Talk:Tombstone (film)/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Tombstone (film). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

There is ZERO proof that Russell directed

This claim MUST be referenced to PROOF that he ghost directed, not an obscure interview with Russell saying so. If genuine proof exists then please provide it. If not, don't include it. This is potentially defaming the dead. If this claim is true then it should be very easy to prove, right? Even a reference of another cast member backing up the claim. So far all we have is a vague statement in a lone interview. Best regards. --Nikoz78 (talk) 06:57, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

"Inaccuracy" About Fred Whites role in the film

This is listed in the Inaccuracies:

Marshal Fred White was in fact well liked by the outlaw "Cowboy" faction, and by his own testimony prior to his death, the shooting by Bill Brocius that caused his death was accidental. Brocius in fact showed remorse and regret over the shooting.

While this may be a fact, it is not disputed by the film. In fact, it is upheld by the film when Brocius went to turn his guns over to the marshal and said "Why sure, Dad, I'm only funnin'." and accidentally shot him. He then exlaimed "FRED?" realizing through his opium high that he had shot him. This statement should be moved from the Inaccuracies to the Accuracies.98.215.128.112 (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the part about the Duel between Johnny Ringo and Doc Holliday, I thought Johnny didn't die immediately but kind of crawled about while doc Insulted him some more before he collapsed? --Wallaby 21:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I remember something to that effect, with Doc taunting Ringo by saying "You're no daisy!" However it was still pretty quick as I remember it. --Gunmetal 21:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Define "death". He is shot in his forehead, and what he does after that can barely by taken as anything but death cramps? He does fire his gun, though. I'll just put up an image and a infobox film. Skrewz 14:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
He was shot from below through the forehead, which have could conceivably left him alive and possibly conscious for his last moments. The frontal lobe is not the area "responsible" for respiratory/circulatory/neurological life-sustaining processes (it has more to do with cognitive and emotional aspects of the human mind). See Phineas Gage for an example that could be relevant. Obviously, we're talking about a movie, but it isn't beyond the pale to imagine that Ringo could have lasted a few moments. Quigonpaj 13:30, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Doc shoots Ringo throught the head. Ringo remains standing and staggers slightly while Doc urges him to shoot. He fires at the ground, then Doc gives the "daisy" line, then Ringo collapses. (And Doc then says "Poor fellow. He were just too high strung", and then Wyatt turns up)ILoveJackDaniels 14:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Doc's last words

Doc Holiday's last words are explained with a comparison to a painting. Apart from this being rather far fetched, I don't see the link. The only thing connecting them are the bare feet. The sheets don't look anything alike. On top of that, from the camera's point of view, there's some semblance, but Doc's perspective is from the other side. The article says this is likely to be the reason he says this, so I suppose it's just some editor's guess. Anyone got a better explanation? DirkvdM 18:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone changed that to him realising he was going to die with his boots off. Which sounds more plausible. But is it true? Silly, really, that there's disagreement on this. One would not expect a mainstream film to be so 'obscure'. DirkvdM 08:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Well Dirk, here in the USA promiseing your mom you would die with your boots off was a way of telling her you would not become a outlaw and get shot...therefore dieing with your boots on. Its not so obscure to those who know the "wild west"

Do tell. The "whild west"? Please elaborate. And sign your posts and check your spelling. Canonblack 08:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The above poster, Cannonblack, is a jerk for his post. My opinion only though.

Hey cannonblack: at least I answered the question, unlike your sarcastic response. Try and be helpful instead of spiteful.

If you don't mind a little original research, the reason he said it was funny was because he had never imagined he would die from his disease, but rather during a gunfight. He did, afterall, have nothing to lose. Ours18 11:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

It said something to the effect of Doc not wanting to die with his boots off in Bloodletters and Badmen. I'll see if I can get a quote.

revisionism

Why is this movie called "revisionist?" Nowhere is "Tombstone" claimed to be a documentary. If you simply mean it isn't historically accurate, then every film based on actual events probably fits the "revisionist" bill. One significant departure from reality, for those interested in history, is that Doc didn't kill Ringo. No one knows who did, in fact, though there is some reason to believe Ringo killed himself. Regardless of the circumstances of Ringo's death, however, Holliday was almost certainly in Colorado for a court appearance when Ringo died in Arizona. Keep in mind, when making accusations of "revisionism" that there was little mass media at the time, no TV or radio, and period newpapers were hardly reliable; stories were told and retold, and grew and changed with each telling. That's we call them legends. Most of our history has been inflated and altered, and even the undisputed facts can be made to fit many different scenarios. 216.39.180.60cneron

Headstrong11 01:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)== Doc and Ringo's Duel ==

Changed it because the line "I'm your huckleberry" does not have an exclamation point. Also, Doc was not taunting Ringo during their staring contest with that line. If he did any taunting, it was after Ringo was basically dead when he was yelling "come on" or telling him "you're no daisy." Rick Rossovich 20:40, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe he was taunting him at all. By saying "You're no daisy", he was actually giving Johnny Ringo respect. Doc Holliday had a reputation, and very few people would confront him in a gunfight. (Remember the scene when Johnny and Doc first meet, and Ringo pulls his gun on Doc - Curly Bill whispers in Ringo's ear "Watch it Johnny, I hear he's real fast") A daisy is wimp, I assume. [Headstrong11]

Actually, earlier in the movie, when one of the cowboys said he was going to shoot Doc, Doc said, "You're a daisy if you do." So I'm assuming its still an insult. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.53.3.5 (talk) 07:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Original Research

The entire interpretation section, while interesting, is totally unsourced. I happen to find it interesting, but Wikipedia isn't really a place to list every single person's interpretation of an artwork. Ours18 11:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

The Interpretation in this article should be taken out.

Inaccuracies in Film section inconsistent with other information on wikipedia

The innacuraccies section of this article contains information that is inconsistent with other information on wikipedia. For example, the section states Sherman McMasters was not killed by cowboys, yet the wikipedia article on McMasters says it is most likely McMasters died at the hands of cowboys.

Furthermore, some entries in this section, such as Doc is depicted as only being tolerated by Virgil is based upon interpretation. Virgil does not say anything negative towards Doc at any point in the film. Another example is the idea that Wyatt is depicted as the most experienced gun fighter going into the fight at the O.K. Corral. Wyatt readily admits having only been in one shoot out prior to arriving at Tombstone, which certainly does not suggest he is the "most experienced".

There should be a complete overhaul of this section. --Gypsyjazzbo 10:06, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

"Virgil does not say anything negative towards Doc at any point in the film." is not entirely accurate. Before Holliday arrives in Tombstone, Wyatt is musing upon his old friend while walking with his brothers and mentions how he misses Doc; you can clearly hear Virgil say (off-camera) "I don't." However, that's the only indication of any animosity or ill-will; for the rest of the film they're quite cordial with each other. Evixir (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Interpretation

While I'm sympathetic to the idea that Doc and Ringo are mirror-images of each other, wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that they are something like "two-sides of the same coin?" Both had vices (gambling, women, drink, mean temper, propensity for violence), and both certainly had a latent sense of existential angst. However, Doc's angst seemed to be manifest in a sense of melancholy that resulted in hedonism, whereas Ringo had a depraved anger, a need to exact "revenge" by causing pain without regards to whether violence could be considered just or reasonable. Doc seemed, at least as portrayed in the film, to be genuinely interested in friendship, and seemed to loathe the kind of chaotic, wanton violence committed by the Cowboys. While certainly flawed, there was at least a sense of justice and a longing to think beyond his own selfish feelings (e.g. recognizing that Kate "could be the anti-Christ" and be perpetuating his demise instead of ameliorating it, and the way he sticks with Wyatt despite the obvious ill-effects on his health. "Wyatt Earp is my friend." Johnson replies "I've gotta a lot of friends," to which Doc says poignantly, "I don't." It seemed as though he was genuinely concerned with Wyatt getting killed by Ringo as much as killing Ringo to "eliminate a counterpart."

Perhaps I've been to generous to Doc here, but I do think that there is an obvious moral contrast being drawn here between the "good guys" and the "bad guys." delineating a kind of code of justice that exists in the Earp Posse, but is glaringly absent in the Cowboys. Doc and Ringo seem to epitomize that code existentially in their characters. Of course, I could be completely out to lunch, which is why I am waiting until the community responds before posting to the main article.

I believe you are basically correct. I rather disagree with assertions (above; higher) that Doc & Ringo are about the same; ie mirror images of each other. I believe most viewers - the masses that don't go into historical detail or deep psyhcoanalysis of characters - see Doc as Good and Rngo as Evil. Period.

Pragmatic Doc is in it to support his friends. Doc also has a debilitating disease. Ringo is driven by some psychotic sense of loss or percieved mistreatment (almost like he's been 'wronged' somehow by the world)...To me, these characters are fairly distinct. They share education, and extreme skill with weapons, and each seems to sit on the fringes of his respective "family", but other than that their motivations and actions are very different...Engr105th 21:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, in my honest opinion I believe they were meant to be see as Mirror Images(Kind of an equal to Doc). I think the first exchange between the two of them was supposed to insinuate that(Doc says something in Latin to outwit the cowboys, and Ringo sees it happen, and returns it, meaning that they are indeed equal on the opposite sides of the proverbial spectrum of life). It also continues(And this is really far out there and something I just thought of) with the equalness to say that Doc is dying and Ringo is full of life. Ringo said he sold his soul to the devil and Doc makes the comment about Kate as written above. Doc(While completely drunk) shows no fear to Ringo outside and Ringo(If I remember correctly) was only brave when Doc seemed to be basically dead by the tree(And of course when he thought Doc was unable to think straight in the town). Granted most of this(Like I said) is out there, but I do think it was supposed to be some sort of metaphorical thing about equals between them. Raven6248 20:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Loosely based?

Why is this line in the article, "The movie is loosely based on the 1957 classic, Gunfight At The O.K. Corral."? Why wouldn't it be based on the actual historical people and events, rather than a previous film which was even more loosely based on actual historical people and events? Is there some evidence that says it's more based on the earlier film? Fred8615 20:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

This movie was in no way based upon the movie "Gunfight At The O.K. Corral".--12.2.10.242 (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That was changed years ago. Meishern (talk) 00:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Willem Dafoe

Can someone PLEASE add to the article why Buena Vista refused to have Willem Dafoe cast as Doc Holliday? This is left wide open, and simply leave the reader asking "Why??" --Schmendrick (talk) 19:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This has indeed been added by a generous contributor. Evixir (talk) 19:09, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Latin Conversation

Someone please tell me what was said between Doc and Ringo during their exchange in the saloon in Lating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.172.6.66 (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Doc Holliday: In vino veritas. (In wine there is truth.) Johnny Ringo: Age quod agis. (Do what you do.) Doc Holliday: Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego. (Let Apella the Jew believe, not I.) Johnny Ringo: Iuventus stultorum magister. (Youth is the teacher of fools.) Doc Holliday: In pace requiescat. (May he rest in peace.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.180.94 (talk) 03:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, while those are the literal translations...It doesn't make sense without a background into the language and how people were taught it. This is what they are saying in a more modern context:

Doc: In wine there is truth (when I'm drinking, I speak my mind) Ringo: Be careful what you say. (or do what you do best, ie drinking) Doc: Tell that to an "idiot", not me. (or I don't believe drinking is what I do best) Ringo: Fools must be taught by experience. (tapping his pistol) Doc: Rest in peace. (Its your funeral)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.53.3.5 (talk) 07:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Ghost Director

A number of wiki pages mention the director being a "ghost director" on Tombstone...can someone clarify what that means? Maybe even a possible wiki page? smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This is tricky. Kurt Russel claimed that he directed the whole movie but promised not to disclose it until Cosmatos was dead. Is it true? Who knows. Meishern (talk) 00:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Kurt Russel claims he had a "secret sign-language" on set with the director and claims he directed the film. As of yet not one person has substantiated this claim. The way it's listed on the article page is not right... we should get verified sources that proves this claim. If that was the case then why didn't he get credited as the director? Sounds fishy to me. Maybe Kurt Russel's ego is so out of control he actually believes it. And maybe it's even true. But until we have some kind of evidence should we list it as fact? I think not. If Al Gore says "I invented the internet" should we list it as fact based on him saying it? Again, I think not. --76.210.234.27 (talk) 02:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've edited the first paragraph to make Kurt Russel the "ghost director", as that's the common usage of "ghosting" -- as in "ghost-writing" a book. There's a story that everyone agreed to keep this on the QT until Cosmatos had passed on. This, of course, leaves the principal witness unable to confirm or deny. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 22:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Headlines

to use with this article--J.D. (talk) 16:07, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about Tombstone (film). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1