A Dark Humorless Somewhat Revisionist Western: “Hostiles” (Short Review)

Hostiles movie Critics seem divided on the latest interpretation of the great American Western, Hostiles (2018).  Is it an “excellent modern take on the Western” or is it “a brutal, shallow Western“?  Well, there is truth in both views about the new movie directed by Scott Cooper.

The film is set in the West during 1892 in the waning period of the American Indian wars, around six years after Geronimo has surrendered and less than two years after the Wounded Knee massacre.  Christian Bale stars in Hostiles as Joseph Blocker, a captain nearing retirement.  BLocker has seen and done horrible things during the wars with the Native Americans.

Blocker’s final assignment is to escort an ill chief (Wes Studi) from New Mexico back to his tribe’s lands in Montana so the chief may die on his own soil.  Blocker, who has nothing but hatred for the Native Americans, does not want the assignment.  But he is forced into it.  So, he sets off with a few men and the chief and the chief’s family.

Along the way, Blocker’s group picks up new people and loses others.  The film opens with some Native Americans killing a family, with the only survivor being Rosalie Quaid (Rosamund Pike).  Soon, Blocker’s group finds Quaid, still traumatized from her own experience.

The movie follows Blocker’s struggles with his beliefs about duty and about his old foes as he also tries to get his group to safety in a hostile land.  Some of the travelers have their own demons.  And other characters are somewhat developed, but the film mainly focuses on Bale’s character.

Not the Greatest, But a Good Addition to the Western Canon

There are echoes of other Westerns here.  Blocker’s changing assortment of traveling characters may remind one  of The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976), for example.  But the most obvious connection here is to John Ford’s beautiful classic, The Searchers (1956).  That film followed John Wayne’s racist character searching for his niece.  One may also recognize echoes of the final shot from The Searchers in the final scene of Hostiles, one of my favorite touches in the new film.

Hostiles does not rank among my favorite Westerns.  But it does a decent job telling a story steeped in realism as do many revisionist Westerns, even if one may debate how far the movie deviates from traditional Western stereotypes.  And the acting is superb all around.  The movie features another great performance from the always fascinating Bale, who also did a very good turn in the recent Western 3:10 to Yuma (2007).

The movie, though, is not an enjoyable ride.  While there are scenes of horrible violence, the movie lacks the excitement and pace of most Westerns.

Darker Westerns can still show flashes of joy or humor — as do The Searchers, Unforgiven (1992), McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971), and The Outlaw Josey Wales. But there is little human joy or laughter in Hostiles.  The story reveals some friendships and human connections.  But the dour movie could have done more with them.  Those few moments still seem buried in the darkness of the story, perhaps because the camera rarely leaves the grim Blocker.

Hostiles is a good movie and anyone who enjoys Westerns should check it out.  I see why critics and viewers are somewhat split on the film, with Rotten Tomatoes giving it a 72% Critics Rating and a 71% Audience Rating. While Hostiles is not a fun ride and one may debate its success as a Revisionist Western, the film gets credit for trying to do something deeper than most recent action movies.

What did you think of Hostiles? Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • What Song Does the Sergeant Sing About a Sparrow in “Hostiles”?
  • The Myth of Redemptive Violence (Part Two): The American Western
  • The Myth of Redemptive Violence: 3:10 to Yuma (Part One)
  • James Arness: 1923-2011
  • True Grit ’10 vs. True Grit ’69
  • Bury Me Not on the Lone Prairie
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    “Westworld” is Coming to HBO

    Westworld HBO

    You might remember that great attempt to combine science fiction and Western categories into the classic 1973 film, Westworld. That movie was written and directed by Michael Crichton, and it starred Yul Brynner as the robot gunslinger at an amusement park where everything goes wrong. Even if you have never seen the movie, you might be a little excited seeing the new teaser trailer for the upcoming HBO series Westworld.

    The teaser trailer does not reveal much about the HBO series, but we get a glimpse of Anthony Hopkins and Evan Rachel Wood in a series that looks updated for the current century. Some folks think that Westworld will be HBO’s next great show. But we will have to wait until 2016 to find out.

    What do you think of the teaser trailer for “Westworld”? Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • The Song That Played Over Carl’s Last Days Montage on “The Walking Dead”
  • A Dark Humorless Somewhat Revisionist Western: “Hostiles” (Short Review)
  • Jennifer Lawrence and Chris Pratt Travel Space in “Passengers”
  • “The Magnificent Seven” Trailer With Denzel Washington
  • Moral Ambiguity and “Lawman” (Missed Movies)
  • 8 Reasons to Watch Terror in a Texas Town
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    Moral Ambiguity and “Lawman” (Missed Movies)

    Burt Lancaster stars in “Lawman,” an underrated Western that veers into unexpected territory.

    Burt Lancaster Western Lawman is an excellent underrated 1971 Western that should stand next to the better-known classics in the Western canon. The film, directed by Michael Winner, features the brutality and moral ambiguity of other more highly regarded films like The Wild Bunch (1969), McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971), and Unforgiven (1992). Lawman also features excellent acting from Burt Lancaster, Robert Ryan, Lee J. Cobb, Robert Duvall, Sheree North, and many other familiar supporting actors.

    Lancaster plays Jared Maddox, the lawman of the title, who comes to town seeking the cowboys who got drunk and shot up his town and accidentally killed a man, as shown in the movie’s opening scene. Lee J. Cobb is the cattle baron Vincent Bronson who employs the cowboys, and Robert Ryan plays the local marshal who basically works for Cobb. So early on a viewer might be expecting a good guy versus evil cattle baron story. But that is not what happens.

    While some of Bronson’s men are hotheads, Bronson is a practical man who initially tries to reason with Maddox. As the movie progresses, one begins to see that Maddox is relentless in his pursuit of following the rule of law as he begins to seem like a Western version of Inspector Javert from Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables. Even though Maddox realizes that the wanted men will most likely face a fine if brought to justice, various encounters lead to more and more bloodshed. Ryan’s marshall and Maddox’s former lover (Sheree North) question what is happening in the town. As the film moves to a chilling climax, the viewer begins to question what is right and what is wrong. But I will not reveal any more about the plot.

    The wonderful screenplay is by Gerald Wilson, and Winner does an excellent job with the direction. Winner, who would revisit themes around violence three years later in Death Wish (1974), here highlights both the beauty and loneliness of the desert landscape (filmed in Durango, Mexico), doing the same with Lancaster’s face. His Western attempts to give a realistic portrayal of violence and the difficulty of living in the West.

    Conclusion? If you are looking for a Western that features twists on classic stereotypes and you like movies that challenge conventions, you will probably enjoy Lawman. While Lawman may not be on the same level as some other classic challenging Westerns — such as McCabe & Mrs. Miller from the same year, it is still worth seeking out if you are in the mood for an unusual Western.

    Other Reviews Because Why Should You Trust Me? The somewhat unusual Lawman garnered mixed reviews at the time of its release, although I wonder if it is a movie better appreciated as time has passed. Rotten Tomatoes gives the film an 80% critics rating and a 61% audience rating. The lower audience rating might be because some viewers were disappointed that the movie did not follow the usual Western conventions and featured a somewhat unusual resolution. Roger Ebert gave the film only two stars, calling it “a Western with a lot of sides but no center.” The New York Times found the movie “unresolved in substance” but “long on sting.” One of the few reviews of the film on the Internet is one by Dennis Schwartz, who gives the movie a B- and calls it a “wannabe thoughtful Western.” Schwartz also calls Lawman and “unofficial remake” of 1955’s A Man With a Gun, and I see some similarities in plot to that also underrated Western, which stars Robert Mitchum. Meanwhile, Jeremy Poulos on Letterboxd found the film enjoyable and noted similarities to spaghetti Westerns.

    {Missed Movies is our continuing series on good films you might have missed because they did not receive the recognition they deserved when released.}

    Thanks to Tony Fontane for telling me about Lawman on Twitter. Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • Rating the Lonesome Dove Series, Part 1: The Prequels
  • A Dark Humorless Somewhat Revisionist Western: “Hostiles” (Short Review)
  • “Westworld” is Coming to HBO
  • Jim Thorpe, Great American Athlete
  • 8 Reasons to Watch Terror in a Texas Town
  • Was Armie Hammer’s Portrayal of the Lone Ranger Offensive?
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

    8 Reasons to Watch Terror in a Texas Town

    Terror in a Texas Town (1958) is an odd movie starting with the first scene of a Swede carrying a harpoon down the street of a Western town. The 80-minute movie was the final feature film directed by B-movie director Joseph H. Lewis, and while far from one of the great Western movies of all time, the movie features several unconventional elements that make it worthwhile viewing.

    Terror in a Texas Town A rough outline of the movie makes it sound like a conventional Western, including similarities to Shane. There is the traditional plot of settlers trying to hold onto their land while a rich man tries to take it away. There is a bad-guy gunslinger. There is a stranger who comes to town who inspires the scared locals to stand up against the bad guys. There is a whore with a good heart. There is the final confrontation. But, if you look deeper, the movie is not your usual Western. Here are eight reasons to see the overlooked classic.

    (1) The movie itself has an odd pedigree. Terror in a Texas Town was written by Dalton Trumbo, who was one of the Hollywood screenwriters blacklisted for refusing in 1947 to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. Trumbo worked on a number of famous movies, including Spartacus and Papillon, and he wrote the excellent anti-war novel, Johnny Got His Gun. Trumbo was still blacklisted when he wrote Terror in a Texas Town, and the movie also stars two actors who also were called before the Committee: Nedrick Young (who refused to testify) and Sterling Hayden (who testified but regretted it).

    (2) Nedrick Young, who wrote the screenplays for Jailhouse Rock and The Defiant Ones and was also blacklisted for a period, plays the evil gunslinger Johnny Crale.

    (3) Sterling Hayden, an outstanding actor in several film noir movies as well as memorable roles in The Godfather (1972) and Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964), speaks with a Swedish accent throughout Terror in a Texas Town.

    (4) The movie features Sebastian Cabot, who played the cuddly Mr. French on the TV series Family Affair, as the rich and powerful villain.

    (5) The evil gunfighter has a solid steel hand.

    (6) The supporting characters may at first appear to be classic Western stereotypes, but as the movie progresses, you realize they have depth and do not follow conventions.

    (7) The soundtrack to the movie for the most part sounds like you are in a beatnik nightclub, mostly with a trumpet and drum. Sometimes a little guitar is thrown in.

    (8) The final showdown is between the evil gunfighter with his guns and the good guy . . . with a whale harpoon! WTF?



    What do you think of Terror in a Texas Town? Leave a comment.

  • Is Shane a Romantic Movie?
  • A Dark Humorless Somewhat Revisionist Western: “Hostiles” (Short Review)
  • “Westworld” is Coming to HBO
  • Moral Ambiguity and “Lawman” (Missed Movies)
  • Was Armie Hammer’s Portrayal of the Lone Ranger Offensive?
  • The Myth of Redemptive Violence (Part Two): The American Western
  • (Some Related Chimesfreedom Posts)

    Was Armie Hammer’s Portrayal of the Lone Ranger Offensive?

    The Lone Ranger Critics have attacked The Lone Ranger (2013) for a number of reasons. Because of the movie’s big budget and low box office returns, some have labeled it a flop, although that is not how a viewer should judge a film. Many attack the film for Johnny Depp’s portrayal of the Native American Tonto, while others have defended his role. I understand the criticisms, and the producers should have expected that discussion. I am not qualified to add much to the Tonto debate, but I can say that the portrayal of the Lone Ranger disrespects the franchise and the Lone Ranger, by portraying him as kind of a jerk. [Warning: Post contains some spoilers.]

    First, though, let me say I enjoyed the movie for a summer popcorn movie, which may explain why the film still has a Rotten Tomatoes audience rating of 68% compared to the horrible 26% critics’ rating. While critics have argued that the film shows that Westerns cannot do well at the box office, such conclusions are wrong. Good Westerns, like the 2010 remake of True Grit, will continue to find an audience. It is wrong to put the whole genre of Westerns on the shoulders of The Lone Ranger, which fails to succeed because it is not a great movie.

    So what are the problems with the way the movie portrays the Lone Ranger? First, while Armie Hammer is a very good actor and captures aspects of the character, physically he is not right. Yes, it is a fantasy that folks will not recognize anyone who puts a mask around the eyes, but it stretches fantasy too much to expect someone would be fooled by the masked Hammer, who towers over everyone else. Further, the movie is never quite sure whether or not it is a fantasy. There are some realistic scenes of violence, but then we are expected to believe the Lone Ranger can ride Silver up and down the top of a moving train.

    But the main problem is that this Lone Ranger is not a man of honor, and even if the intent of the film is to show the character’s evolution or it is meant to be a comedy, it fails in those respects too. In director Gore Verbinski’s The Lone Ranger, we are expected to accept the Lone Ranger as a symbol of upholding law, but he turns out to be kind of a dick. Some of it makes no sense, like the fact that he would leave Tonto to die buried up to his neck even after Tonto has helped him.

    In another scene, we see that the Lone Ranger has evolved into an attempted murderer. In that scene near the end of the movie, the Lone Ranger points a gun at the head of his prisoner Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner) and pulls the trigger in cold blood. Although the gun misfires and, yes, we have already seen Cavendish is a horrible person, the scene makes the Lone Ranger into a cold blooded (attempted) killer without addressing any of the moral ramifications.

    The late Walter Wink wrote about the use of “redemptive violence” in movies, where an audience is manipulated into rooting for the hero to commit acts of violence by watching the bad guy repeatedly do horrible things to the hero. While I am not opposed to violence in movies, the problem is when we are supposed to accept the hero killing a captured prisoner out of revenge and still root for the hero.

    Again, the movie is a fantasy, and we can suspend reality a little, especially once we hear the William Tell Overture. And for a summer movie, it is better than a lot of others. But as someone who likes Westerns, I hate to see The Lone Ranger used as a representative film of the modern Western genre or that this film will be the only portrayal of the Lone Ranger that kids will know.

    Maybe I need to cleanse my palate with a viewing of my Appaloosa (2008) DVD. Or I can just watch the 1949 Enter the Lone Ranger below with Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels, where the Lone Ranger captures Butch Cavendish instead of trying to kill him in cold blood — and where he does not abandon Tonto to die.

    Conclusion? The portrayal of the Lone Ranger in the 2013 The Lone Ranger may not be offensive, but it fails to capture what made the earlier versions of the character heroic and fun.

    What did you think of The Lone Ranger? Leave your two cents in the comments.

  • A Dark Humorless Somewhat Revisionist Western: “Hostiles” (Short Review)
  • The Unsatisfying Ending of Scorsese’s “Silence” That Is Still Perfect
  • “Westworld” is Coming to HBO
  • Moral Ambiguity and “Lawman” (Missed Movies)
  • 8 Reasons to Watch Terror in a Texas Town
  • Paul McCartney (and Famous Folks) in “Queenie Eye” Video
  • (Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)