Despite the two films being personal favourites, I have had to go to lengths to basically not re-write the Young Guns. Obviously basing a story off historical events means the two stories will be very similar, so here is five ways we have significant differences from the Young Guns movies (And to a lesser extent, Sam Peckinpah's "Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid")
1. "Once Upon a Time in Lincoln-County" is NOT a Billy the Kid movie.
Shame when you're only photograph makes it look like a drivers licence.
The biggest difference by far. Although Young Guns was about the Lincoln-County war and the other Regulators, it was still essientially a Billy the Kid movie. Our's simply shifts the focus onto the Regulators as a whole, with Billy just being another member. It's about as far apart from Peckinpah's plot as possible in that regard.
2. Different Regulators
Half of the Regulators were not members of the Brat Pack
Another seemingly obvious one is the different characters. With a large amount of members to choose from, it was very easy to choose which ones would fit with our vision. Some of them are the same - Doc Scurlock, Billy the Kid, Jose Chavez Y Chavez, Charlie Bowdre and Richard Brewer are on ours too. But we have added more into the main cast - Frank McNab, Tom O'Folliard, Yginio Salazar and Big Jim French.
Young Gun's Regulator (and real life Regulator) Dirty Steve Stephens has been removed/merged with Dirty Dave Rudabaugh (Christian Slater in Young Guns II) While other real life members have also been omitted/merged - George and Frank Coe, John Middleton, Ab Saunders.
The characters also have varying differences in their personality's compared to other movies. We've been drawing from real life accounts as much as possible.
3. More realistic, not more accurate.
I would wear this everywhere
Young Guns did have a lot of effort to get it historically accurate. Yes it's way, way, way off, but it's impossible to adapt months of reality into a 90 min movie and expect it to be bang on. Creative influence, pacing, character development all come into play to steer away the accurateness of the story.
Ours is no different, it is much more historically accurate than Peckinpah's but like Young Guns, we have had to take liberties to tell a better story. The biggest difference is our story is much more grounded and less romanticized . And no that does not always mean grittier and darker. It means it's less fantastical and helluva more depressing. Because that's life kids!
4. Pat Garrett.
James Coburn is the man.
Patrick Wayne isn't a great Pat Garrett (Why the fuck didn't they get him to play John Chisum!?) and as much as I love him, William Petersen ain't great as him either.
Neither can properly express the complicated nature of the character, although that could be because of the script too.
Our Pat Garrett is a much more complex, more obsessive and frighteningly efficient. Think of half James Coburn's Pat Garrett (From Pat Garett and Billy the Kid) and Daniel Day-Lewis' Daniel Plainview (From There Will Be Blood)
5. The Tone
Very simple, our tone and themes are extremly different from Young Guns. Sadder and darker, our story is a tragedy at heart. The doomed destiny of our protagonists are set in stone, we want to pity them and relate to them. They are more human, kids caught up in a world they were ill-prepared for. Fully aware of their impending fate and helpless to avoid it.
No comments:
Post a Comment