The Hatfields and McCoys... - Page 4 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #1 06-03-2012, 03:02 PM

Finally got around to watching all of it. Not bad, seems to have a good bit of historical accuracy. I have to wonder if the second McCoy girl to get involved with Johnse was just a double agent all along.

Plenty of sinning on both sides but it seems as thought the elder McCoy was a particularly hard nut to crack.

The Clk Man · #2 06-03-2012, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Finally got around to watching all of it. Not bad, seems to have a good bit of historical accuracy. I have to wonder if the second McCoy girl to get involved with Johnse was just a double agent all along.

Plenty of sinning on both sides but it seems as thought the elder McCoy was a particularly hard nut to crack.

The credits at the end said that Johnse Hatfield was married an additional 4 times.

cmac2012 · #3 06-04-2012, 03:42 AM

I thought it well made in many respects but dang, I often had a hard time understanding the dialogue. I would replay it several times with the volume up high and could still not make out what the hay-ell they were saying. I'm often amazed at films in general that they don't go in and splice a re-reading of the lines over the garbled ones. Surely they could get remote readings of the lines from the actors, couldn't be that expensive, and I would think they have the tech to do it seamlessly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Clk Man

The credits at the end said that Johnse Hatfield was married an additional 4 times.

Found this, was also mentioned in the credits but this has more detail:

Quote:

In a twist of fate, Johnse Hatfield, convicted separately and later than the others of feud crimes, was pardoned when he saved the life of Lt. Gov. William Pryor Thorne as the latter was attacked by an inmate during the official's prison inspection. Johnse's wife Nancy had long since left him, moved in with and, upon the pair's mutual divorces, eventually married his pursuer, Frank Phillips. She died at 36.

http://blueridgecountry.com/archive/hatfields-and-mccoys.html

Ara T. · #4 06-04-2012, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I thought it well made in many respects but dang, I often had a hard time understanding the dialogue. I would replay it several times with the volume up high and could still not make out what the hay-ell they were saying. I'm often amazed at films in general that they don't go in and splice a re-reading of the lines over the garbled ones. Surely they could get remote readings of the lines from the actors, couldn't be that expensive, and I would think they have the tech to do it seamlessly.Found this, was also mentioned in the credits but this has more detail:

The Hatfield-McCoy Feud: Roseanna, Don't You Cry - Favorite Articles - Archive

Agree with you on the dialogue. Too much muttering and mumbling. Some of the dialogue was extremely cheesy as well.
"AH AM HELL ON URTH" But hey better than the usual crap History Channel peddles nowadays.

cmac2012 · #5 06-04-2012, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ara T.

Agree with you on the dialogue. Too much muttering and mumbling. Some of the dialogue was extremely cheesy as well.
"AH AM HELL ON URTH" But hey better than the usual crap History Channel peddles nowadays.

They did paint some fairly broad caricatures. The McCoy woman who had been married to Johnse, after her true love Phillips was shot, after hitting the guy who shot him (in self defense if the film is to be believed) chimed in 'there weren't none better than my Frank fer killin' Hatfields!' Oh well, live by the sword . . .

And the guy in the role of her brother hammed it up pretty good when he came to their cabin saying they were after him, he needed to hide out, etc. It was sorta funny, him waving his gun as he gestured. He said he shot the guy, they asked why, he says 'cuz I was drunk!'

God only knows how much of this was pure fabrication by the film-makers, well maybe someone other than God but not me.

JB3 · #6 06-04-2012, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

They did paint some fairly broad caricatures. The McCoy woman who had been married to Johnse, after her true love Phillips was shot, after hitting the guy who shot him (in self defense if the film is to be believed) chimed in 'there weren't none better than my Frank fer killin' Hatfields!' Oh well, live by the sword . . .

And the guy in the role of her brother hammed it up pretty good when he came to their cabin saying they were after him, he needed to hide out, etc. It was sorta funny, him waving his gun as he gestured. He said he shot the guy, they asked why, he says 'cuz I was drunk!'

God only knows how much of this was pure fabrication by the film-makers, well maybe someone other than God but not me.

I don't know, that sort of stuff isnt too far from reality when people are completely sauced.
Of course everyone has a hand gun on their person.

I was just thinking back on how many silly altercations ive gotten into over my youth over stupid crap, and what could have happened if anyone had been armed at the time. Stands to reason that the ridiculousness of it is fairly accurate to a community of drunk, armed men

jplinville · #7 06-04-2012, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

They did paint some fairly broad caricatures. The McCoy woman who had been married to Johnse, after her true love Phillips was shot, after hitting the guy who shot him (in self defense if the film is to be believed) chimed in 'there weren't none better than my Frank fer killin' Hatfields!' Oh well, live by the sword . . .

And the guy in the role of her brother hammed it up pretty good when he came to their cabin saying they were after him, he needed to hide out, etc. It was sorta funny, him waving his gun as he gestured. He said he shot the guy, they asked why, he says 'cuz I was drunk!'

God only knows how much of this was pure fabrication by the film-makers, well maybe someone other than God but not me.

A little comparison between reality and the movie...

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2012/05/29/how-realistic-is-hatfields-and-mccoys/?mod=google_news_blog

SwampYankee · #8 06-04-2012, 03:56 PM

2 episodes in and I find myself "rooting" for Devil Anse. Not entirely sure why. Both sides are completely off their rockers. I guess Randall comes across as the woe-is-me type.

SwampYankee · #9 06-04-2012, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

A little comparison between reality and the movie...

'Hatfields and McCoys': How Realistic is The Kevin Costner Miniseries on History? - Speakeasy - WSJ

What the hell would a professor emeritus from UConn know about the Hatfield-McCoy feud???

jplinville · #10 06-04-2012, 08:03 AM

Since my grandparents and uncles hail from those same hills that the H&M's fought on, I grew up listening to that same dialect. My grandfather, who used to tell me stories of the feud that were told to him by his father, had a VERY thick accent from the hills of Kentucky.

Oddly, I had NO problems understanding each and every word they said. I did, however, had to explain some of it to my wife and kids.

SwampYankee · #11 06-04-2012, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

Since my grandparents and uncles hail from those same hills that the H&M's fought on, I grew up listening to that same dialect. My grandfather, who used to tell me stories of the feud that were told to him by his father, had a VERY thick accent from the hills of Kentucky.

Oddly, I had NO problems understanding each and every word they said. I did, however, had to explain some of it to my wife and kids.

Hell, me and mine going back centuries are all from New England and I didn't have much trouble understanding them. Some of the Maine relatives aren't much different from the H&M's, except they have some of Edison's lightning bulbs and their accents are a different funny.

I've watched episodes 1 & 2 in hour segments (after my little guys go to bed) and will start 3 tonight. I've enjoyed it.

BobK · #12 06-04-2012, 10:15 AM

I have to admit, I did not have any trouble at all understanding them. Then again, I have spent all but 2 years of my life in Ky.

jplinville · #13 06-04-2012, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobK

I have to admit, I did not have any trouble at all understanding them. Then again, I have spent all but 2 years of my life in Ky.

It's an acquired ability, necessary for outsiders to learn if they plan on doing any business or traveling through the area.

cmac2012 · #14 06-05-2012, 02:55 PM

It's hard to say. It appears as though they took serious liberties with the Perry Cline story. Apparently, a detailed account of what went down on the Devil Anse/Cline lawsuit will not be forthcoming. I found this bit from a Cline family website about it:

Quote:

5/31/2012 - The recent mini-series, Hatfields & McCoys, starring Kevin Costner, takes certain liberties with the actual facts as they pertain to Perry Cline. First, in the movie, when Perry Cline first confronts Devil Anse Hatfield, he is portrayed as an attorney representing a client who claims that Devil Anse is cutting timber on his client's land. This is a complete fabrication of the actual facts. In reality, in 1872, a lawsuit was filed by Devil Anse Hatfield against Perry Cline over ownership or timber rights to a 5,000 acre tract of land on Grapevine Creek. Perry, and his brother Jacob Jr., inherited that 5,000 acre tract from their father, Jacob "Rich Jake" Cline, in 1858 when Jacob died. The matter was settled out of court by 1877 when Perry deeded his interest in this 5,000 acre tract to Devil Anse. During this period, Perry was not a lawyer, and he was not representing anyone else's interest as a lawyer. It is unknown how Devil Anse Hatfield got control of that tract of land. However, it was not due to Perry Cline filing a false claim as an attorney on behalf of another, as is claimed in the movie. Perry Cline does not become a lawyer until several years after the beginning of the lawsuit. What is clear is that the writers intended to portray Perry Cline as a "shyster lawyer" from the very beginning.

Second, Perry Cline was married in 1868 to Martha Adkins and had several children with her by the time of the major events of the feud. However, in the movie, Perry is portrayed as a bachelor, with interest in Roseanna McCoy, which never happened. It is true that Roseanna lived with Perry Cline and his wife and children in later years, but as a nanny and nothing more.

The end of the movie is a further attempt to smear Perry Cline when he introduces his bride to Frank Phillips. The insinuation by Frank Phillips, that Perry liked his women "young," is demonstrably false as shown by census and marriage records. The 1870 Logan County, West Virginia census lists Perry Cline as 20 years old, with wife Martha as 21 years old, and their oldest child, John (1 yr old). If the real Perry Cline liked his women "young," he would not have married someone older than himself. As is obvious, the writers were again attempting to paint Perry Cline in a negative light.

Poetic license is sometimes used very effectively to condense real life events, that took place over several years, into a manageable length for a movie. However, this movie unnecessarily takes liberties to portray one side as "good" and the other as "evil." It is unfortunate but it appears that the writers saw it necessary to falsely implicate someone as the "bad guy." It might make good fiction, but it does not make good history.

Jerry P. Cline

Cline Family Association

Other sites have about the same info. I've read several times that the latter half of the feud could be more accurately be called the Cline/Hatfield feud and the movie more or less alludes to that. Hard to know who was the bigger villain from this distance.