By 1969, director Sam Peckinpah had worked on several TV series and several film productions, including The Deadly Companions, Ride the High Country and Major Dundee. He was an incredibly talented director but one whose fiery personality and personal demons could potentially derail any film he worked on. But in 1969, it all came together, Peckinpah making his classic, his all-time great film, one of the best westerns ever and best films ever in general, 1969's The Wild Bunch.
It's 1913 in a small border town near the Rio Grande, and a gang of outlaws, led by the infamous Pike Bishop (William Holden), disguised as soldiers ride in to rob the bank of a rumored silver shipment. The robbery is an epic disaster as a posse of bounty hunters, led by Deke Thornton (Robert Ryan), a paroled outlaw who used to ride with Pike, is waiting in ambush. Many of Pike's gang is killed in the robbery that nets them NO money. The remaining members of the gang, including Dutch Engstrom (Ernest Borgnine), retreat into Mexico. They need a new job, a new robbery, a new chance to earn some money. Pike especially knows that time is running out, that times are changing, and their chances at surviving as outlaws is becoming ever more unlikely. It doesn't help that Deke and his bounty hunters have followed them into Mexico, looking to collect the bounties on these infamous outlaws. With time running out, what do they do?
What a movie. Every so often, each and EVERY thing involved in the making of a film comes together and forms that perfect symmetry. 'Bunch' is an all-timer, not just a movie I love but a great movie in terms of storytelling and in technical terms. Appropriate for the time it was released (the late 1960's), it is cynical, horrifically violent, brutally honest and generally downbeat. This is a western and film ahead of its time, helping set the tone where films would go in the coming years. This is Peckinpah at the top of his game. He would have other good to great to classic films, but this is his Great film. Just a gem.
There is little to nothing to criticize here. While the filming process sounds incredibly interesting (a film in itself), the choice to film in Mexico pays off huge dividends. Cinematographer Lucien Ballard shoots a beautiful movie with the Mexican countryside and desert as a backdrop. The locations are phenomenal. You feel like you're watching the actual settings of the Mexican Revolution to our story. Composer Jerry Fielding turns in quite the memorable score as well, appropriately epic at times and equally quiet and emotional as necessary in other scenes. Listen to a sample HERE. As for the story itself, Peckinpah and writer Walon Green turn in a screenplay that's just a gem. It isn't a movie in a rush, letting things breathe and allow the viewer to get to know the characters -- for good or bad -- over its 145-minute running time. Sit back and take it in. You shan't be disappointed!
Many westerns have dealt with the death of the old west, the end of an era, but none better than The Wild Bunch. It's 1913 and there's no place for these outlaws, killers and gunfighters anymore. The world is changing, and civilization (of sorts) is moving in to replace them. We follow a gang of those outlaws, robbers, killers/murderers as they try to pull off their one last job and step away, and it's a testament to the acting on display and screenplay that we feel any sympathy at all to these men. Like few movies I've ever seen, there is a doomed quality to these men who are working with limited time on their hands. They know the door is closing on them, more than likely a bloody death awaiting them if they don't figure out something soon.
Where Peckinpah's screenplay is so strong is in its characterization and its depth. There's a whole lot of acting talent on display in 'Bunch,' and for much of the cast, this is their all-time best performance or certainly one of their best. Holden's Pike Bishop is one of the most fascinating characters ever in my book, an aging outlaw who's outlived his time but doesn't know what else to do. Borgnine too is excellent as Dutch, his right-hand man who can also see the writing on the wall. Their scene together after the early botched robbery is essential, two men who potentially know what awaits them but go into things willingly because maybe that ending is what's supposed to happen. On the counter, Ryan's Deke Thornton is equally tragic. He's riding after his old partner, Bishop, and would much rather be riding with them than chasing them. But as the script relies on, your word is your word, and these men live by that coda.
One of the many things Peckinpah loved to touch on in his films was that bond of men under fire who come through while others don't. Holden's Pike is the mouthpiece for that concept, of giving your word and sticking by it even when it'd be far easier to tuck your tail and run. We see that again and again with the bunch, including Pike, Dutch, old, grizzled Sykes (Edmond O'Brien), the crass, unsavory Gorch brothers, Lyle (Warren Oates) and Tector (Ben Johnson), and Angel (Jaime Sanchez), the youngest of the group, a fiery Mexican. What's interesting is that though Pike and the bunch claim to live by this coda, they continue to fall short of actually living up to it. It's when they realize their faults in that department that the story takes a far more tragic turn toward the inevitable ending that you just knew was coming.
Because the already-mentioned star power wasn't enough, here's some more! Along with Ryan, look for scene-chewing Strother Martin and L.Q. Jones as two scummy bounty hunters with Albert Dekker as the railroad magnate "employing" them. Emilio Fernandez is perfectly slimy as Mapache, the Mexican general claiming to be some sort of freedom fighter but it seems it is all for show, for more power, with Jorge Russek and Alfonso Arau (El Guapo in Three Amigos) as his subordinate officers. Also look for Bo Hopkins, Dub Taylor and Chano Urueta in key (if small) supporting parts.
What 'Bunch' has become synonymous with over the years is its groundbreaking, sometimes horrifying portrayal of on-screen violence. It's not that Peckinpah lingers on the violence for the sake of shock value. Far from it, but instead he makes it into an art form. The idea of a 'dance of death' comes to mind in any portrayal of violence with three main set pieces (1. The opening robbery turned into a bloody shootout 2. A prolonged train robbery and 3. The final, bullet-riddled and blood-splattered gun battle). The editing is ridiculously fast and cut in with perfect uses of slow motion. Simply put, there is an art to Peckinpah's use of violence, both in the editing, in the overwhelming use of slow-motion blood squibs, and the impact of that violence we're seeing. If Bonnie and Clyde opened the door some for its own use of on-screen violence, Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch kicked that door wide open. Almost 50 years later, it still resonates, and it's clear the impact it had on hundreds and thousands of movies released since.
It all builds to maybe the most memorable action sequence of all-time. If it's not No. 1, it certainly belongs in the conversation. In a sequence that's been dubbed "The Battle of Bloody Porch," it all comes together in an extended sequence that has lost none of its edge since its release in 1969. This is a transfixing scene that is equal parts horrifying and startling but you just can't look away. There are too many great moments just in this scene alone to mention, including an improvised walk the Bunch takes on their way to a final showdown (maybe the movie's second-strongest sequence). It is followed by a quick, shocking death, and then an eerie moment of silence that hangs in the air. With one gunshot, it is on, bullets flying thick in the air. Obvious SPOILERS but you can watch it HERE. If you haven't seen the movie, I don't recommend watching the sequence out of context. Watch the movie and soak it all in as part of the whole product. Just a remarkable extended sequence with virtually no music. The focus is the characters, violence and death. Nothing more. Nothing less.
A classic in every sense of the word. I pick something new up with every viewing, and it never loses any of its impact. A film without a weakness.
The Wild Bunch (1969): ****/****
The Sons of Katie Elder

"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Jorge Russek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jorge Russek. Show all posts
Monday, December 28, 2015
Friday, May 1, 2015
Guns for San Sebastian
You know who’s pretty cool? Anthony
Quinn. I don’t always think of Mr. Quinn as one of my favorite movie
stars, but my goodness, did this man have a hell of a career. Zorba the Greek,
The Guns of Navarone, Viva Zapata, Lawrence of Arabia, he did it all. One of my
favorites though is a little known, generally forgotten quasi-spaghetti western
from 1967,Guns for San Sebastian.
It’s the late 1740s in Mexico, and bandit Leon
Alastray (Quinn) is in trouble and on the run. Wounded after the rest of his
gang is killed or captured, Leon is saved by a faithful, well-meaning old
priest, Father Joseph (Sam
Jaffe). When Joseph refuses to turn Leon over, he quietly accepts his
punishment to the far-off, possibly abandoned desert town of San Sebastian.
Feeling like he owes the old priest, Leon accompanies him far out into the
desert to the town and finds…nothing. When their plan goes awry though and the villagers
return, it is Leon who must pretend to be a priest and help the village not
just recover, but survive. Why? The villagers have come under the “protection”
of a half-breed bandit, Teclo (Charles
Bronson), who is also working with the warring Yaqui Indians. What is
Leon to do?
This quasi-spaghetti western from director Henri
Verneuil has virtually no reputation within the genre. Why? Well,
it’s a spaghetti western in name only really. It isn’t gunfighter anti-heroes
and evil bandits and extreme violence. To call it an epic isn’t fair, but it is
an above average, highly entertaining period piece. It is set in Mexico in the
1740s so not your typical background setting, but for me, it worked because
‘Guns’ is trying something different. This is a gem, one of my favorite
underrated movies that deserves a far bigger reputation.
For starters, it’s Anthony Quinn. What a great actor, what a
great presence. Accused at times of stealing scenes and other times of chewing
the scenery, I’ve always thought just the opposite. He just goes with the part.
His Leon character is fascinating both within the spaghetti western but also
the western genre in general. He’s not a cardboard cutout, an emotionless
killer. Leon goes through a change over the course of the movie. We see him
grow and develop and fight for what he believes is right. It just so happens
that his decision-making now impacts a whole village. I’ll get into this more
in a bit, but the obvious comparison for the film and character is The
Magnificent Seven.
Quinn’s Leon has been a bad, bad dude with bounties over his
head and soldiers always on his trail. Out of desperation and survival, he
follows this priest into a desert wasteland. Once he arrives in San Sebastian,
Leon starts to make tough choices, not just selfish choices. So where The
Magnificent Seven had seven gunfighters, here we have only one, but the premise
is the same, bad guys to anti-heroes to gunfighters doing what’s right, not
necessarily what’s easy. He also gets to cozy up to one of the women in the
village (Anjanette Comer) who knows his secret. It’s just a cool
dynamic though, the supposed savior and the village needing some sort of help,
familiar but tweaked.
So if we have an interesting flawed main character, we need
a worthy opponent, right? Who better than Charles Bronson? In the mid 1960s
headed to Europe and became one of the world’s biggest stars, and he’s having
some fun here. It isn’t the most well-written, developed villain, but it’s a
good part. Who else to look for? Jaffe is excellent in a smaller part and Comer
is good too, shoving aside the helpless female role that’s all too familiar in
the western. Jorge
Martinez de Hoyos too has a fun part as Cayetano, an architect
tasked with building a wall-like fort around San Sebastian to hold back an
attack. Jaime Fernandez plays Golden Lane, the Yaqui
chief, with some familiar faces among the villagers if you’re a fan of
‘Magnificent Seven’ and The Wild Bunch. There’s also small parts for Silvia
Pinal, Leon
Askin, Pedro
Armendariz Jr., and Jorge
Russek.
‘Guns’ has a ton going for it beyond the acting. As
mentioned, the story is both familiar and unique in how it develops. It was
filmed on-location in Mexico with several familiar locations in and around
Durango, including El Saltito waterfalls that’s also been seen in
Major Dundee, The Train Robbers and Sons of Katie Elders among others. It’s the
rare spaghetti western filmed away from Spain and Italy. Also, master of the
genre when it comes to soundtracks, composer Ennio
Morricone delivers an absolute gem, a beautiful score that isn’t
as big and booming as some of his more well-known scores. Listen to an extended
sample HERE. Morricone’s
score playing over the final scene is one of my all-time favorites. As always,
it’s always a plus when the littler things come through in such strong fashion.
I’ve seen this movie three or four times now, and it gets
better each time. Great performances, interesting story, an impressively staged,
large-scale action scene, memorable score, and an excellent, appropriate
ending. Highly recommended and well worth tracking down.
Guns for San Sebastian (1967): *** ½ /****
Friday, October 17, 2014
Eagle's Wing
Keep on looking, and eventually you'll continue to find movies you've absolutely heard nothing about that still appeal to you. Now if I could just win that dang lotto, I could spend all my time looking for hidden gems like that. Here's a good example. Cool cast, genre I love, interesting premise. What's the final verdict on 1979's Eagle's Wing?
It's in the 1830s in the wild expanses of the New Mexico desert. An inexperienced frontiersman and former soldier, Pike (Martin Sheen), is on his own after his partner is killed during a run-in with an Indian war party. Riding across the desert looking for what's next, Pike stumbles across a Comanche burial, a beautiful white stallion picketed nearby. Pike manages to escape with the horse, but he's not the only one interested in the horse. A Kiowa warrior, White Bull (Sam Waterston), has also seen the horse and wants it more than anything else, a run-in on the trail more than likely with such a prize on the line. That's not all though. A stagecoach and burial hearse loaded with gold and jewelry, not to mention a small group of beautiful women, is traveling across the desert at the same time. What will happen when these disparate individuals all meet up?
So ever heard of this one? Yeah, me neither. From director Anthony Harvey, 'Wing' is considered a Euro-western (I guess) as it was backed by an English studio and filmed on-location in Durango, Mexico. It received decent film reviews back in 1979 but struggled to find a footing in theaters. And wow, what a mixed bag in the end. Purely on a visual level, this flick is a stunner. You get a sense of how big the desert is, how immense the wilderness truly was when Indian tribes ruled the west and a few brave mountain men, traders and trappers navigated the country. A gorgeous film to watch, but does it rise to something else? Something more?
My biggest criticism is that 'Wing' isn't content to just be a western story with some interesting characters in an interesting historical time that doesn't always get its due in film. It has to be something more, like an allegory about human wants, needs and what drives them. Yes, it is an immaculate white stallion with impeccable speed on the line. It becomes more though. How far will these individuals go? Waterston's White Bull begins to abandon everything else he owns to keep the horse. Sheen's Pike risks bleeding to death with a wound rather than risk losing the horse. Members of a posse trailing them all turn to greed, murder and backstabbing. Maybe the premise would work better if handled a little differently, but the story never quite develops how I'd like. The second half of the movie (I saw a version about 105 minutes) is significantly better, but the finale disappoints too, open-ended without any real closure. So it's got that going for it!
And then there's the casting, some interesting, some good, and some just odd. First of all, Sam Waterston as an Indian warrior? It's not that this is a bad performance -- he doesn't speak much -- but seriously....Law and Order's resident district attorney Mr. McCoy as an 1830s Kiowa warrior? Tsk tsk, that's not ideal casting. For such a wily trailsman, White Bull also seems to make some insanely dumb decisions along the way. Sheen escapes with less damage, at times channeling his dream-like voiceover from Apocalypse Now, as the frontiersman quickly learning how to survive. Also worth mentioning? Harvey Keitel is around for about 30 minutes as Henry, a far-more experienced trader and frontiersman trying to teach Pike the ways of the wilderness.
Other characters include Judith (Caroline Langrishe), an Irish woman kidnapped by White Bull, a widowed woman (Stephane Audran) with the desert hearse, the two most persistent members of the pursuing posse (Jorge Russek and Manuel Ojeda), and Judith's brother, the Priest (John Castle).
An interesting movie for sure. As I mentioned, the second half is significantly better with the pace quickening and the chase coming to its sorta conclusion. The premise is excellent, a handful of individuals with limited weapons and fewer supplies all pursuing each other, all for different reasons. I wish I liked it more, but as is, it's a decent western with some big positives and hard to avoid negatives.
Eagle's Wing (1979): ** 1/2 /****
It's in the 1830s in the wild expanses of the New Mexico desert. An inexperienced frontiersman and former soldier, Pike (Martin Sheen), is on his own after his partner is killed during a run-in with an Indian war party. Riding across the desert looking for what's next, Pike stumbles across a Comanche burial, a beautiful white stallion picketed nearby. Pike manages to escape with the horse, but he's not the only one interested in the horse. A Kiowa warrior, White Bull (Sam Waterston), has also seen the horse and wants it more than anything else, a run-in on the trail more than likely with such a prize on the line. That's not all though. A stagecoach and burial hearse loaded with gold and jewelry, not to mention a small group of beautiful women, is traveling across the desert at the same time. What will happen when these disparate individuals all meet up?
So ever heard of this one? Yeah, me neither. From director Anthony Harvey, 'Wing' is considered a Euro-western (I guess) as it was backed by an English studio and filmed on-location in Durango, Mexico. It received decent film reviews back in 1979 but struggled to find a footing in theaters. And wow, what a mixed bag in the end. Purely on a visual level, this flick is a stunner. You get a sense of how big the desert is, how immense the wilderness truly was when Indian tribes ruled the west and a few brave mountain men, traders and trappers navigated the country. A gorgeous film to watch, but does it rise to something else? Something more?
My biggest criticism is that 'Wing' isn't content to just be a western story with some interesting characters in an interesting historical time that doesn't always get its due in film. It has to be something more, like an allegory about human wants, needs and what drives them. Yes, it is an immaculate white stallion with impeccable speed on the line. It becomes more though. How far will these individuals go? Waterston's White Bull begins to abandon everything else he owns to keep the horse. Sheen's Pike risks bleeding to death with a wound rather than risk losing the horse. Members of a posse trailing them all turn to greed, murder and backstabbing. Maybe the premise would work better if handled a little differently, but the story never quite develops how I'd like. The second half of the movie (I saw a version about 105 minutes) is significantly better, but the finale disappoints too, open-ended without any real closure. So it's got that going for it!
And then there's the casting, some interesting, some good, and some just odd. First of all, Sam Waterston as an Indian warrior? It's not that this is a bad performance -- he doesn't speak much -- but seriously....Law and Order's resident district attorney Mr. McCoy as an 1830s Kiowa warrior? Tsk tsk, that's not ideal casting. For such a wily trailsman, White Bull also seems to make some insanely dumb decisions along the way. Sheen escapes with less damage, at times channeling his dream-like voiceover from Apocalypse Now, as the frontiersman quickly learning how to survive. Also worth mentioning? Harvey Keitel is around for about 30 minutes as Henry, a far-more experienced trader and frontiersman trying to teach Pike the ways of the wilderness.
Other characters include Judith (Caroline Langrishe), an Irish woman kidnapped by White Bull, a widowed woman (Stephane Audran) with the desert hearse, the two most persistent members of the pursuing posse (Jorge Russek and Manuel Ojeda), and Judith's brother, the Priest (John Castle).
An interesting movie for sure. As I mentioned, the second half is significantly better with the pace quickening and the chase coming to its sorta conclusion. The premise is excellent, a handful of individuals with limited weapons and fewer supplies all pursuing each other, all for different reasons. I wish I liked it more, but as is, it's a decent western with some big positives and hard to avoid negatives.
Eagle's Wing (1979): ** 1/2 /****
Labels:
1970s,
Harvey Keitel,
Jorge Russek,
Martin Sheen,
Sam Waterston,
westerns
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)