western and not

Rating: Null/10 (29 July 2001)

I wonder whether to think of the film as if it had two parts. It begins with the credits rolling next to an old theatrical projection, one reminiscent of films belonging to the epoch of the likes of Buster Keaton's "General". Then we are taken to Paul Newman's face. He is observing a bank. Probably one he intends to rob. The first 15 minutes carries a beautiful cinematography. From the black & white documentary about the Hole in the Wall gang we are carried to a beginning with tones of green and yellow. Then cut, and a scene in a bar with Sundance. The only thing revealed is Sundance's facial expressions, and the voice of card players, fingers ticking on the gambling table. While the camera keeps fixed on Sundance's face, we witness a duel involving him and the guy sitting opposite him, whom we don't see, only hear. Then comes Paul Newman, whispering into Sundance's ear, asking him to let it go, being the negotiator, a cunning one. The camera still stays fixed. A feeling of isolation takes place, like disconnection, loneliness. Why the face or the fingers instead of a traditional shot involving all the elements which make up the scene? The bar, the gamblers, the table. Perhaps it was early in the film to come up with a conjecture, but I nevertheless did. This film takes the western genre, deconstructs it, and recreates it. Our sympathetic villains are quite western, the action is quite western, but once you lay hands on the details, the cinematography, disuniform timing, fast forwards, especially when they tour the country and end up in Bolivia, Butch as a cunning businessman way ahead of his time, not belonging to the West, Sundance as the notorious gunman from New Jersey, this film is created by someone who studied western and revolutionized it. Kind of like what Tarantino did with B-films I guess. And the duel takes place. And we see Sundance and Cassidy riding on their horses, with the picture transforming into color. Then we are taken to the second part of the film. Butch and Sundance running from an expert team of bounty hunters and lawmen hired to put an end to their lives. "Who are those people?" Spielberg might have decided to reveal the shark in "Jaws" in the second half of the film, being inspired by the suspense attempted to be built up by Roy Hill during the struggle of Cassidy pulling all the tricks on their "mysterious" followers and the followers figuring the truth out in every single one of them. But out of every element which makes this film so great, perhaps the most electrical component is the lead characters themselves. They are the most sympathetic bank robbers to hit the west. Cassidy being my favorite, despite being the leader of the gang, perfectly complemented by his buddy Sundance, he has never killed anyone. He doesn't bring a serious social criticism, as his robberies are not justified, he simply robs and spends money on alcohol and women, no need for an ethical interrogation on behalf of the audience. But being a robber, nevertheless he has a charm. He holds a twisted sense of humor, seems to care about human life, as he warns the clerk in the train to open up the wagon, but doesn't care enough to stop robbing the train as he blows it up despite the clerk, but after the smoke the first thing he does is check to see if the clerk is still alive. A villain with humor, respect, cunning mind, and selfish priorities. His relationship with Sundance is worthy. Throughout the second part of the film, during their fled, the director takes the oppurtunity for us to love these two. And by the time "the end" arrives, we wish they are not dead. And perhaps they are not. In Peckinpah's Wild Bunch, the gang kills a hundred people or so. Whatever the conclusion is, the end seemed to be another innovation. One has to watch Leone's westerns, and then come back to this film to see what kind of a new breathe it has brought. Perhaps.