Review of The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

The three way stand off at the end of the film is the best stand off that's ever been recorded in Cinema history. The tension, the anxiety, that builds and builds. The fast cutting from faces to guns and to just the eye movements of Tuco, Angel Eyes, and Blondie make the sequence unforgettable and unrivaled in the history of stand offs in the Western genre.

If you watch the film for the first time the tension rises steadily, steadily. And the question of what will happen; who will shoot who? Angel Eyes would shoot Blondie. And Blondie would shoot Angel Eyes. But who will Tuco shoot? Would he shoot Angel Eyes who had him tortured? Or would he shoot Blondie who nearly had him hanged by the noose? It's a tough decision. But Tuco decides to kill Angel Eyes. The question doesn't get answered as his pistol is empty.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is a strong case for the best Western ever. It has all the ingredients of a great film. A strong story, a strong cast, and a World that makes the viewer nostalgic for the Civil War. And the War may be the best part of the film. It looms like a storm over every crucial scene. Starring Clint Eastwood as the man with no name, Eli Wallach, and Lee Van Cleef as the trio of bandits hunting the 200,000 in gold, the film was released in 1966 to great acclaim. The film is the capstone in the trilogy of films by Sergio Leone. Eastwood starred in all three as the dead eye who can't be beat.

The cast is all around great. Every performance notches a solid grade. From the guy who faces the camera at the beginning of the film to the farmer that Angel Eyes murders in the first segment of the film, each character contributes to the film.

I was taken in by each of the three main characters. Angel Eyes especially. He is so evil and so cold-hearted. He kills without remorse. Always getting his way until he is finally put down by Blondie. Blondie is the other character that comes off as an extension of John Wayne. He can't be beat. He makes the precise shot every time. He conveys no emotion. No deep psychology. He keeps going until the good fight is won. He stands as the symbol of White, Christian, settlers out on the range battling with everyone else to win. And win he does. He is like the myth of the greatness of settlement. He is the good.

Eli Wallach however is the ugly. And it shows. He fights for scraps trying to outwit Blondie and Angel Eyes. The film really is the story of Tuco. Without him the story doesn't move forward and isn't as good. Otherwise we would just have a standoff between Blondie and Angel Eyes. There would be no search for the 200,000. The character of Tuco is not as perfect as Blondie. But he has appeal. He is funny and obscene. In the scene where is introduced he has a bottle of liquor and a chicken leg in his hand while being pursued by bounty hunters. It is comical and shows the nature of The Wild West. Tuco is a great and memorable character. The final scene when he screams at Blondie is one of the best endings in a Western ever filmed. I wanted to see that scene again the minute it was over.

The techniques in the film are incredible. It far surpasses any Western in terms of battle scenes or cinematography. It makes ample and expert use of the close up. From the first shot of the film to final showdown, the cameras zoom in on just the eyes. The darting, insecure eyes, reveal all. Who will get shot? Who will die? The battle scene with the Union soldiers going against the Confederate soldiers on the bridge is incredible. I asked myself as the scene played out, how much did it cost? All of those canon ball shots, the close ups of the canons shooting off, how much did they cost? Such good film making. No other Western that I've seen rivals it. Not up until the point of the release of the film. Dances With Wolves does have some great shots too. But that wasn't until the 1990's.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is easily the best Western of it's generation. Sergio Leone is clearly a genius at creating movies in the Western genre that restore it to it's greatness. Seven Men From Now may have been entertaining to the crowd of the 40's or 50's, but compared to Leone's Spaghetti Westerns they look old, tired, and obsolete. Perhaps The Searchers can measure up to a film like The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.

The Searchers is deep and complex. It deals with issues between settlers and Native Americans. It raises questions that Dances With Wolves deals with in the most complex way I've seen yet on screen. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly doesn't deal with any issues related to colonialism. In fact there are no Native Americans in the film. It does create a sympathy for The South like Keaton's The General or Gone With the Wind. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly may have been the peak of Leone's work. Made at a time when film and culture was changing it shows that new ideas for The Western are a good thing. The reinvention of genres reveals that film will live on in different, better forms.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is a film that should be watched several times. In Clint Eastwood there is the legend of the unbeatable cowboy. Quick with a gun and short on empathy. Along with Leone they create films that are legendary. They will live on in film history far past the death of the director or Eastwood himself. I've seen the film at least four times and every time I'm watching the final battle scene into the showdown with rapt attention. Every time Eastwood's tension filled eyes draw me in to see how he will strike down his enemies with cold precision. Like an act of God he kills with exactitude. Yet, I reflect, is it all just a myth? Was there anyone really that good?

Review of The Searchers

Was John Wayne really that bad? Over the course of his film career he made himself into an icon of The Western. In Film History you can't study The Western without considering John Wayne. He made so many Westerns that were of such quality that he is a legend. Whatever his politics are. The Searchers is a Western that many people consider his best work. Working with John Ford it addresses so many questions of The Western; settlement by White pioneers, the one sided portrayal of Native Americans, the archetype of the Western gunman which is so ingrained into American culture, and the defense of White, Christian culture against outsiders.

For me it brought up questions about the very broad issue of Colonialism. The Western frontier ended sometime in the 20th century. Yet, Colonialism affected not just North America, but also Asia, Africa, and South America. Whatever your opinion about Western settlement, The Searchers is a canonical film which raises questions for debate and is indispensable for studying the West and Colonialism. Like Huckleberry Finn and Gone With the Wind, The Searchers is a film which shows life as it was in those days. However Racist, one sided, and White Supremacist it might be, we should allow films like The Searchers to show how life really was before revisionism and political correctness took hold. Times have changed. But I'm not for white washing History just to show how far we have come. For it is only when we know where we are from that we know where we are. And if you forget your past, you are forever condemned to repeat it.

The best qualities of The Searchers are it's plot and main character Ethan played by John Wayne. The plot commences with an idyllic setting on the Texas plains. Everything seems hunky dory until one of the farmers has his cows stolen. This leads to the defining moment of the film; when Ethan's family is slaughtered. This sequence was masterfully done by John Ford. I was reminded of the scene from the first Star Wars movie where Luke Skywalker returns to find his Aunt and Uncle slaughtered by Imperial troops. The scene from The Searchers is almost the same. The house is burning, the women have been kidnapped or murdered, and the men are dead. The reaction of John Wayne is memorable. His eyes are teary as he looks on. The only action is anger. Thus begins his long search to avenge his family.

It is the plot that keeps this film going. There is a debate about what should be the motive force in a film. Should it be the plot? Or character? This film moves along because of plot. Without the plot there would be no film. Beginning with Laurie's reading of Martin's letter the film moves from scene to scene up until the final thirty minutes of the film. Along the way there are minor characters and Ethan always figures into the action. But the plot, the sequence of events, keeps the film moving from scene to scene. Until finally, Scar is killed and Debbie is rescued from captivity.

The film would be nothing without John Wayne. The second time I watched the film it occurred to me that no one talks down to The Duke. He is always posturing and speaking from a position of superiority. The only person who can confront Ethan is the Commanche Chief Scar. The scene where Ethan and Scar meet is a taught scene filled with anger and tension and the one person who might be able to best Ethan. But John Wayne is never defeated. He doesn't kill Scar. In fact I thought the killing of Scar could have been done better. Scar gets three pistol shots from Martin and dies. Only to be disgraced by Ethan in a later scene. I thought they could have shown Scar's death a little more gruesomely. After all he does remorselessly kill many white settlers. I was hoping for more revenge.

The Western was John Wayne's best genre and produced his best films. The Green Berets, which so many people have criticized negatively, may have been out of touch and too propagandistic. But, you can't deny that some of Wayne's Westerns are not only entertaining, but critically address issues of the White Settler community. Perhaps they don't address the other side of the argument very well.

The Searchers will stand as a film which shows the perspective of the White Settler. It reminds me of arguments Niall Ferguson made about the British Empire. Would the World be a better place without the British Empire? The spread of Democracy, Capitalism, and the English language on the rest of the World, are seen by Ferguson as positives. The same could be said for the settlement of the Western United States. And I think The Searchers is representative of that argument. That settlement, the spread of Democracy, Capitalism, and the American way of life was a good thing.

Review of McCabe and Mrs. Miller

McCabe and Mrs. Miller is the most realistic Western I’ve ever seen. For all its shortcomings, it does not fail to portray the West as it was. Like Altman’s big breakthrough Mash, McCabe and Mrs. Miller gives audiences a view to a bygone era of American history. The film is replete with references to the Old West. And the ending is just as poignant as the entire film. It presents a view of the Old West from a saloon keeper and a gambler. It shows how the prostitutes lived. Instead of alluding to the situations of the Old West it takes you inside and shows how it was in all its glory.

The best part of the film is it’s World. It is a period piece of excellent quality. Everything is there; the boom town, the gambler, the madame, the prostitutes, the hungry miners, and the last desperate shootout to the death. All of the qualities are there for Altman to orchestrate into a film that dramatizes an aspect of the West which was rarely shown. Before it was typical Western. Cowboys versus Indians. Settlers being harassed in their mission to settle the frontier. Never before was the West of the gamblers, drunkards, and prostitutes given such voice as they were in this film. Surely the Western was never the same after McCabe and Mrs. Miller.

If the World was the best part of the film, the writing was a close second place. The characters and plot of the film keep the audience interested in what will happen next. And when the company men are introduced it seems that a criticism of American Capitalism takes precedence. Warren Beatty is a struggling small businessman who is given no choice but to fight for his life against the oppressive, tyrannical mining company. It presents the main conflict of the film; man versus the corporation. In the America of that time big business was unrivaled in America. And the worst aspects of that dominance emerged on the frontier. In the film the mining company owns everything. McCabe can only plead to make a deal to save his life. He knows it’s a losing struggle. And his death is the last gasp against the mining company’s control of the town, of the frontier, and of the country.

McCabe is a romantic figure in thinking he has rights. That he can go to a lawyer and have some kind of redress against the company. The final struggle shows that he doesn’t have any rights in opposition against the company which is the representative of Capitalism. The character of McCabe shows that free will is a fallacy. McCabe’s destiny is not determined by his own actions, but by the actions of a mining company. Freedom is an illusion.

The film is rather slow. It takes time to develop and only picks up steam when Julie Christie makes an appearance in the film. Without her the film would suffer badly. The scenes of the miners waiting for the hookers is rather banal. And Warren Beatty’s Western accent becomes hardly believable as the film progresses.

Still there isn’t much wrong with the film. The technical aspects are all top notch. It’s a film that reinvigorates the stale genre of the Western. Sergio Leone may have created a fantastical realism in his spaghetti Westerns. But those seem like fabrications of a West that never existed. Altman’s film feels real. Like I could have walked onto the set and felt like I was really in the West. It has a humanistic realism that is altogether lacking in the more popular, yet less meaningful films of Leone.

Review of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

Is the Western a dead genre? It would certainly seem that the Western as a genre has been dying for some time. Sure there are still movies made about the West, but clearly the frontier as it was called in the past has been discovered many times over. But legends still persist. And as long as interest in those legends persist the Western genre will survive. Not as gloriously as in the past, but as a genre with something to say about the large canon of works that center around The West as a mythology in American History.

John Wayne was obsolete by the New Hollywood. And Clint Eastwood made his last Western in 1990 with Unforgiven. It seems that no one has come along to take up the mantle of the quick on the draw, tough as nails, Western leading man. Some efforts have been made like Brad Pitt in Jesse James. Surely he has large boots to fill. Playing a legend is not so easy. Only a personality like Pitt could take on such a large role. He brings a deeper psychology then John Wayne ever had in any of his characters. And unlike Clint Eastwood he doesn’t vanquish his foes at the end. It is a different kind of Western leading man than has been portrayed in the genre.

The film is the story of Jesse James last two years of life. It’s starts out with a train robbery. There is much made about the life of a bandit in The West. It seems those were the glory days for cowboys. Sitting around a fire, talking about sex, getting ready to pull off a heist with the legendary Jesse James; only in the Old West could it have happened. I wonder how many young boys still dream about being a bandit and robbing trains or banks?

It is these fantasies that the film plays on. It is thoughts like these that have obsessed Robert Ford. Played by Casey Affleck, he is despised by almost everyone in the film. Right away he is scene as a coward to be detested for his dastardly act. The film plays out the rivalries among the James gang until we reach Jesse James’ hideout. On a fateful day Robert Ford shoots him from behind with his daughter, son, and wife close by. The film then wraps up by giving a brief history of Robert Ford’s ignominious fame as the assassin who killed Jesse James.

What really stands out in this film is the acting. The director and actors should be commended for their efforts in the film. The casting of Pitt against a smaller, weaker Casey Affleck is a stroke of genius. Their contrasts make the assassination scene that much harder to bear and more intriguing. In that scene alone there could have been another movie made. It’s almost like a film within a film. The tension, the extreme melancholy between the Ford boys and Jesse James is painstakingly depicted. I could almost feel a migraine or a bout of depression coming on as I watched Affleck wash his face, then sit in the rocking chair waiting to strike down Pitt with his new gun. The amount of restraint that was shown during the scene from each actor made it seem almost surreal. It seemed like time had ground to a halt. And all the World was contained in that room in the cottage.

The film feels like a novel with all the narration. Most screenwriters are instructed to not use too much voice over because it comes off as sloppy screenwriting. The rule is “show, don’t tell.” I’m not sure if I like all the narration. In some parts it was useful. In other parts it seemed like a show from the History channel which was tedious and boring. I suppose the intention was to give the legend some weight from what appears to be a secondary source in an omniscient narrator. The narration allows the film to jump from year to year and place to place. It’s especially well used at the end of the film to show how the Ford Brothers met their end after they had a brief stretch of fame.

The film aspires to what other classic Westerns aspire to; mythology. The West is it’s own mythology which has been portrayed in movies for decades. From the John Wayne and John Ford years to more contemporary films, films have created myths and legends like Jesse James which fascinate audiences. The Western is not dead. And this film is proof of that.