing Tombstone on Stephen Lang’s birthday, I thought including a picture of his character, Ike Clanton, in this review made sense. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
What I didn’t like about the film:
Glossed over parts of the story: There were a few parts of Tombstone’s story that became glossed over as the movie progressed. One of those glossed over parts involved Wyatt’s wife, Mattie. Toward the beginning of the film, Mattie seeks to receive laudanum in order to cure a headache. Yet, she refuses to visit a doctor when Wyatt suggests it. Later in the movie, Mattie is seen drinking a bottle of opium. These displayed behaviors imply she is battling an addiction. But none of the other characters, including Wyatt, address Mattie’s concerning issue. In historical/period stories like Tombstone, a storyline involving addiction will sometimes be woven into the script. Usually, these storylines will not only be addressed in that respective story, they will also be treated with a sense of respect, as addiction is a serious, real-world topic. With everything said, I wish Mattie’s part of the story had received some more attention within Tombstone’s overarching story.
The underutilization of Billy Zane: In movies containing ensemble casts, an actor or actress may sometimes become underutilized due to how much screen-time the cast needs to share. The case of Tombstone shows Billy Zane as an underrated performer within the film. Portraying a stage actor named Mr. Fabian, Mr. Fabian represents something beautiful that came to the ugliness of Tombstone, according to Josephine. Billy’s appearances in Tombstone were so limited, he was present in only three scenes within the first half of the movie. He doesn’t show up in the film again until toward the end of the story, when the actions of the Cowboys and Wyatt’s group have taken their toll on Mr. Fabian. Taking Josephine’s words into consideration, I was disappointed Mr. Fabian wasn’t utilized more in the story, as a way to achieve peace within Tombstone. But I guess as a stage actor, there was only so much he could have done to find a solution to the town’s conflict.
Half of the story feeling “slice of life”: The overarching conflict of Tombstone involves the Cowboys and Wyatt alongside his brothers and Doc fighting over control of Tombstone. But this conflict doesn’t really become the story’s central focus until the second half of the movie. In the film’s first half, the emphasis is placed on the “slice of life” aspect of the characters residing in Tombstone. While it was interesting to catch a glimpse of life within the late 1800s, the intrigue wasn’t as consistent in the movie’s first half as it was in the second half. In fact, as I watching the first half of Tombstone, I honestly wondered why this story wasn’t a television show instead of a movie?
As I said in the introduction of this review, I chose to write about Tombstone in honor of Stephen Lang’s birthday. Therefore, I was looking forward to seeing his performance in this movie. While I did witness a very memorable portrayal of Ike Clanton, there is so much more this film gave me. The cast as a whole was strong, which made each performance enjoyable to watch. The research and attention to detail put into Tombstone’s historical accuracy allowed the movie’s creative team to achieve an illusion of immersion. Interconnections between characters’ stories added intrigue to characters’ on-screen interactions. Though the film gave me an enjoyable movie-viewing experience, there were flaws that held it back from being stronger. I wish the overarching story had consistently focused on the conflict for control over Tombstone. I also wish Mattie’s part of the story had received some more attention in the script. Seeing Billy Zane’s talents become underutilized was disappointing as well. But despite these flaws, I can recognize why Tombstone is highly regarded by fans of the western genre!
Overall score 7.3-7.4 out of 10
Have you seen Tombstone? Are there any films from the western genre you’d like to see me review? Let me know in the comment section!
2026 marks the 250th birthday of the United States of America’s founding. Because of this major milestone, MovieRob selected July’s Genre Grandeur theme as “Red, White and Blue Movies”. This means a chosen film has to deal “with The American Revolution, American Patriotism or related to the 4th itself”. For my selection, Young Washington, I had planned to publish my review on July 4th. But because of my schedule at the time, I didn’t get the chance to see the 2026 picture as soon as I had hoped. Now that I’ve seen the movie, I can finally post my review for MovieRob’s Genre Grandeur Blogathon! As I already mentioned in this introduction, a chosen film for the event had to deal “with The American Revolution”. When George Washington appears in entertainment media revolving around this period in history, the story itself focuses on what led up to the signing of The Declaration of Independence. In Young Washington, however, the story explores the events that shaped George into the leader history remembers him as today. Reflecting on The American Revolution related pieces of entertainment media I’ve seen, heard, or read, Young Washington’s approach to this specific time period seems to have addressed a creative void.
Young Washingtonposter created by Wonder Project, 2521 Entertainment, Angel, Provident Films, Radar Pictures, Red 56, Ten Ton Studio, and Wild Atlantic Pictures
Things I liked about the film:
Incorporation of the story’s natural landscape: IMDB lists Ireland as Young Washington’s primary filming location. Yet the story is set in Virginia. Since the majority of the movie takes place outdoors, the forest landscape of America’s tenth state was given center-stage through long and medium shots. Clear blue waters, rolling green hills, and what appears to be pine trees literally and figuratively represent the “calm before the storm”, as the Ohio Territories are at the center of a major conflict. This same landscape was also shown at different times of the day as well as in different climates. On a few occasions, snow covered the forest floor and trees. Paired with a gray-blue sky, this landscape visually presented a peaceful environment, despite the uncertainty this type of terrain brings. The incorporation of Young Washington’s natural landscape added natural beauty to the film. This creative decision also reminded me of Europe’s natural landscape receiving importance in I Am David, showing a side of the United States of America that could be easily taken for granted.
The acting: As I just mentioned in this review, the Ohio Territories are at the center of a major conflict in Young Washington. The reason is because the French desire to claim the land as their own. In order to convince the French to leave, George is tasked with persuading a French military officer named Joseph Jumonville. In a scene where George negotiates with Joseph, Joseph, at first, appears very jovial. His huge smile, jolly demeanor, and laughter gives George (and the audience) the impression things will go George’s way. But as soon as George addresses the French residing on the Ohio Territories, Joseph’s attitude immediately changes. His intense stare and sharp tone of voice lets George (as well as the audience) know he means business. Joseph’s change in attitude causes a shift in the scene’s atmosphere, raising the stakes of the situation. Despite having a limited presence in Young Washington, Joseph became such a memorable part of the movie! That’s because the actor who portrayed Joseph, Clement Toyon, gave a performance that was captivating due to his flawless transition between attitudes. With that said, I wish Joseph made a few more appearances in the film.
While George and a surveyor named Christopher are surveying the Ohio Territories, they cross paths with Half-King Tanacharison. Similar to Joseph Jumonville, Half-King Tanacharison appears in Young Washington for a limited period of time. Also similar to Clement Toyon’s portrayal of Joseph, Half-King Tanacharison was so memorable because of Ryan Begay’s performance! Whenever he showed up in the story, Half-King Tanacharison carried himself with a strong confidence, his demeanor letting others know how he should be taken seriously. At the same time, Half-King Tanacharison carried a gentleness which emphasized how he was a leader who sought fairness. These combined characteristics in demeanor allowed Ryan’s performance to contain a commanding presence. Because we’re on the subject of leaders, I must talk about William Franklyn-Miller’s portrayal of George Washington! Like I said about Liev Schreiber’s portrayal of Orson Welles in RKO 281 and Tom Hulce’s portrayal of Amadeus in Amadeus, William brought humanity back to George’s name by finding the heart of the “genius” and putting some genuine emotion behind it. What I also liked about William’s performance is how it possessed a strong sense of realism. This element didn’t show an actor portraying a historical figure, but, instead, a young man becoming the leader he was destined to be. Working in William’s favor as well is his understanding how to utilize emotion and when to increase or decrease the intensity of those emotions.
Historical accuracy: Filmmakers have the ability to create the illusion of immersion. This illusion makes the audience feel immersed in a movie’s world, giving them a reason to stay invested in the story. One way to achieve the illusion of immersion is through historical accuracy. When a film’s creative team adopts that element of storytelling, research and attention to detail must be prioritized in order to effectively bring the chosen time period back to life. While watching Young Washington, the historical accuracy could be seen as well as felt! One of my favorite examples is when George attends a party at the Belvoir plantation. Every room within the plantation is lit by candles. Throughout scenes taking place at the plantation, the lighting was consistently dim. Looking back on the movies I’ve seen (and even reviewed) relying on historical accuracy, I never thought about how a film’s lighting could affect a film’s historical accuracy, let alone illusion of immersion. The example I brought up of the dim lighting in Young Washington allows the audience to grasp how different lighting options were in the 1700s.
The dialogue: An underrated film-making element is the quality of a script’s dialogue. If the dialogue among a movie’s characters is good, it can become a memorable component of the movie itself. As I watched Young Washington, there was dialogue that stood out to me because of how good it was! When George applies for the British Army, he is ultimately rejected due to his social status. To prove his worth, George presents his collection of quotes he wrote down while being tutored by his half-brother, Lawrence. But George is told how an imitation of great men doesn’t make him one. This quote not only encourages George to forge his own path in life, it also foreshadows George’s future. Earlier in the story, Lawrence teaches George how to play chess. During the lesson, Lawrence says how a pawn can take a king. This quote was, once again, clever foreshadowing, as George’s role in the American Revolution helped the Thirteen Colonies break away from a king ruled government to form the United States of America. The two examples of dialogue I presented in this review show how much thought and effort went into the screenwriting as well as how the dialogue was delivered!
Inconsistent incorporation of subtitles: Earlier in this review, I brought up how George and Christopher cross paths with Half-King Tanacharison while surveying the Ohio Territories. Christopher and Half-King Tanacharison share a conversation, despite never meeting before. Half-King Tanacharison and Christopher’s conversation is not in English, yet no subtitles appear on the screen during their conversation. But any other time characters speak to one another in a language that isn’t English, subtitles are present on the screen. This inconsistency became noticeable to me by the third non-English conversation characters shared in Young Washington.
A missing “And then what happened” segment: In movies based on true stories, there is sometimes a segment toward the end of the movie explaining what happened to the story’s key individuals after the events presented in the movie. But Young Washington lacked this kind of segment. Toward the end of the 2026 film, on-screen text reveals a few of the events leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence. However, what happened to key people from Young Washington, like Sally Cary, David Frisk, and even Robert Dinwiddie, was not brought up. This creative decision left me disappointed, as I wanted to know more about the people in the story.
Some underutilized talent: Before watching Young Washington, I knew Kelsey Grammer starred in the movie. From what I remember, he was heavily featured in the movie’s marketing. At the end of the film, Kelsey himself delivered a message on the film’s importance. Yet he appeared in Young Washington in two scenes as Lord Fairfax. One of my family members almost forgot Kelsey was cast in the movie due to his very limited screen-time. While I understand why Kelsey starred in the film for a short period of time, this was one example where, to me, talent was underutilized.
Since colonial style hats were worn throughout Young Washington, including a photo of the small colonial style hat from my Oh Lil Christmas Tree collection made sense. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
My overall impression:
The best way I can describe Young Washington is a “hero’s journey” woven into a history lesson. Throughout the 2026 movie, the audience sees George experience both trials and triumphs. What the audience of Young Washington also sees is solid acting performances, immersive historical accuracy, and a beautiful forest landscape. They can hear dialogue that is well written and delivered, as well as good messages and themes. Another strength of Young Washington is the ebb and flow between action-heavy, suspenseful scenes and quieter, slower-paced scenes. This ebb and flow maintained the story’s intrigue, keeping me invested in what was happening on screen. There are flaws within the 2026 picture, like inconsistent incorporation of subtitles and some underutilized talent. But, in my opinion, there’s a lot Young Washington got right when it comes to film-making. Now that we’re at the halfway point of 2026, I can honestly say I’ve seen more movies, so far, I liked than didn’t. Young Washington is one of those films belonging to the first category of movies I liked!
Overall score: 8 out of 10
Have you seen Young Washington? Is there a movie set around the American Revolution you like? Please tell me in the comment section!
Have you come across a movie that fell into your lap at the right place and time? That’s what happened before I reviewed the 1985 television film, Playing with Fire. This is a movie I not only had never seen, I had never heard of. But that changed when I listened to the Telehell Podcast episode, ‘The Top 8 Darkest Moments in Kids TV Cartoons’, as the upcoming episode about Playing with Fire was advertised at the end of the episode about the darkest moments from kids TV cartoons. According to Telehell’s episode, ‘Prologue of Fire (“Playing with Fire” PREVIEW)’, the 1985 movie was considered “lost media” up until 2024. As someone interested in the subject of “lost media”, I think it’s worth celebrating when a sought-after piece of “lost media” like Playing with Fire not only gets found, but is also archived on Youtube. For any “lost media” that was eventually found, however, one has to wonder why it was “lost” in the first place? In this review of Playing with Fire, I hope to find an answer to that question!
Playing with Fire(1985) poster created by New World Television, Zephyr Productions, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)
Things I liked about the film:
Characters who subvert expectations: In Playing with Fire, Mike Harris is a friend of the protagonist, David. Based on his personality and appearance, Mike would be considered a “bully” in other ‘80s entertainment media. Throughout the 1985 movie, he teases David, pulls pranks, and doesn’t seem to take school seriously. But when David starts a fire in a trash can (because he was upset Mike wouldn’t play basketball with him), Mike pulled David away from the fire as well as encouraged David to pull their school’s fire alarm in order to get help. Mike even warns a fellow student named Pamela about David’s issues. These actions and choices help Mike subvert expectations, showing the audience how, despite his initial introduction, he actually cares about David’s wellbeing.
Entertainment media from the ‘80s that revolves around younger characters will sometimes feature a school principal who is a stickler for the rules. This creative decision may be made to either emphasize how much “cooler” the younger characters are or to show how the principal is holding the younger characters back from being themselves. But in Playing with Fire, Principal Sweeney subverts those aforementioned expectations. In a meeting between Principal Sweeney and David’s parents, Principal Sweeney acknowledges how intelligent David is. He’s also brutally honest about how it’s the responsibility of David’s parents to help David with his problems. Principal Sweeney even puts David on probation in an attempt to assist David in resolving his issues. Because of the subversion of expectations, Principal Sweeney is presented as a character who actually prioritizes the wellbeing of all his students.
The role of Fire Chief Walker: Throughout Playing with Fire, Fire Chief Walker tries to solve the mystery of who started a series of fires around his neighborhood. He wants David to admit he’s responsible for creating the fires. But Fire Chief Walker doesn’t want David to tell the truth in order to arrest him. Instead, he believes David is worth saving. Fire Chief Walker encourages David’s family to seek out family counselling, in order to help them solve their personal problems. He also encourages David to talk to his parents about how he feels, acknowledging how David is causing fires for a reason. It would have been easy for the creative team behind Playing with Fire to show their protagonist simply facing the consequences of his actions. Instead, the role of Fire Chief Walker shows how there is more than one way to solve a problem, with a way being getting to the heart of an issue to resolve it as well as preventing it from escalating.
Showing the reasons behind the behavior: The synopsis for Playing with Fire on IMDB gives David the label of “teenage arsonist”, due to how often he starts fires. The creative team behind the movie could have focused on David’s problematic behavior in order to give their project “shock value”. But instead, the script emphasizes the reasons behind the behavior. Sparks fly (literally and figuratively) due to David’s parents having marital issues. These issues cause a domino effect in David’s life, from failing grades at school to becoming easily angry. Starting fires is a manifestation of David’s unresolved feelings toward the problems within David’s parents’ marriage. By showing the reasons behind David’s behavior, the creative team behind Playing with Fire gives their audience a reason to empathize with David and his family.
Campfire with marshmellows and shooting stars image created by macrovector at freepik.com.
What I didn’t like about the film:
David as a static character: As I already mentioned in this review, showing the reasons behind David’s behavior gives the audience a reason to empathize with David and his family. But for the majority of Playing with Fire, David remained a static character. He doesn’t come to terms with his decision to start fires until an hour and forty-seven minutes into an hour and fifty-five-minute movie. This means he spends more time remaining bitter and angry about the problems in his life instead of transforming his life for the better over the course of the story. I recognize resolving problems like David’s takes time. But the static status of David held back his character development.
Fire related scenes feeling like PSAs: David starts multiple fires over the course of Playing with Fire. While these moments are frightening due to how dangerous they are, it felt like the story shifted to present a somewhat subtle PSA (public service announcement) about fire safety. One way this feeling is achieved is how causes of fire or safety measures are heavily emphasized. In a scene where David causes his first fire within his home, his mother asks him how the fire started. David explains how an overloaded electrical socket was likely the cause, followed by a close-up shot of an overloaded electrical socket. This approach to the fire related scenes made the overall movie kind of seem like an “afterschool special”.
The disappearance of Mike and Pamela: Like I mentioned earlier in this review, Mike is a friend of David who actually cares about his friend’s wellbeing. Pamela is also a friend of David, someone who kind of understands how David feels due to her parents’ divorce. Both of these characters were interesting. While Mike was subverting expectations, I wanted to see where Pamela’s character development went as the story progressed. But Pamela and Mike disappear from the story after about the film’s halfway point. Even though Pamela returns toward the end of Playing with Fire, she’s only on screen for almost four minutes. I wish Mike and Pamela played a more consistent role in the story, as they could have represented what to do if someone is afraid to speak up or doesn’t know how to help a loved one.
In the introduction of my review, I said I hoped to find an answer to the question of how Playing with Fire became “lost” in the first place. Now that I’ve seen the movie for myself, I think the movie just, simply, fell through the cracks of time. The way I feel about the 1985 movie is similar to the way I felt about the 1988 television film, Dance ‘Til Dawn; it didn’t go above and beyond enough to be considered good or great, but it wasn’t offensive enough to be bad or even disappointing. While there were elements of Playing with Fire I liked, such as how showing the reasons behind David’s behavior gives the audience a reason to empathize with David and his family, there were flaws that held the movie back from being a stronger picture. Some of these flaws include keeping David a static character for the majority of the movie, fire related scenes feeling like somewhat subtle PSAs, and Mike and Pamela disappearing from the story. At best, Playing with Fire is ok. It seems like the creative team behind the 1985 presentation had their hearts in the right place. But, at worst, the film feels like an hour and fifty-five-minute PSA about fire safety. There was even a video message at the end of Playing with Fire where Gary Coleman (the actor who portrayed David) explains the dangers of arson. With everything said, it’ll be interesting to hear what the consensus what will be for the movie on the Telehell Podcast.
Overall score: 6-6.1 out of 10
Have you seen Playing with Fire? Is there a piece of “lost media” you’d like to see become discovered? Let me know in the comment section!
Have fun at the movies!
Sally Silverscreen
If you want to check out the podcast episodes I referenced in this review, visit the Youtube channel, Telehell Podcast, and listen to the episodes, ‘The Top 8 Darkest Moments in Kids TV Cartoons’ and ‘Prologue of Fire (“Playing with Fire” PREVIEW)’.
June’s theme for Genre Grandeur is “Movies With Genre Bending themes”. I spent a lot of time researching potential titles due to how specific this theme is. But with this month’s Genre Grandeur overlapping with the Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathon, I chose the 2007 movie, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. According to an article of The 10 Best Genre-Bending Movies Of All Time from the website, Taste of Cinema, “What makes the film [The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford] one of the true genre-bending westerns is how it chooses to present it mythology of the west”. The author of the article, Mark Serravalle, explained how “The characters are more life-like and complicated than how they are made out in the stories that are told about them”. I will admit that, even though I’ve heard of him, I know very little about Jesse James. In fact, the titles I’ve selected for past Legends of Western Cinema Week Blogathons have revolved around either fictional or fictionalized stories. Therefore, reviewing The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is not only a learning opportunity for 18 Cinema Lane, it’s allowing my blog to travel newer paths within the realm of blogathons.
The acting: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford received two nominations at the 80th Academy Awards. One of those nominations was given to Casey Affleck for his portrayal of the titular Robert Ford. Looking back on the 2007 movie, I can agree with the Academy’s decision! What I liked about Casey’s performance is his ability to say so much without saying anything at all. A perfect example is when Robert is reflecting on the similarities he and Jesse share. Throughout this recollection, Robert appears disappointed and even defeated. His eyes and the slight frown his mouth adopts give these feelings away. But every now and then, a smile shows up on Robert’s face and his eyebrows even move upwards. This moment effectively illustrates how Robert has become disillusioned by the reality of who Jesse really is, yet fondly remembers his fabricated image of him.
If I had to be brutally honest, I think Brad Pitt should have been nominated for his portrayal of Jesse James. This is because, through his acting talents, Brad presented Jesse as the opposite of what one might expect. When it comes to legendary figures like Jesse James, presentations of being “larger than life” and a “showman” could give the impression Jesse was an untouchable, unstoppable force. But Brad’s portrayal of Jesse emphasizes the human he was; capable of feeling fear, making mistakes, and constantly looking over his shoulder. A perfect example of this point is when Jesse is interrogating Robert’s cousin, Albert. When Albert claims he doesn’t know Robert’s whereabouts, Jesse beats Albert up because he thinks Albert is lying. During the beating, the anger on Jesse’s face is very evident. But as he realizes Albert is, indeed, telling the truth, Jesse’s face quickly goes from angry to confused. He adopts a “thousand yard stare” as well as a look of disbelief, wondering how he could be so wrong. Several minutes later, as he’s preparing to leave on horseback, Jesse bursts into tears, realizing he just crossed a line.
The cast of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford gave performances that were well-done. However, I was pleasantly surprised to see Jeremy Renner star in the film as Wood Hite! Before reviewing the 2007 film, I had seen Jeremy’s portrayal of Clint Barton/Hawkeye throughout the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) and his portrayal of Aaron Cross from The Bourne Legacy. But what was different about Jeremy’s portrayal of Wood is how he had to rely more on emotion in order to carry the character through the story. During an exchange between Wood and Robert, Wood shares how his mother is Jesse’s father’s sister. He tries to use his familial connection as leverage against Robert, smugly smiling and his tone of voice sounding very arrogant. When Robert questions this familial connection, Wood’s face quickly changes to a look of shock. His tone of voice becomes defensive and his eyes grow wide. This example shows how, even though Jeremy appeared in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for a limited period of time, the versatility of his acting talents were on full display!
The cinematography: Remember when I said The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford received two nominations at the 80th Academy Awards? Well, the other nomination was given to Roger Deakins for the Cinematography category. Once again, this is a decision I agree with the Academy on! Two of the best examples of the cinematography’s mastery in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford happens during a train robbery taking place toward the beginning of the movie. When the train stops right in front of Jesse, only the train’s front light is shining. White smoke forms around both the train and Jesse. Because of the minimal lighting, Jesse is presented as a silhouette. He’s presented as a silhouette again when he’s walking beside the train, emerging from the aforementioned white smoke. Only the light from the train’s window illuminates the scene, giving the scene itself a warm, orange glow. Through the cinematography, these two examples elaborate how Jesse was depicted by those who didn’t know him well; a mysterious myth who seized the attention of others.
More unique ideas brought to the Western genre’s table: It seems like the two most common settings in the Western genre are deserts and plains. But what if I told you a forest is where parts of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford take place? While there were plains in the 2007 film, I’d argue forests were featured in the story the most. Because forests are usually not known for being a Western genre location, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford brings something more unique to the genre’s table. In Western genre films revolving around legendary figures like Jesse James, the script typically focuses on the prime of the figure’s life, highlighting the most exciting, thrilling parts of their story. But The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford showcases Jesse and his gang’s life after crime. Even the train robbery I referenced earlier was not presented as a thrilling, exciting event. Instead, that train robbery is shown as a scary event full of uncertainty, fear, and even violence. These screenwriting choices gave the 2007 movie a sense of honesty that isn’t always found in the Western genre.
The run-time: As listed on IMDB, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford’s run-time is two-hours and forty-minutes. Similar to my thoughts about Gods and Generals’s run-time, the 2007 film’s run-time can definitely be felt. The story of Jesse James and his gang’s life after crime is told at a slower pace. That paired with the aforementioned run-time causes The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford to feel unnecessarily stretched out. I found myself zoning in and out while watching the movie, concerned I’d fall asleep during my movie-viewing experience. One solution to this flaw would have been to trim scenes that linger, such as a scene where Jesse stares at his brother, Frank, for what seems like a minute.
A somewhat misleading title: When I recently reviewed The Naked Jungle, I criticized the movie for its somewhat misleading title. Even though the titular jungle played a role in the story, it didn’t appear until about the last forty minutes of the hour and thirty-five minute film. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford possesses the same flaw. Based on the title alone, one would believe the titular event would serve as the story’s primary focus. But that event doesn’t end up happening until the film’s last twenty-seven minutes. This means during The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford’s two-hour and forty-minute run-time, most of that time is spent leading up to the event itself. The audience is forced to wait over two hours for Jesse’s other shoe to drop.
The dialect: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford takes place during the late 1800s. This setting in time encouraged the film’s creative team to adopt historical accuracy. While that aspect of filmmaking was achieved visually, it was also achieved vocally, as the cast spoke with the dialect (as well as the dialogue) of the story’s time. Despite these historically accurate achievements, there were times I found it difficult to understand what the characters were saying. Because I don’t hear that dialect (and dialogue) consistently, I was forced to actively pay attention to what was being said. Otherwise, there’s a good chance I would have missed important context.
The more I think about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the more it reminds me of Gods and Generals and The Naked Jungle. Not only does the 2007 movie possess a run-time that is, in my opinion, too long (like Gods and Generals), its title is also somewhat misleading (like The Naked Jungle). While I appreciate the creative team’s efforts to make their film look and sound historically accurate, I sometimes found it difficult to understand what the characters were saying. But despite these flaws, it’s evident there was merit put toward the project. Besides the historically accurate appearance of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, the cinematography made the film visually interesting. The train robbery scene proves how the movie’s creative team took advantage of film’s visual medium to present their intended ideas. The cast as a whole gave good performances, especially Casey Affleck, Brad Pitt, and Jeremy Renner. But what I appreciate the most about The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is how more unique ideas were brought to the table of the Western genre. From setting parts of the story in a forest to showcasing Jesse and his gang’s life after crime, these creative choices prevent the Western genre from becoming stagnant. It also illustrates how creatively diverse the Western genre can be.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford? What creatively unique ideas from the Western genre have stood out to you? Let me know in the comment section below!
This is my third time participating in the Luso World Cinema Blogathon. Back in 2021, I wrote about the 2005 film, Ladies in Lavender, which I thought was just ok. Then last year, I reviewed Jasmine Guy’s episodes of Touched by An Angel. While the episodes, “Sympathy for the Devil” and “Lost and Found”, were fine, “Clipped Wings” became my least favorite Touched by An Angel episode reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane, so far. But these previous entries for the Luso World Cinema Blogathon were chosen based on a particular actor’s or actress’s involvement in a project. For this year’s event, I decided to select a movie based on its location. Therefore, I picked the 1954 film, The Naked Jungle! According to the criteria for the Luso World Cinema Blogathon, The Naked Jungle takes place in Brazil. The movie was also recommended to me by Maddy (from Maddy Loves Her Classic Films). Both Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker are no strangers to 18 Cinema Lane. Not only have I covered 1959’s Ben-Hur, I’ve also written about Interrupted Melody, The Man with the Golden Arm, and Return to Peyton Place!
The acting: In this review’s introduction, I stated how both Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker are no strangers to 18 Cinema Lane. After reviewing three of Eleanor’s movies, what I’ve noticed is how Eleanor uses emotion to her advantage. Despite only writing about one of Charlton’s films, Ben-Hur, I can appreciate the consistency of his acting strengths. These compliments can be applied to Eleanor’s and Charlton’s portrayal of Joanna and Christopher in The Naked Jungle! Throughout the 1954 picture, Christopher is a stoic man who prioritizes his plantation. So, when Joanna comes into his life, he carries frustration, pride, and even entitlement in his eyes, through his voice, as well as his body language. Meanwhile, Joanna is a sweet and gentle woman who is open-minded to her new life with Christopher. But when Christopher becomes argumentative with her, Joanna shows little to no fear, effortlessly replacing sweetness with fierce confidence. Because of how strong both Charlton’s and Eleanor’s performance was, their characters were interesting to watch! One of my favorite scenes in The Naked Jungle is when Joanna meets a Commissioner who happened to board the same boat as her. Portrayed by William Conrad, the Commissioner had the charisma and friendly personality to brighten up a room. I could even sense nice on-screen chemistry between William and Eleanor. These factors made me look forward to scenes featuring the Commissioner!
The set design: When it comes to set design, sometimes less is more. This was definitely the case for The Naked Jungle! My favorite set was Joanna’s room because of how pops of color were incorporated into the space. Standing out against the white walls and shutters were gold sconces, dark wood furniture, and bright hued chairs. The vanity area was, in my opinion, the most impressive! An ornate, gold mirror proudly hung on the wall. Right underneath the mirror was a dark wood vanity table, nicely complimenting the mirror’s shiny frame. A chair with green cushions provided a visually appealing bridge between the darker and brighter hues. Though all the pieces of décor were simplistic in design, the overall room presented an elegant, classy, and timeless space!
The dialogue: I sometimes come across films where some of the dialogue is so clever, it sticks in my memory. The Naked Jungle happens to be one of those films! An example of memorably clever dialogue is when Joanna arrives in Brazil for the first time. As Christopher’s “number one man”, Incacha, introduces himself, even bringing up his title, Joanna addresses herself as Christopher’s “number one wife”, as she desperately wants to know where her husband is. The quick response and immediate play on words make this response cordial and somewhat hilarious. Another great example arrives after Joanna and Christopher meet. When Christopher tells Joanna how the tropics have their own schedule, Joanna asks, “What time is bedtime”? Christopher replies by saying, “Whenever you wish, madam”. Joanna then tells Christopher with a hint of playful sarcasm, “I wouldn’t want to upset your schedule”. This comeback works because of the screenwriting and Eleanor’s performance!
Lack of on-screen chemistry: As I previously talked about in this review, I liked the acting performances of Charlton Heston and Eleanor Parker. But what I didn’t like about their portrayals of Christopher and Joanna was their lack of on-screen chemistry. In this case, the fault lies in the screenwriters. Not only was the relationship between Joanna and Christopher tense, this tension between them lasted the majority of the movie. By the time Christopher and Joanna finally got around to appreciating the other’s company, this renewal of chemistry came too little too late. That writing choice made it difficult, for me, to determine if Charlton and Eleanor truly possessed any on-screen chemistry.
The “locals” as background characters: “Locals” of the story’s Brazilian setting make appearances throughout The Naked Jungle. But these “locals” aren’t given much to do in the story. Among them was a gentleman who not only possessed Mayan ancestry within his family tree, he also carried around a small head known as his “treasure”. Because of these details, I thought he’d make a fascinating addition to The Naked Jungle’s script, using his family history and maybe even his “treasure” to help resolve the film’s overarching conflict. Unfortunately, this gentleman barely said anything in the one scene he was featured in. Even Incacha, the “number one man” of Christopher, receives a smaller role within the script. Despite dealing with a personal conflict of his own, that conflict has little bearing over the movie’s plot. I was disappointed by the creative decision to turn the “locals” into background characters. This is because their inclusion in the film made me want to learn more about their culture and perspective.
A somewhat misleading title and synopsis: According to The Naked Jungle’s synopsis on IMDB, “a 2-mile-wide, 20-mile-long column of army ants” plan to destroy anything in their path, including Christopher’s plantation. With a movie titled, The Naked Jungle, one would think the titular jungle would play a significant role in the story. But the jungle doesn’t actually appear in the movie until about the last forty minutes. Meanwhile, the “army ants” I previously brought up aren’t shown on screen until about the last thirty minutes of the movie. Keeping in mind The Naked Jungle has a run-time of an hour and thirty-five minutes, this means the majority of the script prioritizes the tension between Christopher and Joanna. These creative choices I talked about make the title and synopsis seem kind of misleading.
Have you ever seen a movie where it wasn’t bad, but it just didn’t meet or exceed your expectations? That’s how I felt after watching The Naked Jungle. Before reviewing the 1954 film, I expected a story where a husband and wife worked together to solve the problem of an ant infestation. But what I got instead was a movie that prioritized the tense relationship of Joanna and Christopher, the aforementioned husband and wife. While there was an ant infestation and the titular jungle did play a role in the story, these parts of the script didn’t arrive until toward the end of the movie. But as I waited for these arrivals, I came to appreciate certain aspects of The Naked Jungle. Not only did I like the “less is more” approach to the set design, I also liked how clever some of the dialogue was. I even liked the acting performances, including those from Eleanor and Charlton. When it comes to The Naked Jungle, however, I was left desiring more. Maybe I’ll review a film where the “locals” are given center stage.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen The Naked Jungle? Is there a movie from Charlton Heston’s and/or Eleanor Parker’s filmography you’d like to see me review next? Please tell me in the comment section!
Last month, I wrote a Word on the Street story about Sebastian Stan joining the cast of The Batman Part II as Harvey Dent/Two-Face. In that article, I brought up how intrigued I was to see Sebastian approach that character, especially since I’ve never seen him portray a villainous character before. But now an article from The Direct and even those from the Youtube channel, Film Threat, are singing a different tune. A recent report reveals Sebastian may portray a different villain. According to Aeron Mer Eclarinal, from The Direct, an actor named Brian Tyree Henry could be given the role of Harvey Dent/Two-Face. Meanwhile, Sebastian would receive the role of Victor Zsasz, a “serial killer who carves tally marks into his skin for each victim”. Confused by this potential development, one of the guests of ‘Film Threat Versus’, Stephanie (from the Youtube channel, My Nerdy Home), asks, “Wasn’t it announced that he [Sebastian] would be playing Harvey Dent”? Another guest on the show, Angry Badger (from the Youtube channel, The Angry Badger), said, “It never got officially confirmed, unfortunately”.
Whenever I write a Word on the Street story, I always try to create an article containing the most accurate information possible. Not only do I mention who originally reported the piece of movie news I write about, I provide references for readers to check out the original article or video. But, sometimes, new information becomes published that is different from what I originally wrote about in a Word on the Street story. Sebastian Stan’s role in The Batman Part II is one of those times where it’s happened. When I watched the Film Threat video about this piece of movie news, I knew I had to write a Word on the Street story about it, so my readers would be notified about this potential change in casting. I apologize if this recent possible development made my first Word on the Street story about Sebastian Stan’s casting seem contradictory.
What are your thoughts on this piece of movie news? Would you rather see Sebastian portray Harvey Dent/Two-Face or Victor Zsasz? Let me know in the comment section below!
Audrey Hepburn is no stranger to 18 Cinema Lane. In the eight years I’ve been blogging, I have reviewed The Nun’s Story (which I liked), Funny Face (which I also liked), and Roman Holiday (which was, in my opinion, ok). For Classic Film And TV Corner’s Audrey Hepburn Blogathon, I decided to pick a movie I don’t often hear in the discussion of Audrey’s films. Over the years, I’ve heard 1961’s The Children’s Hour has been considered “controversial”. Though I wasn’t sure if the movie still carried that title today or if it once held that title when the film was originally released. Wanting to find an answer to that question, I selected The Children’s Hour to write about for the event. Another actor who’s no stranger to 18 Cinema Lane is James Garner. Despite only reviewing one of his films, Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Promise, I have seen other projects from his filmography, such as Atlantis: The Lost Empire, The Notebook, and Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Decoration Day. So, I was pleasantly surprised to discover James starred in The Children’s Hour.
The Children’s Hourposter created by The Mirisch Corporation and United Artists
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: As I said in this review’s introduction, I’ve written about three of Audrey Hepburn’s films; The Nun’s Story, Funny Face, and Roman Holiday. Through her roles in these films, Audrey has proven to be a very expressive actress who allows her characters to adapt to any situation. This sentiment holds true in The Children’s Hour, as Audrey portrays a teacher named Karen. One great example of Audrey’s expressiveness takes place during a conversation Karen shares with a doctor named Joe (portrayed by James Garner). Throughout their conversation, Karen shares her desire to get married. As soon as Joe agrees to marry Karen, her face lights up, complete with wide eyes and a big ear-to-ear smile. It also helps how this reaction from Karen appears genuine. Speaking of James Garner, I also want to talk about his portrayal of Joe. During his and Karen’s aforementioned conversation, Joe is frustrated by lack of funds and resources at the hospital where he works. As he takes Karen for a car ride, Joe carries that frustration on his face, from a narrowed stare to his mouth turning in a scowl. The look on Joe’s face is consistent from a previous conversation he shared with Karen’s friend, Martha (portrayed by Shirley MacLaine). In his and Martha’s conversation, Joe expressed his frustration through his facial expressions and tone of voice. This consistency, as well as his versatility, showed just how strong of a performance James gave in The Children’s Hour!
Like I mentioned earlier, Audrey portrays a teacher named Karen. This means throughout The Children’s Hour, Karen’s students appear in the story from time to time. Out of the young actresses who received lines in the movie, two of the strongest performances came from Karen Balkin and Veronica Cartwright! In The Children’s Hour, Karen portrays Mary, a manipulative girl who never takes ‘no’ for an answer. Meanwhile, Veronica portrays Rosalie, a fellow student of Mary’s who is terrified of Mary. Whenever Mary tries to control Rosalie into following a plan of hers, Rosalie’s terror for Mary is visibly displayed through her wide eyes and appearance of fear on the rest of her face. Even when she’s questioned about the rumor about Martha and Karen, Rosalie bursts into tears as Mary’s figurative grip on her is just too powerful. On the other hand, Mary’s mood changes depending on the situation. One moment, as she’s presenting flowers to another teacher named Lily, Mary displays a sweet demeanor with a smile on her face. But when Karen catches Mary in a lie about those flowers, Mary’s attitude immediately changes to being defensive, complete with a sharp tone of voice and an angry look in her eyes. The strong execution of Karen’s and Veronica’s performance made me, as a viewer, effectively empathize with Rosalie and despise Mary.
The dialogue: I brought up earlier in this review how Shirley MacLaine portrayed Karen’s friend, Martha. One of the reasons why I liked her performance was her execution of the dialogue. To add to this, some of the dialogue in The Children’s Hour was cleverly written. A great example takes place during a conversation between Martha and Karen. While bringing up the subject of money, Karen addresses her concern for Martha’s wardrobe. Martha casually and confidently responds to Karen’s concern by saying, “I’m a skirt-and-blouse character. We’re always in style”. Later in The Children’s Hour, Martha and Lily have a disagreement. During this disagreement, Martha suggests Lily leave to pursue her Broadway dreams, even offering to give her money. Lily refuses to accept Martha’s offer and says she’d “rather scrub floors first”. Martha, her voice fueled with sarcasm, replies “You’ll change your mind after the first floor”. The cleverness of the dialogue’s writing, as well as the dialogue’s delivery, was such a pleasant surprise!
The mise-en-scène: While watching The Children’s Hour, I noticed interesting mise-en-scène that was sometimes utilized during the movie. One example shows Mary spying on Karen and Martha as they share a conversation in Martha’s room. The door to Martha’s room is in the background near the left-hand side of the frame. In the foreground near the right-hand side of the frame is Mary’s face hiding behind the door of her room. Shots like the one I described present the illusion of putting the audience in a scene alongside the characters. This creative decision was, for me, an unexpected yet memorable aspect of the movie!
Telling instead of showing: Throughout The Children’s Hour, Martha and Karen recount how Mary’s rumor negatively impacted their lives and careers. They planned on filing a libel and slander lawsuit, but ended up losing that lawsuit. The rumor became national news, as Martha mentions it made the front page. But none of these events are shown in the film. No newspapers are presented with that rumor as headline news. There’s no courtroom scenes either, so the audience is forced to take Karen and Martha’s word for it. Because of the script’s reliance on telling instead of showing, the severity of the situation isn’t fully felt. The closest The Children’s Hour gets to addressing the severity is when the students actively leave the school.
Not addressing Mary’s accountability: Karen, Martha, and even Joe are hated by Mary because they do what Mary’s grandmother failed to do: hold Mary accountable for her bad decisions. This hatred is what caused Mary to start the rumor about Martha and Karen in the first place. But The Children’s Hour spends so much time focusing on the fallout from the rumor, Mary isn’t shown facing any accountability for creating the rumor. Sure, the rumor is debunked and Mary’s grandmother discovers the truth. However, the script never addresses what happened to Mary when the truth came to light. As a viewer who was waiting for Mary to face her comeuppance, I was disappointed.
Drawn-out scenes: There were a few times within The Children’s Hour where scenes were drawn out longer than necessary. One example is when Joe confronts Karen about the rumor. While I understand this scene was intended for Karen to debunk the rumor and re-confirm the status of her and Joe’s relationship, the scene itself felt like it lasted between five to ten minutes. Because there’s only so much story you can tell in an hour and forty-eight minutes, I believe scenes like the one I described should have been trimmed a bit.
In the world of cinema, there are three types of movies: those that stand the test of time, those that were ahead of its time, and those that are a product of its time. Personally, I think The Children’s Hour fits in the latter category, primarily due to how the dialogue tries to skirt around the rumor instead of being straightforward about it. However, I don’t believe this makes The Children’s Hour a bad movie. In fact, the 1961 picture has its merits. The acting was solid, from Audrey’s portrayal of Karen and James’ portrayal of Joe to the performances from the younger actresses like Veronica and Karen. I also liked how clever some of the dialogue was and how the mise-en-scène was utilized. But the creative team behind The Children’s Hour didn’t take the opportunity to expand the story beyond the stage it was adapted from. The script relied on telling instead of showing, which prevented the severity of the situation from being fully felt. Some scenes were drawn out longer than necessary and Mary’s accountability for starting the rumor isn’t addressed in the story. Therefore, I like Funny Face and The Nun’s Story over The Children’s Hour.
Overall score: 6.1 out of 10
Have you seen The Children’s Hour? Which movie from Audrey Hepburn’s filmography would you like to see me review next? Let me know in the comment section below!
I try to learn more about “popular” characters to understand why they are well-liked. But in order for me to dedicate an editorial to those characters, they need to capture my undivided attention. Colonel Miles Quaritch and Varang did just that as I listened to commentary discourse on Avatar: Fire and Ash. Those discussions about the 2025 film yielded constant praise about Varang and Quaritch’s relationship. Some people claim Quaritch and Varang were the best part of the third film, let alone the Avatar franchise. In fact, they’ve become so popular that Varang received her own unofficial theme song (MONTAGEM BUDA by DYGO). The choir of Varang and Quaritch’s admirers singing their praises genuinely confused me. However, because Quaritch and Varang are the villains of Avatar: Fire and Ash, I decided to write an editorial about their relationship similar to when I wrote about Lestat and Akasha’s relationship (from Queen of the Damned) and Top Dollar and Myca’s relationship (from The Crow). I assumed Quaritch and Varang’s relationship was equally or more toxic than those relationships. Even though they make villainous choices throughout Avatar: Fire and Ash, their relationship is, surprisingly, healthier than some of the problematic relationships from movies I’ve reviewed in the past or I’ve written about on 18 Cinema Lane. In this editorial, I will contrast Varang and Quaritch’s relationship with a handful of other film (and even television) relationships to prove my point. To support my argument, I will utilize examples, screenshots, and quotes from or related to Avatar: Fire and Ash, as well as referencing the other media in question.
My editorial introduction image created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Who are Quaritch and Varang?
Quaritch and Varang are the villains of Avatar: Fire and Ash, as well as the Avatar franchise. For readers who haven’t seen these films, I will introduce them to Varang and Quaritch. Colonel Miles Quaritch (portrayed by Stephen Lang) has remained an important character through all three Avatar films. In the first movie from 2009, Quaritch was the commander of the RDA’s (Resources Development Administration) security division. He also led the charge in Pandora’s war, attempting to remove the Omatikaya Na’vis from their home in order to provide more space for humans on Pandora. But in Avatar’s final battle, Quaritch was shot and killed by Neytiri, one of the Na’vi from the Omatikaya clan. He returned in the franchise’s second film, Avatar: The Way of Water, which takes place fifteen years after the events of the first movie. This time, however, Quaritch appears as a Na’vi Recombinant with the neurological information from his human self, such as his memories. In both the second and third film in the Avatar franchise, Quaritch maintains his objectives of providing space for humans on Pandora and holding Jake Sully (his former Corporal) accountable for abandoning the RDA in the first film. Quaritch’s second objective becomes disruptive for Jake and his family as the film series progresses.
Left picture: Portrait of Quaritch as a human in 2009’s Avatar. Image created by 20th Century Fox, Dune Entertainment, Ingenious Film Partners, Lightstorm Entertainment, and Walt Disney Studios. Right picture: Portrait of Quaritch as a Na’vi Recombinant in Avatar: Fire and Ash. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Quaritch and Varang (portrayed by Oona Chaplin) meet in Avatar: Fire and Ash. She is the Na’vi olo’eykte (clan leader) and the tsahìk (spiritual leader) of the Mangkwan clan, known for having their home destroyed by a volcanic eruption prior to the events of the third movie. Believing Eywa (the Na’vis’ goddess representative of their belief system) abandoned the Mangkwan clan after the aforementioned volcanic eruption, Varang leads her clan through trauma, anger, and survival. While the Mangkwan Na’vis see her as the glue that’s kept their clan together, other Na’vis see Varang (and the Mangkwan clan) as a threat to Pandora’s society.
Portrait of Varang from Avatar: Fire and Ash. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang and Quaritch vs. Achara and Jack
Achara and Jack (from the Lost episode ‘Stranger in a Strange Land’) is the only relationship from a television show included in this discussion. Jack becomes frustrated that Achara won’t share what her “gift” is with him. He becomes so hyper-fixated on learning what Achara’s “gift” is that Jack not only doesn’t take the time to learn more about Achara and the world around her (besides trying Thai food and meeting Achara’s brother in one scene), but he also defines Achara by that one aspect of her life. Throughout her month-long relationship with Jack, Achara remains hesitant to share her “gift” with him. This decision implies she doesn’t fully trust Jack. When Achara eventually reveals what her “gift” is, which is being “able to see who people are” and creating definitive (not decorative) tattoos, Jack forces her to give him this desired explanation. He also forces her to give him a tattoo by forcibly pulling her toward and placing her in a chair by her tattooing station. While Jack is in his drunken fueled aggression and frustration, Achara refuses his request. She cites Jack’s status as an “outsider”, saying that she isn’t allowed to give him a tattoo and giving Jack a tattoo would go against her people. But when Achara’s brother eventually discovers Jack received a tattoo from Achara, he and his friends beat Jack up. Achara’s brother then orders Jack to leave Thailand. Meanwhile, Achara tearfully looks on while this confrontation takes place.
The ash and burnt trees hold proof of the trauma Varang (and the Mangkwan clan) endured. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang leads the Mangkwan clan through trauma, anger, and survival after her people’s home was destroyed by a volcanic eruption. This information isn’t revealed in Avatar: Fire and Ash until Varang willingly brings it up when she invites Quaritch in her yurt (tent) during their second interaction together. While recounting her traumatic past, Varang tells Quaritch the following:
“The fire came from the mountain when I was little; burnt our forest. It took everything. My people were starving. They cried for help, but Eywa did not come. So I went to the fire, and I learned its way”.
She also shares with Quaritch how she, along with the rest of the Mangkwan clan, responded to Eywa’s abandonment of them, saying:
“I am the fire! By my hand, my people grow strong! We do not lie down and die just because Eywa turns her back on us! We turn our back on Eywa! A weak mother for weak children. We do not suck on the breast of weakness”.
The fact all this information isn’t brought up in the movie until Varang herself shares it implies she doesn’t freely offer this information, especially to those outside of the Mangkwan clan. During this same interaction, Varang chose to tell him, “I see you” (which has been established in the Avatar franchise as the equivalent of saying “I love you”) and “You have a strong heart. No fear” (which seems to be a term of endearment). For Varang to openly share all this information with Quaritch on her own terms (and within her personal space) shows that she has developed full trust in him. Another example of Varang’s trust in Quaritch takes place in Bridgehead City. When Quaritch arrests Jake and takes him to Bridgehead City, Varang travels there with them. She immediately recognizes how being in an unfamiliar environment and surrounded by more humans than she’s ever interacted with before can be overwhelming. She even tells one of the attending Mangkwan warriors, “Do not show fear”. Yet, while in Bridgehead City, Varang is shown peacefully sleeping in her tent within the Mangkwan camp. Meanwhile, Quaritch is right outside the tent the whole time. People are likely to sleep more soundly if they feel safe. Varang sleeping peacefully inside her tent shows how she trusts Quaritch to keep her safe.
The two photos on the left show Varang’s awareness of how overwhelming coming to Bridgehead City can be. The photo on the right shows Varang telling one of the Mangkwan warriors, “Do not show fear”. Her quote is circled for emphasis. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang sleeping peacefully shows the trust she’s placed in Quaritch to keep her safe in an unfamiliar place. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Quaritch and the group of Mangkwan Na’vi are circled in this picture to emphasize how close Quaritch was to Varang. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Throughout Avatar: Fire and Ash, Quaritch is shown trying to understand Varang and the world around her. He teaches her how to use a gun and a flamethrower, providing resources and skills the Mangkwan clan are interested in receiving. While in Bridgehead City, Quaritch speaks with Varang in the Na’vi language. He interacts with other members of the Mangkwan clan besides Varang during his time in Bridgehead City. Quaritch adopts the appearance of a Mangkwan Na’vi, even sporting the clan’s war paint toward the end of the film. Unlike Jack’s confrontation with Achara’s brother and his friends in ‘Stranger in a Strange Land’, Quaritch never faces animosity from the Mangkwan clan whenever he attempts to learn more about Varang and her world. It should be noted that some of Quaritch’s war paint appears to mirror Varang’s, implying her direct influence over their design. With all that said, Quaritch is not disrespecting the cultural boundaries of the Mangkwan clan, a mistake Jack made in the aforementioned Lost episode. Even when Quaritch introduces Varang to a human named General Ardmore in Bridgehead City, he refers to Varang as “Tsahìk of the Mangkwan”. This simple decision highlights three things:
Quaritch is honoring and respecting Varang’s culture, as well as her role within it
He refuses to define Varang by his perception of her (such as referring to her as “my girlfriend” or “my soulmate”), especially after General Ardmore calls Varang Quaritch’s “little missy”
Quaritch believes he doesn’t have to prove his and Varang’s relationship to anyone, as his actions and choices should speak for themselves
The arrows in these photos are pointing out the similarities in Varang’s and Quaritch’s Mangkwan war paint designs. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
These pictures show Quaritch interacting with some of the Mangkwan Na’vis in Bridgehead City. The Mangkwan Na’vi shown in these pictures, including the one with their face circled, do not present animosity. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Quaritch and Varang vs. Top Dollar and Myca
In 2021, I wrote an editorial analyzing the toxic relationship of Top Dollar and Myca from The Crow. One of the takeaways from that editorial was that Myca and Top Dollar’s incestuous relationship is likely the result of an absent/dysfunctional family unit, as well as likely being exposed to dark and harmful things from a young age by their father. Another major takeaway was how Top Dollar and Myca’s enablement of each other was contributed by their likely long-term exposure to dark and harmful things being their “normal”. But when I wrote and published that editorial five years ago, I didn’t realize how Myca and Top Dollar lacked awareness for who they are and what they do, which kept them in a constant cycle of toxicity. When Varang shares her traumatic past with Quaritch in Avatar: Fire and Ash, she recollects what caused her to become the leader she is and how the Mangkwan clan responded to the tragedy. Varang expressing self-awareness doesn’t excuse or condone her aggressive and violent behavior toward others. However, it shows that change, as well as healing, seems realistically possible for her. Varang’s steps toward healing consist of a) she willingly opened up to Quaritch about her traumatic past and b) she willingly opened up her heart to Quaritch after closing her heart off for so long, to the point where it dictated how she walked. Oona even commented on how Varang’s walk was developed, saying, “Varang’s trust is broken and so what happens when you close the heart”. Only time will tell if Varang wants to heal from her trauma, let alone change her villainous ways.
This awareness of Varang’s trauma is also acknowledged by the creative team behind Avatar: Fire and Ash. During an interview with Youtuber Bryce Edward Brown, James Cameron (the director of all three Avatar films) said, “I think that as a little girl the powerlessness and the loss and that she felt and and is playing out through PTSD and trying to recapture power and control the things that that she couldn’t control as a child”. When Oona was interviewed by Bryce Edward Brown, she explained, “The reason that she [Varang] is the way that she is is because she has been hurt in a really really deep place. And it’s, like, the classic, you know, architype of ‘hurt people hurt people’”. In an interview with ABC News, Oona addressed how “She’s [Varang’s] gone through a lot of trauma”, elaborating on that statement by saying, “But she’s gone though a lot of grief, you know, she lost her land, her whole way of life, her family, and, and, her great mother, the, the source of all of her faith, so she has suffered a lot of loss”.
The picture on the left shows how Varang walks, influenced by her broken trust. The picture on the right shows Varang demonstrating to Quaritch how she is “the fire”. During this demonstration, anger toward Eywa can be heard in Varang’s voice. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
One of the reasons why Varang is considered a villain in Avatar: Fire and Ash is because she uses her kuru (neural queue/braid) to forcefully connect to other Na’vis’ kurus, using that connection to mentally manipulate her victims. Based on the context within the film, she does this as a form of interrogation as well as to gain an upper hand. After Varang and Quaritch become a couple, however, Quaritch has stood back and watched Varang continue to mentally manipulate others with her kuru. Initially, I was confused why Quaritch would do this, especially considering a) Varang mentally manipulated him when they first met and b) Varang willingly opened up to him about her traumatic past, as well as expressing self-awareness for why she is the way that she is. I wondered, “shouldn’t Quaritch be trying to help Varang heal from her trauma”? This confusion led me, at first, to speculate if Quaritch had adopted Top Dollar and Myca’s “I don’t care because it’s none of my business” attitude/mindset, the same attitude/mindset they used to enable each other to hurt themselves or other people. But Quaritch is the same man who has gone out of his way to try to understand Varang and the world around her. In Bridgehead City, when General Ardmore called the Mangkwan clan “savages” and Varang Quaritch’s “little missy”, Quaritch (and Varang) appeared uncomfortable by what General Ardmore said. Quaritch even tells General Ardmore, “Don’t be a jackass, General”. What I said shows how Quaritch does care about Varang and her world because he’s made that his business. Though there are better ways Quaritch could have shown he cares about Varang, like preventing her from using her kuru for harmful purposes.
These collection of pictures show Quaritch and Varang’s reaction to what General Ardmore said about Varang and the Mangkwan clan. It’s obvious how they do not look pleased. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
In an interview from the Youtube channel, Film Stories, Stephen responds to a question about where Quaritch fits in within the conflict of humanity versus Na’vi. He says, “What he [Quaritch] recognizes is that he can no longer, the idea of making the planet come to him, the moon come to him doesn’t work. He’s got to go to it. He’s got to adapt to it”. Stephen’s quote can be applied to Quaritch’s relationship with Varang. Varang willingly opened up to Quaritch about her traumatic past, as well as willingly opened up her heart to him. During his interaction with Varang in her yurt, Quaritch reminds her how she wants an “equal” (something she’s never had). With that said, he recognizes how Varang has not only carried her unresolved trauma for a long time, but has also lived her life a certain way for a long time. Quaritch recognizes as well how Varang’s new chapter in her life (developing a relationship with her “equal”) will take some adjusting to. So, as Varang’s “equal”, Quaritch’s decision to stand by and watch her continue to mentally manipulate others with her kuru is not about intentional enablement like Myca and Top Dollar not caring about what the other does. Quaritch acknowledges and respects where Varang is in her life, as well as her healing journey, and meeting her there instead of forcing her to do something she either doesn’t want to do or isn’t ready to do. However, I do wish Quaritch had intervened and encouraged Varang to make better choices that don’t involve hurting other Na’vis.
In these two photos, Varang continues to mentally manipulate Na’vis with her kuru. Meanwhile, Quaritch just stands by and watches the events unfold instead of intervening. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
When I wrote and published my editorial about Top Dollar and Myca’s relationship, I discussed how both their conversations in The Crow were not meaningful. As I explained in that editorial, words aren’t utilized to address emotions, leaving feelings and personal turmoil bottled up and unresolved. Concerns and basic needs are ignored as well. In Avatar: Fire and Ash, Varang and Quaritch share only one conversation, which takes place during their interaction in Varang’s yurt. Despite this, their conversation is meaningful because of how much it accomplishes. Like I’ve already said, Varang willingly opened up to Quaritch about her traumatic past, showing how she not only trusts Quaritch, but also how change and healing seem realistically possible for her. Varang sharing her backstory allows Quaritch (and the audience) to learn more about her as well. Meanwhile, Varang learns more about Quaritch by asking him questions, such as why he came to see her in the first place. Even when Quaritch tells Varang, “You want to take on Eywa? You need me”, he confirms how he’s actively paying attention/listening to what Varang is saying. Though he was under the influence of a hallucinogenic powder she gave him earlier in their interaction, potentially affecting his judgement. The most important thing Quaritch and Varang’s conversation accomplishes is establishing their relationship. They no longer see each other as a threat like they did when they first met. As their conversation goes on, their tone of voice becomes friendlier. Varang even gently strokes Quaritch’s chin and kuru, though she did cut his chest prior to that, which could have given Quaritch mixed messages on her feelings for him. But when Varang tells Quaritch, “I see you”, he responds by telling her, “Damn right you do”, while appearing relaxed and speaking with a confident and matter-of-fact tone of voice. This response, and the fact Quaritch doesn’t appear surprised or caught off guard by what Varang told him, emphasizes his acceptance of her love, as well as doubling and tripling down on that idea.
The top two pictures show Varang gently stroking Quaritch’s chin and kuru. Though she did cut his chest before that, which could have given Quaritch mixed messages. The bottom left picture shows Varang right after she told Quaritch, “I see you”. Meanwhile, the bottom right picture shows Quaritch right after he tells Varang, “Damn right you do”. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang and Quaritch vs. Akasha and Lestat
I wrote an editorial in 2019 about Lestat and Akasha’s relationship (from Queen of the Damned), discussing why it was problematic for Akasha to possess more control in the relationship. One of her missteps was not making an effort to get to know Lestat. Akasha assumes she knows Lestat based on his image as a musical performer, even though being a musical performer only plays a small role in his life. This assumption leads her to give him a royal title he did not desire. Had Akasha taken the time to ask Lestat what he wanted, she would have known all he wanted was to walk in the light and not hide in the shadows. In Avatar: Fire and Ash, Varang doesn’t make Akasha’s mistakes. I brought up earlier how she learns more about Quaritch by asking him questions, such as why he came to see her in the first place. Varang even asks him, “What do I want”, when Quaritch claims she doesn’t want to keep him as a slave. Her asking this question shows how she’s interested in hearing his answer instead of assuming what he’ll say is incorrect. It also shows how she’s willing to change her mind about how she sees Quaritch, though her entertaining the idea of keeping him as a slave is concerning. Before giving Quaritch the hallucinogenic powder I referenced earlier in this editorial, Varang tells him, “First, I must see your soul”. Then, before telling Quaritch, “You have a strong heart. No fear”, Varang says, “Only true words will come from your tongue”. These examples illustrate Varang making a strong effort in getting to know Quaritch instead of falling for a fabricated image of him. Sadly, this is the only time Varang is shown learning more about Quaritch, which could give the impression her efforts aren’t strong.
The left picture shows Varang as she’s asking Quaritch, “What do I want”. The picture on the right shows Varang asking Quaritch questions. That picture is from Quaritch’s perspective while under the influence of the hallucinogenic powder she gave him. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Akasha doesn’t seem to see Lestat as an equal, but instead as something she can control. Akasha refers to Lestat by his name on less than three occasions. She also talks at him, not to him, as well as purposefully leaving Lestat out of the process of building their “kingdom”. Because Akasha forced Lestat into their relationship and possesses more control within it, he doesn’t feel their relationship is worth investing in. Once again, Varang refuses to repeat Akasha’s mistakes. In Avatar: Fire and Ash, when Quaritch brought up how she wanted an “equal”, Varang never objects or claims Quaritch is wrong. In fact, she tells him “I see you” after he reveals how an “equal” is what she really wanted. Any time she communicates with Quaritch (talking to him, not at him), Varang refers to him by his name. The only times she didn’t do that is when she didn’t know his name, hence the reason why she called Quaritch “Sky Man”. Since forming their relationship, Varang and Quaritch are rarely seen apart, as they recognize how valuable their time and company is. This is just one example of how their relationship contains equal investment. Meanwhile, Quaritch shows how he is an active participant in his relationship with Varang. In Avatar: Fire and Ash, during his interaction with Varang in her yurt, Quaritch explains what he can give her, such as “guns”, “comms”, and “RPGs”. But Varang recognizes the nontangible things he can give her as well, like security and peace of mind. This portion of their conversation highlights how Quaritch is willing to share and be a provider in his and Varang’s relationship. As I’ve said, Quaritch tries to learn more about Varang and her world. Because Varang has willingly provided these learning opportunities to Quaritch, he has received chances to grow closer to her.
Varang’s response to Quartich’s reminder of how she wants an “equal” doesn’t show her disagreeing with him. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
While reflecting on Lestat and Akasha’s relationship, as well as the other relationships discussed in this editorial, I noticed how their displays of affection are not consistent, whether these displays have been publicly or privately. It seems like those couples’ problematic behavior was the primary focus. Though Quaritch and Varang display villianous behavior in Avatar: Fire and Ash, their displays of affection are shown consistently throughout the film as well. Varang and Quaritch hold hands on two separate occasions; in Bridgehead City (after Quaritch introduces Varang to General Ardmore) and after Quaritch teaches Varang how to use a flamethrower. Quaritch has referred to Varang by endearing names like “baby”, “sugar”, and “darling”. Any time he touches her, Quaritch has continually been gentle with Varang. Meanwhile, Varang gently touched Quaritch’s arm in Bridgehead City. As I mentioned in this editorial already, Varang gently strokes Quaritch’s chin and kuru, which she does before Quaritch brought up how Varang wants an “equal”. But what I’ve noticed is how Varang only blinks whenever Quaritch is around or when something connected to Quaritch is around. Because this behavior is so patterned around Quaritch, I believe blinking is Varang’s way of showing affection for him. These times are the following:
While examining the deceased body of one of the Mangkwan Na’vi, Varang becomes interested in a bullet lodged within it. After digging out the bullet, Varang blinks as she bites into the bullet. Bullets typically come from the RDA, which Quaritch is associated with.
After Quaritch teaches Varang how to use a gun, she blinks as she tells him, “I do not need you now, Sky Man”.
Varang blinks as she notices the guns Quaritch brought to her Mangkwan village
Varang blinks immediately after Quaritch reminds her how she wants an “equal”
When Jake surrenders to Quaritch, Varang blinks three times during that situation: when Quaritch suggests Neytiri be arrested too, right before Jake refers to Varang as Quaritch’s “new girlfriend” and as Varang is looking up at Quaritch
Varang blinks twice when Quaritch introduces her to General Ardmore: when General Ardmore refers to Varang as Quaritch’s “little missy” and as Quaritch is introducing Varang as “Tsahìk of the Mangkwan”
When Neytiri infiltrates Varang’s tent in the Mangkwan clan’s camp in Bridgehead City, Varang blinks when Neytiri threatens to cut off Varang’s kuru. This incident takes place after Varang and Quaritch formed a tsaheylu (an intimate bond that lasts for life formed by mates connecting kurus). When Quaritch and Varang first met, she forcefully connected his kuru with hers in order to mentally manipulate him. However, an argument can be made that, in this particular situation, Varang did this in self-defense, as Quaritch had a gun pointed at her head when he was helping Jake rescue his children from the Mangkwan clan.
In these photos, Quaritch teaches Varang how to use a flamethrower. Quaritch’s hand is circled to emphasize how gently he touches Varang. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
In this picture, Varang’s hand is circled to emphasize how gently she’s touching Quaritch’s arm. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang and Quartich’s hands are circled to highlight that Quaritch and Varang are holding hands. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Quaritch and Varang vs. Oscar and Lily
One of the worst movies I ever reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane is Twentieth Century. A reason why I don’t like this movie is how abusive Oscar and Lily’s relationship is. Oscar grows jealous and obsessive of Lily over the course of the film. The worst thing he does is use his mortality as a manipulation tactic. Not only does Oscar threaten suicide if Lily doesn’t stay with him, he also fakes his death to trick Lily into signing his contract. Quaritch and Varang, on the other hand, never do that in Avatar: Fire and Ash. The only time Quaritch uses language to manipulate a situation is when he tells Varang, “You touch me with that thing again, I’ll kill you”. Before he said that, Varang was attempting to mentally manipulate Quaritch with her kuru for a second time, even though he came to her village delivering guns for her people. Therefore, Quaritch’s threat was a self-defense tactic, as he still saw Varang as a threat. It should be noted how Varang also still saw Quaritch as a threat during this interaction, as Varang continues to hold her kuru. This is a response to Quaritch holding a gun to her head when they first met, as he was trying to help Jake rescue his children from the Mangkwan clan. Meanwhile, during Quaritch and Varang’s interaction in her yurt, Varang’s mortality is never a topic of discussion. Even though she could have used her mortality to manipulate Quaritch, she instead chooses to share her traumatic past with him, as well as asking him why he came to see her in the first place.
In this picture, Varang’s kuru in her hand is circled to emphasize how, in this moment, she still sees Quaritch as a threat after their first meeting. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Despite being treated horribly by Oscar, Oscar’s friends try to help him fix his relationship with Lily. They even go as far as blaming Lily for Oscar’s failures. Varang and Quaritch never do that either in Avatar: Fire and Ash. When Neytiri infiltrated the Mangkwan clan’s camp in Bridgehead City, Varang is more preoccupied with obtaining Neytiri’s heart than blaming Quaritch for the camp’s breach in security. Later in the movie, when General Ardmore permanently grounds Quaritch after Jake and another character named Spider escape Bridgehead City, Quaritch doesn’t blame Varang. Instead, he stays focused on recapturing Spider and Jake. Quaritch is even pleased he can utilize Varang mentally manipulating Neytiri to lure Jake and Spider, with Quaritch telling Varang, “Thanks, baby”. These examples I brought up show how Varang and Quaritch don’t take their frustrations out on each other because they possess the maturity and emotional understanding to recognize which battles are worth choosing, as well as what is within that other person’s control. At the same time, however, Quaritch and Varang don’t hold each other accountable if they do something wrong.
Even when Quaritch shows up to help Varang capture Neytiri, Varang remains focused on obtaining Neytiri’s heart. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
After Quaritch uses Varang’s mental manipulation toward Neytiri to lure Jake and Spider, he tells Varang, “Thanks, baby”. But he doesn’t hold her accountable for her treatment toward Neytiri. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Varang and Quaritch vs. Nancy and Bill Sikes
Though I have reviewed 1968’s Oliver!, I never talked about how awful Nancy and Bill Sikes’ relationship is. Similar to Lestat and Akasha’s relationship, Nancy is more invested in her relationship with Bill. But, unlike Akasha and Lestat’s relationship, Bill is someone Nancy actually cares about. Unfortunately for her, Bill sees Nancy more as a nuisance than a girlfriend. When she asks Bill if he loves her, he angrily tells Nancy, “Course I do. I live with you, don’t I”? Bill also takes Nancy for granted, never showing gratitude whenever Nancy does something nice for him, like serving him food. He even becomes violent toward Nancy. Bill tries to physically intimidate Nancy by threatening to choke her when she refuses to bring Oliver back into a life of thieving. Bill also slaps Nancy so hard, she falls to the floor. After Nancy is beaten to death by Bill, Bill blames her for the predicament he put himself in. He expresses more concern for being caught by the police than remorse for the way he treated Nancy.
As he makes his way back to his and Varang’s tent, Quaritch says, “Hey sugar, join the party”. This highlights how he wants to spend more time with Varang. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Quaritch is never shown becoming angry at Varang. Even when Varang mentally manipulated him with her kuru or cut his chest, Quaritch doesn’t express anger or resentment toward her. However, Quaritch ignoring Varang’s aggression toward him could give her a mixed message on how to treat him. Quaritch has continually been gentle with Varang any time he touches her. In fact, the closest to aggressive Quaritch has ever been toward Varang is when he pointed a gun at her head. In that moment, however, Quaritch saw her as a threat, as Quaritch was trying to help Jake rescue his children from the Mangkwan clan. Throughout his relationship with Varang, Quaritch never takes her for granted, proving this by taking the time to learn more about Varang and her world. Out of all the ways he could have chosen to spend his time in Bridgehead City, Quaritch chose to spend it with Varang and the Mangkwan clan. What I said about Quaritch can also be applied to Varang. She stops being aggressive toward Quaritch when their relationship is established, as Varang saw Quaritch as a threat before that. Varang doesn’t take Quaritch for granted either, with her proof being how interested she appears in learning how to use a gun and flamethrower. Quaritch and Varang are rarely seen apart when their relationship is formed. They recognize how valuable their time and company is.
These two pictures show Quaritch’s response to Varang’s aggression toward him. Though he holds no anger or resentment towards Varang, Quartich choosing to ignore her aggression could give Varang mixed messages. Images created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
These two photos show how interested and eager Varang is to learn from Quaritch. Image created by 20th Century Studios, Lightstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Conclusion
What led to the creation of this editorial was trying to figure out why Quaritch and Varang were so popular. Through my research, I think I found an answer. In the Avatar franchise, Varang and Quaritch seem to be the only two characters who subvert expectations. In entertainment media, when expectations are subverted, that can spark curiosity and intrigue from the audience. If you had told me back in 2009 that Colonel Miles Quaritch would eventually adopt the appearance of a Na’vi and fall in love with a Na’vi woman, I definitely would not have believed you. Then, in 2025, if you had told me the first Na’vi villain in the Avatar franchise would fall in love at all, let alone fall in love with Quaritch, I also would not have believed you. But, before publishing this editorial, if you had told me Quaritch and Varang’s relationship was healthier than some of the problematic relationships from movies and tv I’m familiar with (like Lestat and Akasha and Top Dollar and Myca), I certainly would have thought you were joking.
My editorial outro image created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by 20th Century Studios, Lighstorm Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Though this editorial highlights how Quaritch and Varang’s relationship is healthier than some problematic relationships from entertainment media, their relationship isn’t truly healthy. Because they are the villains in Avatar: Fire and Ash, their villainous behavior is on full display. They treat other people terribly, from Quaritch destroying Na’vis’ homes in his search for Jake Sully to Varang and the Mangkwan clan sparking unprovoked violence toward other Na’vis. There are also a lot of aspects of their relationship that are up for interpretation. I mentioned earlier how Varang and Quaritch formed a life-long bond called tsaheylu. Even though Varang is more educated about Na’vi culture than Quaritch, it’s unknown if she explained the significance of tsaheylu before they formed this bond, which would have allowed Quaritch to make an informed decision about whether he wants to spend the rest of his life with her. Despite the flaws in their relationship, however, Quaritch and Varang treat each other better than I expected. As of the publication of my editorial, the fourth film in the Avatar franchise has not officially been greenlit, though the release date has already been chosen. If that film does come to fruition, I hope Varang and Quaritch acknowledge how good they have it when it comes to their relationship. Because if my editorial stresses anything, it’s how some people aren’t so lucky.
References:
From 18 Cinema Lane –
Travel Lessons I Learned from Movies and TV
Toxic Valentine: Why Lestat and Akasha’s relationship is very problematic in Queen of the Damned (2002)
We Need to Talk About the Toxic Relationship of Top Dollar and Myca from ‘The Crow’
Take 3: Twentieth Century Review
Youtube Videos and Shorts –
‘Why Varang Is Working With Quaritch and the Humans of the RDA in James Cameron’s Avatar’ (short from Youtube channel, Bryce Edward Brown)
‘I Interviewed Stephen Lang and Oona Chaplin About Quaritch and Varang’s Future in Avatar’ (video from Youtube channel, Bryce Edward Brown)
‘Candid interview with James Cameron and cast of ‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’’ (video from Youtube channel, ABC News)
‘Stephen Lang on AVATAR: FIRE AND ASH!’ (video from Youtube channel, Film Stories)
‘Avatar Fire and Ash Cast Talk About Their Band & Na’avi Phrases & Fan Edits’ (video from the Youtube channel, Hits Radio)
‘The Cast of ‘Avatar: The Way of Water’ on Reuniting, Diving Underwater, and Date Nights’ (video from the Youtube channel, Fandango)
‘Avatar: Fire and Ash’s Oona Chaplin on Crafting Her MENACING Strut (Exclusive)’ (video from the Youtube channel, Entertainment Tonight)
Marilyn Monroe is a woman who needs no introduction. One of the most popular actresses of all time, almost everyone knows who Marilyn is, even if they’ve never seen any of her movies. I remember a time when I would go to a store and find memorabilia with Marilyn’s picture or likeness on it, from metal wall signs to Christmas ornaments. I even recall a church named after her in the 1975 movie, Tommy. But when the Marilyn Monroe – 100th Birthday Anniversary Blogathon was announced, I remembered one of her films was recommended to me. That film is 1961’s The Misfits, suggested by Eric Binford (from Diary of a Movie Maniac)! On my blog’s Year-Long Bingo Card, one of the squares is labeled “Review a movie from the Western genre”. This became another reason why I chose to review The Misfits, as the movie is classified as a “contemporary western”. However, I had no idea Marilyn ever starred in a western genre picture until I selected the 1961 title for the blogathon. My aforementioned reasons, including the fact I don’t review western genre movies often, finally gave me an opportunity to write about The Misfits!
The Misfits(1961) poster created by United Artists and Seven Arts Productions
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: Throughout my years of watching and reviewing movies, I’ve heard Marilyn Monroe receive titles like “icon” and “sex symbol”. But as I reflect on her performance in The Misfits, I feel those titles do her acting talents a huge disservice. Toward the beginning of the 1961 film, Marilyn’s character, Roslyn, is questioning what her life will look like after her recent divorce. She’s hunched over her drink and her hands are folded, appearing as if she’s lost in thought. Roslyn’s eyes show how she’s trying to make a thousand decisions in a single moment, but not in a way that makes her look overwhelmed. She’s carefully processing what her new steps will be, coming up with a strategy that will prevent her from repeating her mistakes. As I watched this scene unfold, I was so focused on Roslyn and what decisions she was going to make, I had completely forgotten I was watching an actress portray a character. This is just one example of how Marilyn’s performance was one of the best parts of The Misfits!
Clark Gable is an actor I am definitely familiar with. Not only have I seen Gone with the Wind, I reviewed China Seas back in 2021. His portrayal of Gaylord in The Misfits is quite different from his two previously mentioned roles. That’s because it didn’t feel like Gaylord had something to prove, yet was emotionally versatile. One of the saddest scenes is when Gaylord is trying to find his children. As he drunkenly stumbles throughout and out of the saloon, he calls out his children’s names. A mixture of pain, confusion, and longing can be heard in his voice. Even his eyes were filled to the brim with sadness. In that scene, I, honestly, couldn’t help feeling sorry for Gaylord. Clark’s solid performance certainly contributed to that.
While I’m on the subject of the acting performances in The Misfits, I want to bring up Eli Wallach and Montgomery Clift. As I watched this movie, I was impressed by Eli’s portrayal of Gaylord’s friend, Guido, as well as Montgomery’s portrayal of a rodeo rider named Perce. One stand-out moment was when Guido is talking to Roslyn about his deceased wife. His voice quivers during the conversation and his eyes even appear on the verge of tears. Eli’s performance presents one of those times where a character can say so much as they say very little. In a different conversation with Roslyn, Perce shares his life story with her. Throughout his reflections, his wide eyes look like they’re searching for something. But it’s not because he’s lost, it’s because he’s trying to find something to focus on after a recent head injury. Montgomery’s expressive eyes are one of the reasons why his performance was captivating to watch!
The dialogue: Sometimes, a movie’s dialogue can be so thoughtfully written, it sounds profound without trying too hard to be. That was definitely the case for The Misfits! Honestly, it’s difficult to choose a favorite quote because several quotes were so thought-provoking. But I will provide a few examples to prove my previously stated point. At one moment in the movie, Isabelle, Roslyn’s former landlady and current friend, claims to know Nevada’s slogan. She says it’s “Anything goes, but don’t complain if it went”. Poignant reminders of how unpredictable life is and how some things were or were not meant to be are shared in that one line. During a conversation with Roslyn, Guido tells her, “You have the gift for life, Roslyn. The rest of us, we’re just looking for a place to hide and watch it all go by”. This piece of dialogue simply, yet effectively, differentiates between people who allow life to pass them by and those who fearlessly grab the steering wheel.
Providing creativity to the western genre: When it comes to means of travel within the western genre, horseback riding, horse drawn carriages/wagons, and trains are typically shown on screen. These modes of travel provide a stone in the western genre’s foundation, making the genre itself what it is. But what if I told you there was a plane in The Misfits? In the 1961 movie, Guido says he was a pilot in the war, likely referring to World War II. He uses his piloting skills to not only fly a plane, but to also wrangle a group of wild horses with that same plane. I bring this up because, prior to reviewing The Misfits, I had never seen, let alone heard of, a plane in a western genre film. Incorporating any aircraft into the movie added creativity to the western genre. It also gave The Misfits a unique identity.
Guido’s unaddressed jealousy: At Guido’s house, Roslyn and Gaylord share a dance together. When Guido sees Gaylord and Roslyn together, the look on Guido’s face appears to be that of jealousy. But throughout The Misfits, this apparent jealousy wasn’t addressed. I honestly thought it was going to lead to a love triangle or Guido and Gaylord fighting for Roslyn’s love. Looking back on the 1961 movie, I wonder what the purpose was of showing Guido looking jealous if that feeling didn’t play a role in the story? Guido’s apparent jealousy could have led to an interesting conflict within the script had that feeling been acknowledged.
The run-time: IMDB lists The Misfits’ run-time as a little over two hours. Personally, I think that run-time is a bit excessive. Not only is the story pretty straightforward and easier to follow, the cast is smaller, which helps the audience remember who is who. These elements should have led to a tighter script. Plus, some scenes were drawn out too long, such as when Gaylord, Guido, and Perce wrangle the wild horses. If scenes like the one I brought up were trimmed down, the run-time of The Misfits could (and should) have been, at least, an hour and thirty to forty minutes. Important points in the story could have been reached sooner as well.
Perce’s underutilized backstory: In my opinion, Perce was the most interesting character in The Misfits. His backstory, along with his phone conversation with his mother, made him intriguing. I was genuinely curious about where Perce’s part of the story would go. But, unfortunately, his backstory became underutilized. During a conversation with Roslyn, Perce brings up how he was denied inheriting his father’s ranch. This could have provided Perce with a motive to carry his story forward. After his conversation with Roslyn, however, this detail is barely brought up again. In fact, Perce’s backstory becomes an afterthought as the movie progresses.
Have you ever watched a movie where you didn’t know what the movie’s creative team was trying to say? That was my experience watching The Misfits. I think I know what the film was supposed to tell me. But I don’t know for certain if that’s what The Misfits’ creative team wanted to tell their audience. However, I don’t believe the 1961 movie is bad. In fact, I thought it was just ok. The acting performances, including Marilyn Monroe’s, were certainly worth watching. Not only was the dialogue, at times, thought-provoking, the inclusion of a plane added creativity to the western genre. But there were flaws that held The Misfits back from being a stronger movie. I didn’t like how Perce’s backstory was underutilized and how Guido’s jealousy was unaddressed. Plus, the run-time was, in my opinion, a bit excessive. Despite those flaws, I am thankful to have received an opportunity to finally watch (and review) The Misfits!
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen The Misfits? Which film from Marilyn Monroe’s filmography would you like to see me review next? Let me know in the comment section!
Any fan of Eddie Munson from Stranger Things knows 1986 is “Eddie’s year”. So, when I dedicated this year’s blogathon to the fortieth anniversary of “Eddie’s year” and since it’s been a while since I last reviewed a movie for one of my blogathons, I decided to make up for lost time by reviewing a “best” and “worst” movie for my Comparing with the Critics series! When it came to selecting titles to write about, I took a different approach; asking myself, “What would Eddie choose”? Had he received an opportunity to make a guest appearance on Siskel & Ebert & the Movies, I’m not sure how many of Eddie’s choices would overlap with Gene Siskel’s and/or Roger Ebert’s year-end selections. Based on the films Roger and Gene did pick, however, I think I know what Eddie would choose. If Eddie’s story teaches anything, it’s that, sometimes, there’s more than meets the eye. His imagination and creativity not only works in his favor as a Dungeon Master, it’s also helped his friends during their time in the Upside Down. So, for the Best of 1986, I have selected The Fly! As for the Worst of 1986, I have chosen King Kong Lives. I believe Eddie would see Roger’s and Gene’s warnings about the movie as a challenge.
Comparing with the Critics banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. TV show title cards created by WTTW National Productions, WTTW, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Lifetime Television, Tribune Entertainment, Buena Vista Television, and Disney-ABC Domestic Television
18 Cinema Lane 