An itinerant Preacher rides into a mining town facing pressure from a greedy mining company. He ends up helping the town stand up to the owner of the mining company and his thugs.
The simple story is a throwback to earlier Eastwood westerns, with Clint’s character having no name other than “Preacher”. I suspect Pale Rider has had the greatest influence on the perception of Eastwood’s western history. He is almost supernatural in his fighting and shooting (and Eastwood has suggested that the Preacher is literally a ghost).
It feels like the film is transitioning away from heroic glorification of violence, but not entirely. The bad guys are bad and never all that sympathetic.
Pale Rider draws from the Classic Shane very heavily in it’s story that you cannot help but compare the two…some have claimed the film is a remake, but Pale Rider gives no such credit to Shane. I suspect more that Eastwood wanted to explore those themes. And the key plot points are, at this point, such a trope of westerns that it is possible they did not even realize how close they were following Shane.
Pale Rider is, overall, a pretty strong Eastwood film, even though it brings little knew to westerns or even Eastwood westerns.
The movie had a beautiful poster too.
A quiet stranger rides onto the land of Joe Starrett and his family. After initially trying to rush him off (believing him to be trouble), the stranger backs him up with a local rancher tries to strong-arm the Starretts off their land. Only giving the name Shane, the stranger starts to work for Joe in exchange for a place to sleep.
Shane finds that the Starretts and several other families are struggling to hold onto their land. Local cattleman Ryker wants all the land for himself and with his employs muscle, is constantly pushing against them. Shane finds himself dealing with Stryker’s men, and after a fist fight, things escalate.
Alan Ladd’s performance is a classic of the western genre. Shane is polite, but tough. He is secretive, but still bonds with the Starrett family. At one point, young Joey Starrett claims to love Shane almost as much as his own father.
Jack Palance, who would become famous for his villainous roles in the years to come, is almost like Shane’s dark mirror. He does not talk a lot, he is highly skilled with a gun, making him an ominous threat.
Ryker, on the other hand is kind of an interesting bad guy. He works hard to seem like the good guy in all the proceedings. He offers Joe good money for his land and a job. He also is impressed by Shane’s fighting skills and offers him a job. But when he cannot have his way, he resorts to threats, violence and murder.
While the film seems to be a good versus evil tale, there is an undercurrent of cynicism. Shane is trying to flee from his past as a gunslinger…and we are left with a moral of “You cannot change.” Shane tries to live a life outside of violence, but it follows him around.
Probably my only real problem with Shane is one that, truthfully, I have with all films of this era. I feel like the music of films from the fifties is often not that distinctive. And the music of Shane feels heavily generic…and at times even works against the mood of a given scene.
But, still, Shane has shaped one of the western genre’s most popular and iconic archetypal stories. The mysterious stranger who helps the down trodden citizens oppressed by a powerful villain (usually a business man or corrupt lawman). It has earned it’s place as a true classic.
I apologize for going silent the past week. Everyone has genres that they kind of get “burnt out” on. While I enjoy westerns, it is the one genre where I can hit a wall, and need a break. So I took a bit of a breather from watching westerns.
Due to this, I am going to continue my reviews of westerns into March. I have several that I still want to get to, including the films that inspired me to want to do a review of westerns in the first place.
Still to come are reviews of films such as Shane, Tombstone and Pale Rider.
A young prostitute who appears to have had a very bad day starts to talk with a saloon (brothel?) piano player…an older man named Cricket, who tells her a tale of heartache and revenge.
Joe Cassidy was the daughter of a prostitute. We then go back in time to learn how the two met. While young Jakob and Joe were drawn to each other, she ends up opting for a life of comfort with Tom Hayes. And affair begins and Joe leaves town (with Jakob planning to follow). Prostitute and friend Rowena tells her Tom killed Jakob and so she leaves, intent on getting revenge.
She returns to kill the man who killed her lover, only to discover that he is still alive and in prison.
Cassidy Red is focused on the romance between Joe and Jakob. It is a fairly standard “forbidden romance” tale. But the western elements are kept me entertained. First time writer and director Matt Knudsen seems to have a love of the genre that comes through.
I especially liked the performances by Gregory Zaragoza as the melancholy Cricket and Rick Kramer’s Cort Cassidy (Joe’s father).
The film’s opening credits are very memorable (evoking the animated open of Fistful of Dollars). Honestly, they put me right in the mood for a spaghetti western, and Cassidy Red works to deliver it. The focus on backstory can slow things down, but the core tale is pretty effective.
Supported with some strong performances, Cassidy Red should keep the attention of fans of westerns. And man, I really liked those animated titles.
I gotta say…if you were going to make a western about young Bill Munny, Scott Eastwood would be the guy you would hire to play him.
Jackson is a veteran of the Civil War whose young wife is kidnapped by Mexicans (the film is intentionally vague on this…other than they are Mexican). He sets out to find her. Along the journey he crosses paths with the cruel Ezra. Ezra keeps showing up at the worst times, leaving a path of bodies.
Diablo takes what could be an impediment, Scott Eastwood looks remarkably like his father Clint, and uses it to it’s advantage. The audience fills in the rather loose sketch of a character with what we expect from his father’s westerns. Jackson is a loose sketch of a character until about the last half hour of the film.
Eastwood does not quite have his father’s charisma (at least not yet), and so it benefits him that the film allows the viewer to fill in the blanks. Walton Goggins plays the mysterious Ezra with a real undercurrent of menace. Why is he following Jackson? Why is he so quick to kill with no remorse?
There is a moment late in the film that saves it from being a generic imitation of old Clint Eastwood films. Diablo is not perfect, but it is a decent western that seeks to subvert the expectations they audience brings with them.
Created by comic book icons Jack ‘the King’ Kirby and Stan Lee, Black Panther has seemed like a character Marvel wants to really make active…but struggles to figure out how to make him work best. Initially being a guest star in the pages of the Fantastic Four and the Avengers, T’Challa (the titular Black Panther) got solo stories starting with 1973’s Jungle Action # 5. The series was not a top seller, and Marvel cancelled it. They tried to continue the Black Panther in his own series, which lasted until 1979. They tried again in 1988, with a mini-series. This was followed by an appearance in Marvel’s anthology series Marvel Comics Presents in 1989. 1990 saw another series. But it was 1998 where Black Panther found some footing. Christopher Priest began his run and truthfully, he cracked the code with an incredibly engaging series. It lasted 62 issues (Priest wrote 60 of those issues). They worked on a new series in 2005 with Reginald Hudlin. 2016 brought back the Panther in his own series led by Ta-Nehisi Coates. This, for me, has come the closest to rivaling Priest’s terrific run.
While the Black Panther film was announced a few years ago, we did not get to see the Marvel Cinematic Universe take on the character until Captain America: Civil War. I really enjoyed his introduction. The film only hinted at a larger Wakandan culture, and so now is the opportunity to explore it deeper. This is a spoiler free review (so story references remain vague).
Opening with a young boy asking him to tell the story of home (Wakanda) before bedtime. This works rather nicely, filling us in on how Wakanda was built on Vibranium, how five tribes were united under a single king who was granted powers via plant life altered by the vibranium. Wakanda grew more technologically advanced than any other nation. They sought to hide from the world.
The film quickly establishes that while the world believes that Wakanda is a low tech third world country, it is a vibrant high tech society. T’Challa and his family are still reeling from the events of Civil War, and it is time to T’Challa to take the mantle of King.
Of course, there are those who oppose him. The weapons supplier Ulysses Klaue (pronounced “Claw” and first introduced to audiences in Avengers: Age of Ultron) and a mysterious young man called Killmonger are collecting Wakandan tech.
T’Challa struggles with his role as king. Heartbroken over his father’s death (again, in Civil War) and struggling with the role of Wakanda in the world. His ex-girlfriend Nakia believes that Wakanda should be sharing it’s riches with the world…to be a beacon for the world, not tucked away. She loves him, but cannot see a place for herself in Wakanda when she has seen such suffering in the outside world.
The film shows us a society which has a richness of history and culture. The costume design is beautiful. The king’s personal guards are all striking in appearance with lush reds and gold. They are all warrior women with shaved heads (in one entertaining moment T’Challa, Nakia and general Okoye are undercover and she complains about having to wear a wig).
The Wakandan tech is exciting sci-fi tech that would make Bond jealous. The Wakandan landscape is a combination a immense futuristic cities and beautiful forests and mountains. There are some fight scenes set amongst giant waterfalls that Director Coogler and his cinematographer use lighting and sunsets to amplify the sequences with intensity and beauty.
I really liked the characters in this film. For T’Challa, it carries over his lessons learned from Captain America: Civil War. T’Challa is merciful and a good man. Heavy is the head that wears the crown…this film shows T’Challa struggling to be a King and Protector and not being blind to the world around him.
The women really steal the show in this film. Okoye is a formidable warrior and guardian. Nakia is intensely stubborn in her dedication. But she also is in love with T’Challa (who is also very in love with her). His mother is a woman of pride and wisdom (Angela Basset is just regal and beautiful). And then there is his sister Shuri. She is a fun character who lovingly spars with her brother. She is a brilliant scientist, but her youth presents a more brash attitude. She is like a super competent “Q”.
Everett Ross (created by Christopher Priest in his 1998 series) appeared in Civil War, but we did not get a real feel for the character. Here we find him seeming over-confident at first, but he rises to the challenge of helping the Black Panther and his family. While he begins seeming a bit like he might be the comedy relief, he becomes a character who shows himself as heroic and willing to risk himself for his friends.
Killmonger is a villain with a good back story. He wants to rule the world, but not in some cheesy maniacal ruler fashion. He wants to rise his people up to subjugate the colonizers. Klaue is just after money, and shows no arc…but Andy Serkis seemed to have a lot of fun in the role.
Full of action, heart and punctuated with some great humor, Black Panther was worth the wait. I would easily categorize this as one of Marvel’s best.
The small mining town of Lago is shaken by the arrival of a mysterious stranger who came from the desert. After he guns down three men harassing him, the town wants his help. The sheriff was killed by a gang, and they want him to help them deal the returning gang.
After agreeing, the Stranger discovers the town was actually complicit in the death of their sheriff, who had discovered important information about who owned the land the mine is on. However, they turned on the gang. This raises the question if the town will also turn on the Stranger.
To be honest, I have trouble rooting for the Stranger in this film. Very early on, there is a scene where one of the women of the town berates the Stranger. He drags her off and rapes her. And this is not a scene I can play off as “it was the times…” This is not presented as one of those outdated “she really wanted it, he just needed to overcome her frosty exterior” sequences. The film recognizes it is rape and treats it like she has it coming. It casts the Stranger in a very unpleasant light previous Eastwood leads did not have, even prior “scoundrels”.
This casts a long shadow over the story making the entire affair tough. The Stranger is clearly the hero of the story, but he commits an obscene act of cruelty that makes him impossible to see in the light of “hero”. Not even an anti-hero.
Ex-Bounty Hunter Joe Kidd is in jail. His opportunity for freedom comes when Frank Harlan wants to hire him to take out the revolutionary leader Luis Chuma. Reluctant at first, when he learns Chuma has raided his ranch (and hurt a worker), Kidd joins up.
Kidd vows to bring Chuma to actual justice, rather than to a lynch mob, putting him at odds with Harlan.
While Kidd is not a mysterious character, Joe Kidd leans more towards the violent tough guy of Eastwood’s western persona. Joe is a guy who would be happy to be neutral, and it really takes Chuma crossing a personal line. But his willingness to avoid violent revenge makes him stand out a bit in the westerns of Eastwood.
Written by Elmore Leonard, Joe Kidd is a good western, though not quite as distinctive as some of the westerns that Eastwood had yet to come.
Hogan comes across Sara, a nun in peril. After saving her, the two become traveling companions. Sara is on the run from the French and Hogan agrees to help her out.
Hogan is a more detailed character than his “man With No Name” role. This is needed for the film, because Hogan and Sara’s relationship is dependent on their ability to connect to each other. The film has a light undertone, mainly in the verbal sparring of Sara and Hogan. One scene that works well is when a wounded Hogan explains that he needs Sarah to climb up a bridge to place the dynamite to blow some train tracks. Her shock going to resignation that she has got to do this to help out makes it a fun exchange.
Unsurprisingly, Shirley MacLaine can hold her own with Eastwood in any scene. I confess, I do not have a ton to say about this one, but I think it is one of Eastwood’s more fun westerns.