Decidedly bloody-kill-deathy in this chapter of writing about watching the entire AFI Top 100 (10th Anniversary Edition) in a brief time period. I never would have imagined I'd love a film like this. And I did. I loved this film.
Film 90
90. "The Wild Bunch" (AFI Rank #79)
I've been staring at the screen wondering how to start this piece. Do I start by saying that it's the last film in the list that I'd never seen before? Do I start by saying that before watching this film, my entire knowledge of Sam Peckinpah comes from Monty Python? Do I start by reiterating that I generally dislike Westerns? Do I start by talking about William Holden appearing in yet another film in the Top 100? Do I start by talking about my preference for "male-themed" films? Wait. I think I just did all of those. So clever...I like to think I am.
I watched "The Wild Bunch" the other night, and frankly...I was blown away by how damned good it was. And that term is applicable. Blown away.
Saddled (HA!) with a premise that seems so tired: "one more job, and then I'm done," this film came at me with one hand tied behind its back. It was at a disadvantage, and I sat in contempt as the film opened. Then something amazing happened. This prejudicial take that I'd had on it was shattered within the first five minutes. What I was watching was a western, complete with all of its clichés, but the film was so much more. Sam Peckinpah, as I said above, was familiar to me only from the very funny, very graphically bloody "Sam Peckinpah's 'Salad Days'" sketch on "Monty Python's Flying Circus." You know what? That sketch is not necessarily that far from the truth, at least as I saw it in this film. And, Python makes a good caricature of Peckinpah, at least what I saw. However, there is so much more there, so much depth to be plumbed.
Telling the tale of a group of outlaws who start the film in an ambush, this film sets its tone IMMEDIATELY. A bloody (and yes, BLOODY) shootout begins almost from the start between our protagonists and a group of guns hired by the railroad to kill these men who have taken so much. The leader of the hunters is a former member of the gang, Deke Thornton, the partner of William Holden's Pike Bishop. He is played with great depth by Robert Ryan, who, while charged with killing his former friends, clearly hates the idea, and is doing so only to avoid jail time. As the gang is getting ready to leave the site of a train holdup, they are besieged by Thornton's band of criminal bounty hunters, who are firing upon them from various places on various roofs. Several members of both gangs are killed. Now, that's fairly standard stuff. What isn't standard, however, is that the whole gunfight happens in broad daylight, in a NON-deserted town square, right as a Temperance Union parade is marching down Main Street. Civilians are killed, both male and female, and children are placed in harm's way. We are clearly looking at a film where morals are not based on "good and evil," like most Westerns, but a film in which the good guys are clearly as warped as the bad guys. And that, friends, is interesting as hell to this here viewer.
Eventually, the protagonists get away, and regroup at the compound of a straight-out-of-central-casting old man, complete with cackle and bad teeth. The members of the gang are Dutch Engstrom (Ernest Borgnine), brothers Lyle and Tector Gorch (Warren Oates and Ben Johnson, respectively), and Angel (Jamie Sanchez). As they deal with regathering themselves, they go to split up the loot, only to discover that the coins in the bags are just washers. Old man Sykes (Edmond O'Brien) cackles away, and eventually the men do, also. This film has a lot of that, by the way. It has a lot of men laughing wildly. In fact, I might consider that a bad thing, as the laughter often serves as the button on a scene, and it often feels put upon. Whatever. The men decide that they are going to do one last job, and rob a train right along the Mexican/American border. Eventually, we wind up in Angel's home town, where his girlfriend has been stolen by a drunken buffoon of a general named Mapache (Emilio Fernandez). Meeting with Mapache, the men decide to take the train, which has a load of guns that the general wants. For this, they will be paid $10,000. Angel sees his girlfriend, now a concubine in Mapache's harem, and kills her dead. Mapache, in spite of the insult, lets him go, but the men have crossed a very powerful man.
Long story short, they rob the train, Angel decides to keep some of the guns himself, he's branded a thief, and Engstrom leaves him in Mapache's clutches. The rest of the men take their money. After an attempt to talk with the general, they leave Angel again, as he is being tortured by Mapache. Finally, at long last, they give each other the "looks like it's a good day to die" look, and they decide to take Angel back by force. Four against an army. The final shootout is amazing, and the ending is great. I'm not giving away more.
Look, to call this film bold would be an understatement. Its use of squibs to show bullet damage was not new. Its excessive blood might have been. Its use of nudity wasn't new, but the way it's used, it is right in your face. And that's the crux of this film. It's just always in your face. It's making you part of whatever happens, good, bad, or otherwise. The torture scene makes you feel pain. The gunshots show what happens to mere flesh when hot metal comes in contact with it. Horses are...well. If you're an animal lover, you probably want to avoid this film. I'm not sure any horses were injured, but I'll say this. A stuntman may know that a bridge is about to collapse under him in an explosion. A horse doesn't. In today's CGI, horses can be abused and it's all pixels. Not so with this film. Nope, stunts are practical, and horses are a big part of what happens.
Early in the film, there is a scene of a scorpion being placed in an ant hill. Again, it may not mean a whole lot symbolically, but the image can't be shaken. Whatever it was that Peckinpah is saying, I'm not 100% sure. What I am 100% sure about, however, is that he meant to say it. He may not have always had a plan, as my research suggests, but once he made a decision on how to take a scene, he committed to that decision.
I'm also going to say that the final march of the men into Mapache's compound should be among the 100 film scenes you watch before you die. It's stirring, gritty stuff. And from all research I've done, was made up kinda right on the spot. Camera angles, music, acting, lighting, plot, everything is so well executed in this brief scene. Really, it should be talked about as one of film's great iconic shots. Ultimately, this film just makes us ask questions of ourselves. We find ourselves rooting for truly despicable men, because they are against slightly more despicable men, whether on the side of law, or military, or whatever. Filmed in 1969, this is a decidedly anti-establishment story/film. I've little doubt that there is deeper allegory in the entire thing. No one is worthy of our admiration, no matter what they are doing at the moment, yet we are drawn to them, because we see us in all of them. At least I do. I am, as you know, a firm believer in the idea of choice in my villains. What must it take to make the choice to be a criminal? What must it take to hunt them? When do the lines get blurred? I'm not sure. Peckinpah wants to be sure that you ask yourself that, though.
Cinematography is breathtaking, at times, as most Westerns are. Flash "subliminal" images can be found throughout. Blood is bloody. Gunshots matter. Bad guys die. Good guys die. Man, this is a tremendous film. "Bonnie and Clyde" started the trend towards violence having visceral consequences. This film takes that idea/technique, and perverts it, setting precedents for far more bloody, more visceral experiences. Put it this way. "Saving Private Ryan" doesn't have the same Omaha Beach scene without this film. It's that important. Oh, and Quentin Tarantino doesn't exist, AT ALL, without Sam Peckinpah. Period. Acting is about as good as can be expected. Holden is fearless, and offers us a complex protagonist. Early on in the film, we know we're supposed to like this guy. Yet, when one of his men is wounded in the opening gun battle, it is Bishop who dispatches the man with a bullet to the head. Lines are drawn, then erased. Holden shows these depths in all he does. Borgnine also shows a staggering range, even if he often feels like a good guy, just having a great time. Check out his face during the train robbery. It's beautiful, and it's full of depth. Borgnine may be the sergeant, the rough number 2 who keeps men in line, but there's one moment in that train robbery where we see real mirth in what he does. It's awesome. Ben Johnson and Warren Oates are capable enough throughout, but it is their steely resolve for the final scene that really cements the scene. Tremendous. Even Edmond O'Brien is great, if caricature.
The other side of the story, of course, is the man hunting the criminals down, and Robert Ryan is brilliant in his portrayal. Full of melancholy, regret, and resolve, Thornton is chased by demons, which compel him to chase them himself. In lesser hands, we'd likely dislike Thornton a lot. He is a turncoat. However, because of nuance expressed by Ryan, and the relatively delicate treatment of the bombastic film, we get a fully fleshed out character who is intriguing as hell. Apparently, however, Ryan was a pain in the ass during the film, and if you watch the opening credit sequence, you'll notice that he is billed alongside a photograph of a horse's ass. I mentioned that this film was in your face, right? Unfortunate, of course, is the portrayal of the Mexicans, but even films like this need some caricatures. Mapache is a slimeball, though, and Fernandez does a tremendous job of showing us that.
All right folks, I've now watched them all. This one right here, I was dubious about in advance. No longer. This is a VERY important film, one that I was dead wrong about in advance. I'm glad that this project makes me watch these films, though. I've gotten to see a bunch of great ones that I would have otherwise avoided. I'm telling you to watch this film. It's that good, and it's that important. One other thing. If you're a woman, this film may cause you to grow a penis. Not that I'd call that a desirable condition, but this film will suck all femininity out of anyone, because there's nary a whiff of it in the film.
Roger Ebert goes so far as to call the film a masterpiece. I'm inclined to agree with him, and he and I explore similar themes in our critiques. Ebert had obviously watched it more than once, but I love his essay. Roger included the film in his series on "Great Movies." It's here. I agree. It's a great movie.
So. That's it. I've watched them all. Up last are the 10 I saved for last, including 2 of the top 3 of all time (according to the list), and a bunch that are just films you watch time and again. Can't wait.
Almost. Almost. Thanks for reading. It means a hell of a lot.
No comments:
Post a Comment