Topic: Action movies: Walking Tall

[Boid Brain]

Just saw it again last night and was struck by the fact that when I 1st saw it at the show in the 70s I was just thrilled by the numerous action scenes from the point of he (Buford) and Luddie visiting the Lucky spot.

My thoughts are these: Not counting Sword and Sandal, War and Western films, was "Walking Tall" the 1st true action film?

I have been racking my brain, and that brain contains a whole lotta movies, but I can't think of an earlier "action" film prior to "Tall".

Can 'yall think of one?

BTW, I don't remember seeing another good action film until "Die Hard" many years later.

[Dog Hambone]

..was "Walking Tall" the 1st true action film?

What in the H.E. Double Hockey Sticks is a "true action film"?

[Boid Brain]

What in the H.E. Double Hockey Sticks is a "true action film"?

Many fistfights, many car crashes and lots of gunplay. Movies that are made nowadays by Vin Deisal, the Rock, Van Dam and their ilk. Low on story value and high on visual action.

[garystooge]

Low on story value and high on visual action.

Hey, that sounds a lot like the films that Mo Howerd, Larry Fein and Curlee Howerd used to make.

[Dog Hambone]

My thoughts are these: Not counting Sword and Sandal, War and Western films, was "Walking Tall" the 1st true action film?

So, for reasons not apparent, Boid Brain is excluding "Sword and Sandal, War, and Western films". Why not exclude cop movies, secret agent, sci-fi, etc.? And since he mentioned a movie in which Joe Don Baker appears as the protagonist, let's further narrow it to movies that feature a guy who is a terrible actor in the lead role.   

[shemps#1]

I tried watching the original Walking Tall once. In fact it was offered on PPV as a cheapo double feature with the remake featuring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson for $1.99 so I went ahead and ordered it. It was so fuckin' bad I shut it off after 10-15 minutes and didn't even bother trying the remake.

Dog, I think that is what Boid is thinking about: terrible movies with bad actors and lots of stuff going "boom".

[Curly4444]

The remake sucked, but the original was great. I love movies about revenge, and this one satisfied. 10-15 min, should have givin it more time. Movies a classic, and it's based on a true story. The original had very good acting, and very little boom.

[Boid Brain]

The remake sucked, but the original was great. I love movies about revenge, and this one satisfied. 10-15 min, should have givin it more time. Movies a classic, and it's based on a true story. The original had very good acting, and very little boom.

The circumstances were altered for the film, but the number of times Buford was shot and stabbed were MORE than shown in it. The scene where his wife was killed in the car was quite true. Pusser was shot in the face with a shotgun and left for dead.

And Hambone, action in westerns is expected, but the action in contemporary films had never reached this level. Take "Bullit", for example: 3 shootings, 1 car chase and no fistfights, yet I remember feeling like it was action packed.

I recently saw the Paul Muni "Scarface" again, once criticized for it's over the top violence. It was tame compared to "Tall".

[Dog Hambone]

Hey, that sounds a lot like the films that Mo Howerd, Larry Fein and Curlee Howerd used to make.

Good point, garystooge. So, this would place the first "true action film" (according to BB's criteria) as dating from the early 1930s.

Now, assuming there actually is something called a "true action film" (which I don't), this would imply that there are "false action films". Maybe something dialogue driven like Glengarry Glen Ross?   

[Liz]

I saw the remake once in after school program in middle school.  Haven't seen it since.