MovieChat Forums > Two Rode Together (1961) Discussion > Stewart and Widmark ... GREAT COMBINATIO...

Stewart and Widmark ... GREAT COMBINATION !!!

posted 17 years ago by mloessel
8 replies | jump to latest

I've seen Two Rode Together several times and it's a treat every time. Two of the finest actors to ever grace the silver screen display their thespian skills to perfection. James Stewart as the not very obliging Sheriff and Richard Widmark as the by the book Army Lt. The main plot of the movie is Lt. Gray (Widmark) is sent to escort the Sheriff (Stewart) back to Gray's Army post in hopes that the Sheriff will consider helping some desparate relatives secure the release of their relatives captured by the Comanches over a decade earlier. Stewart is not anxious to serve as a negotiator especially dealing with the Comanches. As he listens to the Commander of the Army (John Mcintire) post explain the situation Stewart expresses his reluctance unless the relatives are willing to put up some money to secure his services. The Commander is not pleased with this request nor is Widmark. But Widmark goes to the relatives and they are willing to part with any or all of their savings to get their relatives back.
This movie gives a very realistic depiction of the struggle between two opposing cultures living on the same land. The Commanches are seen as savages and the white man is not to be trusted.
Stewart was born to play westerns and as the none too compassionate sheriff he is brilliant. Stewart is one of my favorite all time actors and so is Widmark. They become their character and let you enjoy the story as it unfolds.
In so many westerns every one looks tooooo clean in Two Rode Together you have the feeling that the Old West was in fact very dusty. You also see folks getting water from a creek and you learn how difficult it may have been to be a career soldier. This movie also looks historically accurate in its depiction of an evening campsite and otdher scenes. And then there's the Army Officer (Widmark) removing some of the dust off his uniform in a rather clean looking saloon (cough cough).

[–] c-huddleston 17 years ago

I have to say that I consider this movie an overlooked classic, and an example of why Widmark and Stewart should have made more movies together.

[–] motorsoft 17 years ago

Just a thought. Jimmy Stewart and John Wayne made two movies together and presumably got along with each other and were good friends. The off screen raport of Widmark and Stewart must of been good based on their on screen raport. Why didn't Wayne and Widmark get along when they were making the Alamo?

[–] Bussssss69 17 years ago

I really like this simply western. No Head 'em off at the pass BS. What I thought was a little unrealistic was Richard and Shirley Jones affair. Although I must remember my grammie married a man and she was 14 and he was in his 30's. Although they made a special point to sorta tell you she was about 21. Still I thought he was long in the tooth for her. When the Indian boy grabbed the music box Shirley did some kind of fake cry. But alas the boy got his neck stretched. When they all went back to town I wonder how they were going to figure out Stewart girl friend/bar owner relationship. She fixed that by being rude to Linda Cristal. I guess Linda felt she didnt need any money to get on the stage coach but thank god Stewart got smart and jumped on the coach to California. With his smarts and a woman behind him he could make it any where.
hugs
bus

[–] marvel88 17 years ago

Agreed! At times, you would have thought Stewart and Widmark were just winging it and making up their own script as they went along. Their dialougue and actions together were so natural, everything just really clicked. I don't see why the two didn't do more films together.

"I know you're in there, Fagerstrom!"-Conan O'Brien

[–] chipcoffey 16 years ago

As far as the ages of Widmark and Stewart are concerned, the script never tells us how old these men are, and I've always assumed that the characters are supposed to be right around 30 years old.

Widmark's character, after all, is an army lieutenant, and even though promotions were tough to come by in the post civil war cavalry, it's not unreasonable to assume that a man his age would have progressed farther up the chain of command.

It's not as if this isn't a common occurrence, after all. For decades, a 14 year old Juliet (Romeo and Juliet) was portrayed by actresses approaching middle age.

Ken

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TLAyres 10 years ago

At times, you would have thought Stewart and Widmark were just winging it and making up their own script as they went along.

This is exactly what I thought while watching it, especially at the river scene together early on. Several other scenes have that same feel, very different from other westerns. Interesting to see Stewart in that kind of situation.

[–] snepts 8 years ago

In real life, Ms. Jones was about 27. I think they may have made a reference to her character's age just now (it's on Grit TV), but she's a confident, mature woman, and gorgeous! She already had played a hooker in Elmer Gantry, plus the love interest in just about all her previous movies. And Widmark cuts a dashing figure, straight-backed in his Union blue. Also in real life RW was about 47, to SJs 27. Not so bad, imo.
Now I see Shirley with her hair braided up on top of her head, very much an adult look.
This is a good movie!

I'm not a woman much less Deanna Durbin, but the old-time glam-shot appeals to me.