Spaghetti Westerns are a very interesting sub genre of the western. They are typically filmed in Italy or somewhere in Europe, and often present negative depictions of the United States and its culture. Two excellent examples of “Spaghetti Westerns” are 1966 films The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, and Navajo Joe. One characteristic of spaghetti westerns like these two is their overly violent depiction of the American west. In The Good, the Bad and the Ugly for example, we see a large amount of violence, often pointless or discussed as being pointless. The three main characters are all very violent, ruthless people. Tuco and Blondie’s half-hearted attempts to kill each other only serve to further imply that Americans were viewed in Europe as being desensitized to violence. Whereas in classic westerns the films utilize violence so that the hero can save the day from the bad guys and morality prevails in the end, spaghetti westerns depict violence as a form of showboating, as being something Americans deploy nonchalantly whenever they so desire to do so.
In Navajo Joe, we see violence again emerging as a very prominent issue Europe was concerned about in America. The very opening scenes are of a man shooting and scalping a Native American. The film also makes continuous allusions to the very real presence of racism at the time, and race is often very bluntly spoken above in negative ways. For example, at one point the townspeople don’t want to negotiate with Joe because of his race. These movies came at an important time for the American Civil Rights Movement, and reflected the heightened racial tensions of the era.
While in the classic American western, the masculine, powerful hero is meant to be revered and respected, in the spaghetti western genre Europeans make clear that they do not view the same qualities as being necessary in a hero. Whereas in classic westerns our values are typically held in very high esteem, spaghetti westerns tend to look at our culture through less favorable eyes and depict the United States as being a nation corrupted by greed and violence and racism.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
SK "The Good, The Bad, The Ugly/ Navajo Joe"
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Navajo Joe are two films that fall under the "Spaghetti Westerns" genre. These types of films, which are made usually by Italians, provide European perspectives on the American culture. Violence and greed are emphasized in the Spaghetti Western films and the representation of the alpha male is different from the original Western films.
The European version of the Western is shown to be overly and unnecessarily violent, which gives an idea of how the Europeans are picking on the flaws of America. The extreme violence seems to be influenced by the Vietnam War which was exposed during the time the films were made in 1966. The citizens of America were accessible to the media that showed them such violence that derived from the Vietnam War. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Navajo Joe focus on greed and it is shown to be significant to the plot of the film. America was in a period of many equal rights movement in 1966, and Americans pushed and worked for equality, which is similar to the characters in the film who searched for gold. The effort to gain a fair and much better life for individuals in America was an important issue during the period.
Navajo Joe introduces the alpha male as Joe, who is a Native American. This is obviously different from the classic Western, in which the alpha male must be the white Anglo-Saxon male while the Native American is under the category of "the others". However, in the film Navajo Joe, the town is initially reluctant to ask for help, but they ultimately do. Then again, in the film The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, cut out Native American figures are shot into pieces by a man. The Europeans had a sense that there was a bad relationship between the Native Americans and the settlers during the time.
The European version of the Western is shown to be overly and unnecessarily violent, which gives an idea of how the Europeans are picking on the flaws of America. The extreme violence seems to be influenced by the Vietnam War which was exposed during the time the films were made in 1966. The citizens of America were accessible to the media that showed them such violence that derived from the Vietnam War. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Navajo Joe focus on greed and it is shown to be significant to the plot of the film. America was in a period of many equal rights movement in 1966, and Americans pushed and worked for equality, which is similar to the characters in the film who searched for gold. The effort to gain a fair and much better life for individuals in America was an important issue during the period.
Navajo Joe introduces the alpha male as Joe, who is a Native American. This is obviously different from the classic Western, in which the alpha male must be the white Anglo-Saxon male while the Native American is under the category of "the others". However, in the film Navajo Joe, the town is initially reluctant to ask for help, but they ultimately do. Then again, in the film The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, cut out Native American figures are shot into pieces by a man. The Europeans had a sense that there was a bad relationship between the Native Americans and the settlers during the time.
Monday, November 15, 2010
JM "The Good the bad and the Ugly/Navajo Joe"
The western film genre experienced a number of different periods including a period during which Italian filmmakers began to make a series of their own “Western” genre films. The mid 1960’s saw the increasing production of these Italian western films which later became referred to as Spaghetti Westerns. The Spaghetti Westerns were low budget films that were aimed at portraying Europe’s perception of the violence and ethics that were present in American films. These films portray the Italian perception of America.
One Spaghetti western produced by Sergio Leone The Good the Bad and the Ugly shows the evident negative perception of the American society. The three main characters in the film are portrayed as cutthroat and overly violent figures that care for nothing except to fulfill their goal of finding the hidden collection of valuable coins. In their quests to outdo one another and seek revenge they will do anything and hurt anyone in their way to accomplish their goals. The extent of violence in the movie extends to references of domestic abuse. The film contains a scene where a woman is beaten for withholding information on the location of Bill, possibly eluding to the Italian perception of America’s increasing rate of domestic abuse. Throughout the movie the presence of violence is an ever occurring theme that consumes the actions of all the characters, and seems more extensive then in normal western films. The main difference in the style of spaghetti westerns from normal western appears to be the meaning behind the violence. In The Good the Bad and the Ugly the violence appears meaningless and purely to show the ruthlessness of the characters, where in many domestic western films violence is a trait used by the Alpha Males to protect other characters or to carry out their moral obligations.
Navajo Joe is another Sergio Leone produced spaghetti western film containing senseless violence and a lack of morally based judgment. The films’ opening scene begins with the main character Duncan shooting and then scalping a Native American women. This gruesome display of violence is a clear depiction of the European perception of America. In the conclusion of the movie the main character Joe, who in many senses would normally be considered an other, is able to reclaim the pendent of his murdered wife from Duncan. This scene is very symbolic because Duncan can be seen as a morally lacking individual who thrives on violence and discrimination, and is eventually defeated by the very people he tries to suppress. This depiction seems loosely based on the Italian view of events taking place in America during the 1960’s including the Civil Rights Movement. This negative depiction seems to suggest that the European opinion of the US during this time was that American society was trying to suppress the Civil Rights Movement and all that it stood for.
In conclusion although these movies touched many of the same issues as American westerns, they did so in an overly violent and discriminatory way. In analyzing this it is clear that the classic Alpha Male hero who became revered in American culture was seen as an overly primitive and masculine figure outside of the US.
One Spaghetti western produced by Sergio Leone The Good the Bad and the Ugly shows the evident negative perception of the American society. The three main characters in the film are portrayed as cutthroat and overly violent figures that care for nothing except to fulfill their goal of finding the hidden collection of valuable coins. In their quests to outdo one another and seek revenge they will do anything and hurt anyone in their way to accomplish their goals. The extent of violence in the movie extends to references of domestic abuse. The film contains a scene where a woman is beaten for withholding information on the location of Bill, possibly eluding to the Italian perception of America’s increasing rate of domestic abuse. Throughout the movie the presence of violence is an ever occurring theme that consumes the actions of all the characters, and seems more extensive then in normal western films. The main difference in the style of spaghetti westerns from normal western appears to be the meaning behind the violence. In The Good the Bad and the Ugly the violence appears meaningless and purely to show the ruthlessness of the characters, where in many domestic western films violence is a trait used by the Alpha Males to protect other characters or to carry out their moral obligations.
Navajo Joe is another Sergio Leone produced spaghetti western film containing senseless violence and a lack of morally based judgment. The films’ opening scene begins with the main character Duncan shooting and then scalping a Native American women. This gruesome display of violence is a clear depiction of the European perception of America. In the conclusion of the movie the main character Joe, who in many senses would normally be considered an other, is able to reclaim the pendent of his murdered wife from Duncan. This scene is very symbolic because Duncan can be seen as a morally lacking individual who thrives on violence and discrimination, and is eventually defeated by the very people he tries to suppress. This depiction seems loosely based on the Italian view of events taking place in America during the 1960’s including the Civil Rights Movement. This negative depiction seems to suggest that the European opinion of the US during this time was that American society was trying to suppress the Civil Rights Movement and all that it stood for.
In conclusion although these movies touched many of the same issues as American westerns, they did so in an overly violent and discriminatory way. In analyzing this it is clear that the classic Alpha Male hero who became revered in American culture was seen as an overly primitive and masculine figure outside of the US.
J.O. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly / Navajo Joe
Spaghetti Westerns, unlike the Westerns directed by Americans, portray the outsider view of America. These films, produced mainly by Italians, took the genre Americans utilized to reflect on past American culture and deciphered it to depict the evil nature and violence tendencies of America. Of this new genre, two films produced in 1966, The Good the Bad and the Ugly and Navajo Joe, reflect these outside views of America. These films vastly differ from the classic Western, and with this difference bring a whole new playing field to the mix.
The Good the Bad and the Ugly presented a daunting view of America – that all Americans care about is money and would trample over anyone to get it. The film told the story of three men on a search to find a fortune in gold buried in a cemetery. Encompassing the adventure were numerous scenes of violence, most of them for no reason pertaining to the advancement of the story. The story portrayed distrust and unfriendly alliances which was all surrounded by considerable violence. In a cultural view, America at this time had indeed been on the extreme end of violent activities and heavy distrust. During the 60s, America was plagued with numerous assassinations, public violence significant of the civil rights movement as well as the continuing war in Vietnam. The assassinations, to countries looking at America, depicted distrust among Americans as important figures were assassinated, including Pres. John F. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Further, the war in Vietnam made America look greedy and lustful in its desire to obtain whatever it wants no matter the cost, as portrayed in this film.
Similarly, Navajo Joe also depicts America as a country eager to take what it wants whenever it wants. Most notable from this film is that in speaking about the alpha male cowboy, there was none in this film. The only character that came close to being the alpha male cowboy was the Indian, Joe. Joe, usually considered an “other” in classical Westerns, was the major character in this film. Similar to the alpha male cowboy, Joe was strong, rugged, self-reliable, keen, very skilled, and not afraid of anything. Joe always fought against the odds, triumphing every time. However, unlike the alpha male cowboy, Joe did not fight for duty; instead, he was driven by revenge and also took some payment near the end. In the film, Joe makes a key point when he states that his father was born in the land, while the “American’s” father was actually born in Scotland. This point is significant of the civil rights movement occurring during the time as the Blacks were fighting for civil rights however they were not treated as equals because they were not “Americans.” However, truly, none of the Americans indeed came from America; they are all immigrants, just like in the film, only Joe is the true American.
The film also depicts the greed of America and the violence used to further that greed. Duncan and his crew kill Indians for scalps, just to sell at a dollar a scalp. Furthermore, the gang kills everyone relentlessly in the train just to get to the fortune in the safe. Similar to The Good the Bad and the Ugly, the film shows America as a country bent on its own desires, raining down violence to further its goals. Moreover, a final point notable in the film is the scene where the immigrants are talking about how they hope to have a good life in America. The immigrants mention that they love the scenery, the land and that they know their son will love it too. However, the immigrants soon meet their deaths when Duncan’s gang sabotage’s the train. At the time, immigrants in America usually came with high hopes for a better future. However, when finally reaching the States, they met discrimination, low wages, and unsanitary living. The American dream was only a dream; the ideas of working hard to make a living amounted to nothing other than America’s screensaver. The immigrants met harsh conditions, just like the immigrants in Navajo Joe.
DS Navajo Joe / Il Buono, il Brutto, il Cattivo
The films Navajo Joe and The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly fall under the "Spaghetti Western" sub-genre. "Spaghetti Western" is a catch-all term that has come to mean a low-budget, European film (usually Italian). These films offer a European perspective of American culture, often in the form of a critique. Necessarily, the spaghetti western sub-genre differs greatly from the classic American western.
Violence and greed are integral to both films, and serve to mock America's glorification of and capacity for each. The films portray violence as senseless and to the amusement of the characters perpetuating it. By the time each of these films were produced in 1966 the Vietnam war was already being broadcast to the television sets of hundreds of thousands of Americans, effectively exposing the country to the harsh realities and violence of war as well as desensitizing the American public to the exposure to such violence. Similarly, greed and the pursuit of money guide the plot and the actions of the main characters within the films, as opposed to the duty-driven American alpha male cowboy. This depicts a European distaste for the cutthroat nature of American capitalism and the seeming imperialistic tendencies of the American government around the world leading up to 1966. The European immigrants in Navajo Joe see the potential in coming to America only to end up dead when they're caught in a wake of violence in the name of greed.
These films also portray the glaring inequalities that are espoused in American society. The character of Navajo Joe is a surprise for a leading role in a western because typically Native Americans are cast aside as "other" in the backdrop of the story of the alpha male cowboy. Joe represents the role of oppressed minorities in American culture, and his ability to overcome an adverse society represents the black, women's, and Native American civil rights movements which characterized the 1960s. The sheriff of Esperanza informs Joe that even if he could stop Duncan's gang he could never take up the position of sheriff because he is not "American." Joe retorts by stating that he is in fact more "American" than the Scottish-descendant sheriff despite not being white, challenging the notion of what really makes someone "American." This scene epitomizes the American tendency that places white men in a ignorantly superior position to all others.
NL "Navajo Joe" and "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly"
The European films Navajo Joe and The Good, the Bad and the Ugly are clearly not American-made Westerns. There are several notable differences that reflect the difference in attitudes among the Americans and Europeans concerning the West in these films. As a result of the difference in attitudes about the American West, the European products feature an alternate-reality of the duty-driven, hard working, tough, white, alpha male cowboy that America adores. Instead, his world is replaced with violence, greed and an obvious play upon the inequality in America.
Americans have an obsession with violence; the Western film highlights the extent to which Americans have become desensitized to violence. In the European play upon this, there was significantly more ruthless violence and outright gore; the main characters of each of the films had no reserves to the use of force. Furthermore, the motives that the Europeans drew upon was not the duty that Americans were proud of in their Western: it was greed. American capitalism was something that in the 1966 global community, had already become an icon of almost ruthless greed and power. While the American Western focused on an almost manifest destiny version of expansion, the Europeans plotted it into what it really was: outright greed.
Furthermore, the European play on the Western really highlighted some of the inequality of the Western film. In no right would an Indian every be the alpha male cowboy of a Western. In America, the Indian is not the power of the West, but just a troublesome nuisance that the alpha male cowboy overcomes. The film Navajo Joe really twisted this: making an Indian the focus. Yet at the same time, there is still a reflection on the annihilation that takes place, as the Indian village is pillaged.
Americans have an obsession with violence; the Western film highlights the extent to which Americans have become desensitized to violence. In the European play upon this, there was significantly more ruthless violence and outright gore; the main characters of each of the films had no reserves to the use of force. Furthermore, the motives that the Europeans drew upon was not the duty that Americans were proud of in their Western: it was greed. American capitalism was something that in the 1966 global community, had already become an icon of almost ruthless greed and power. While the American Western focused on an almost manifest destiny version of expansion, the Europeans plotted it into what it really was: outright greed.
Furthermore, the European play on the Western really highlighted some of the inequality of the Western film. In no right would an Indian every be the alpha male cowboy of a Western. In America, the Indian is not the power of the West, but just a troublesome nuisance that the alpha male cowboy overcomes. The film Navajo Joe really twisted this: making an Indian the focus. Yet at the same time, there is still a reflection on the annihilation that takes place, as the Indian village is pillaged.
JP "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly/Navajo Joe"
During the 1960s and 1970s, a competitor to the Classic American Western emerged from Europe, called spaghetti westerns. Spaghetti westerns are low-budget films made in Europe. This sub-genre western embodies a very violent illustration of the frontier life, arranged gunfights and "close-ups of confrontational eyes". Through spaghetti westerns, the audience is confronted with the European perception of the American society.
In the 1966 film, Navajo Joe, the audience watches this spaghetti western lead by a Native American playing the role of the alpha male cowboy. This is a very big change from the traditional alpha male cowboy of the classic western. The alpha male has always been portrayed as a white, fit and clean-shaven man. Due to his acting out of the sole motive of revenge, Joe can be referred to as the film's protagonist. Having a heroic role being played by a Native American, is truly what connects the film to the equal rights movement during this time period. The Equal Rights Movement was very important and prominent in the United States in the 1960s.The entire film is based on the perception that the Europeans have of Americans; violence is the answer, money is very important and Americans are prejudice. Many people lose their lives within the numerous fights that are staged throughout Navajo Joe. The interest of money is at the top of most peoples priorities. Lastly, people are risking their lives time after time to stand up for who they are, no matter the color of their skin.
In another 1966 spaghetti western, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, America is yet again perceived in a negative connotation by the Europeans. This film guides the audience through a storyline of three men who are all on separate missions to find lost gold. The producer shows the film’s so-called heroes, the Good (Blondie), the Bad (Angel Eyes), and the Ugly (Tuco), as selfish and immature men. However, when up against the absurdity of war, their self-serving behavior looks rational, and is a common attitude shared through many spaghetti Westerns. The three men are observed to resort to unnecessary violence and have no moral compass guiding them through decisions; they are simply guided by the desire to find the lost money and don’t have a care in the world who they may have to kill in order to get to it first.
In the 1966 film, Navajo Joe, the audience watches this spaghetti western lead by a Native American playing the role of the alpha male cowboy. This is a very big change from the traditional alpha male cowboy of the classic western. The alpha male has always been portrayed as a white, fit and clean-shaven man. Due to his acting out of the sole motive of revenge, Joe can be referred to as the film's protagonist. Having a heroic role being played by a Native American, is truly what connects the film to the equal rights movement during this time period. The Equal Rights Movement was very important and prominent in the United States in the 1960s.The entire film is based on the perception that the Europeans have of Americans; violence is the answer, money is very important and Americans are prejudice. Many people lose their lives within the numerous fights that are staged throughout Navajo Joe. The interest of money is at the top of most peoples priorities. Lastly, people are risking their lives time after time to stand up for who they are, no matter the color of their skin.
In another 1966 spaghetti western, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, America is yet again perceived in a negative connotation by the Europeans. This film guides the audience through a storyline of three men who are all on separate missions to find lost gold. The producer shows the film’s so-called heroes, the Good (Blondie), the Bad (Angel Eyes), and the Ugly (Tuco), as selfish and immature men. However, when up against the absurdity of war, their self-serving behavior looks rational, and is a common attitude shared through many spaghetti Westerns. The three men are observed to resort to unnecessary violence and have no moral compass guiding them through decisions; they are simply guided by the desire to find the lost money and don’t have a care in the world who they may have to kill in order to get to it first.
BE The Good,The Bad,The Ugly/Navajo Joe
The 1960s brought a different genre of Western films. These new Westerns, more commonly referred to as Spaghetti Westerns, were produced and directed by Europeans. They often starred European actors and actresses who symbolized the directors’ opinions and biases. Spaghetti Westerns are different from typical Western films because they tend to be expressions and portrayals of how Europeans view America.
In the film, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, European view of Americans is evident through the characters. This film is centered on greed, selfishness and power. As the three men search for the buried money, they show their true personalities. Clint Eastwood’s character, Blondie, portrays how Europeans view Americans during the hard times of the 1960s culture in America. Blondie is not only stubborn and self-centered but he is extremely violent and has no regard for other humans. Europeans perceive Americans to only care about money, wealth and success and this is evident through Blondie’s actions. He kills for money and has no regret in hanging Tuco to be left for dead after brutally beating him and forcing him to do the physical labor of digging up the buried money. Blondie lets money and the opportunity to possess power cloud his judgment about what is right and wrong, and good human nature behavior. Throughout the film, Americans, characterized as Blondie, ignore others which isolates themselves. This is an attempt of Europeans to show they perceive us as not properly dealing with the culture issue of segregation that is going on in America in the 1960s. Not being able to work with others to achieve a common goal is expressed through three men fighting until the death over the material power of money.
Spaghetti Westerns continued to view Americans as violent, savages through the film Navajo Joe. The opening scene is a clear indication of how Europeans view Americans. The scene reveals Duncan killing and scalping an innocent Native American woman. This act symbolizes the struggle for equality among men and women in American during the 1960s but also, the struggle all minority groups were experiencing during the radical times of the 1960s. It also represents the perception that Americans’ desire for power leads to uncontrollable and malicious acts. The film revolves more around Joe; a Native American who is seeking revenge after his tribe was murdered. This is atypical of traditional Westerns because Native Americans are usual considered “other” characters but Europeans making a Native American the main character signifies their perspective on how equality should be in America. Joe is seeking revenge because his tribe was murdered and this symbolizes European’s view of how minorities are and will continue to fight back against unfair treatment. Although, acting of revenge, murdering people and at times greedy, Joe represents racial and social movements towards equality.
In the film, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, European view of Americans is evident through the characters. This film is centered on greed, selfishness and power. As the three men search for the buried money, they show their true personalities. Clint Eastwood’s character, Blondie, portrays how Europeans view Americans during the hard times of the 1960s culture in America. Blondie is not only stubborn and self-centered but he is extremely violent and has no regard for other humans. Europeans perceive Americans to only care about money, wealth and success and this is evident through Blondie’s actions. He kills for money and has no regret in hanging Tuco to be left for dead after brutally beating him and forcing him to do the physical labor of digging up the buried money. Blondie lets money and the opportunity to possess power cloud his judgment about what is right and wrong, and good human nature behavior. Throughout the film, Americans, characterized as Blondie, ignore others which isolates themselves. This is an attempt of Europeans to show they perceive us as not properly dealing with the culture issue of segregation that is going on in America in the 1960s. Not being able to work with others to achieve a common goal is expressed through three men fighting until the death over the material power of money.
Spaghetti Westerns continued to view Americans as violent, savages through the film Navajo Joe. The opening scene is a clear indication of how Europeans view Americans. The scene reveals Duncan killing and scalping an innocent Native American woman. This act symbolizes the struggle for equality among men and women in American during the 1960s but also, the struggle all minority groups were experiencing during the radical times of the 1960s. It also represents the perception that Americans’ desire for power leads to uncontrollable and malicious acts. The film revolves more around Joe; a Native American who is seeking revenge after his tribe was murdered. This is atypical of traditional Westerns because Native Americans are usual considered “other” characters but Europeans making a Native American the main character signifies their perspective on how equality should be in America. Joe is seeking revenge because his tribe was murdered and this symbolizes European’s view of how minorities are and will continue to fight back against unfair treatment. Although, acting of revenge, murdering people and at times greedy, Joe represents racial and social movements towards equality.
Ryan L The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly/Navajo Joe
Spaghetti Westerns were films, which emerged in the mid 1960's, made by Italian filmmakers. They attempted to have the films resemble the traditional American western; however, their exist clear distinctions which set them apart. Some Italian views of America can be seen through these films.
An example would be Sergio Leone's film, The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Their exists distinct views of America in this film. Firstly, the idea of America's greed is prominent. The three characters pursue a treasure through any means necessary. The men are violent, cuthroat people, who betray people in order to get the money. It is important to note none of the men truely had a claim for the treasure. From a cultural studies perspective, in 1966, when this film was released, Italy was still recovering from the devastation of World War II. Behind Mussolini, Italy were members of the Axis powers. Thus, there was still a resentment for Americans. The amount of unnecessary violence for all intents and purposes lack of any meaningful plot reflect the idea of America's obsession with violence.
Similarly, Sergio Corbucci's film Navajo Joe demonstrates Italy's view of America. Throughout the film, we follow a Native American as the alpha male cowboy. This is totally unorthodox for a classic western. Generally, the Native American is nothing more than an other. In this case, however, we see Joe avenging his family who was murdered. This is symbolic of America's destruction of Native Americans, and how Italy viewed America's idea of manifest destiny. Joe is a representation of America's past coming back to haunt them.
Similarly, Sergio Corbucci's film Navajo Joe demonstrates Italy's view of America. Throughout the film, we follow a Native American as the alpha male cowboy. This is totally unorthodox for a classic western. Generally, the Native American is nothing more than an other. In this case, however, we see Joe avenging his family who was murdered. This is symbolic of America's destruction of Native Americans, and how Italy viewed America's idea of manifest destiny. Joe is a representation of America's past coming back to haunt them.
DL Navajo Joe/The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
Spaghetti Westerns refer to the film genre made in the mid-1960s and into the 1970s produced and directed mainly by Italian filmmakers. It was often filmed in Spanish deserts because costs were low and they wanted to try and keep the landscape similar to those of traditional American westerns. However, as seen in Navajo Joe and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly there are many differences that can be seen between the traditional western genre and spaghetti westerns. From a cultural studies perspective Italians used these films not only to depict some of the troubles in their own country but also the view they had on American culture.
Europeans at the time viewed the United States as a very greedy and violent nation. This is depicted in the film The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly; the plot surrounds three men in search of a buried treasure which included a large sum of coins. All three men are on separate paths to find this treasure, but many times run into each other and either try and take the other out or form an alliance with them. They will kill anything in their way, having no discretion on the amount of violence they use. One of the men sneaks up upon a woman in the dark and she shrieks Bill, the man he is in search of. So he beats the woman until she gives up the location of Bill, who happens to be the confederate soldier that knows the location of the buried coins. It isn’t till the revisionist western that there is physical harm done to women; there were times in traditional westerns were the woman would be viewed as objects but when they were seen playing the role of the housewife they were treating with nothing but respect. This view however could be the Italians pointing out the growing rate of domestic abuse in the United States in relation to the feminist movements. Another point that can be seen in relation to the culture of Italy is the portrayal of the Civil War going on in the movie. During the times these films were made Italy was a post-war society so many Italian directors would substitute the American Civil War into films in place of WWII.
The film Navajo Joe opens with a very violent and gruesome first scene. It pictures Duncan shooting an innocent Native American woman and scalping her. He would then bring the scalps into the sheriff; however the sheriff told Duncan he was now considered a murder because he was no longer killing troublemakers, but instead killing innocent women and children. Duncan is an example of how little respect many Americans gave to minority groups at the time. The protagonist of the film and character that could most be related to an alpha-male was Joe. But both Joe and Duncan do not carry characteristics typically associated with an alpha-male cowboy; both are very violent and their motives are either money or seeking revenge, neither is looking to carry out a “duty” to society. This is one of the major differences between Spaghetti Westerns and Traditional westerns, the main characters are much more violent and greedy and sometimes acting just out of revenge.
Navajo Joe shows a minority character moving out of a background role, but he is still looked down upon in some scenes such as the one in which he tells the town men that he will do the job but in return wants a dollar for every head and to be appointed sheriff. When he tells them this they all look at him with a dumbfound look, saying “an Indian as sheriff?” This portrayal of the Indian shows that in the United States minorities were beginning to take steps into society, but there were still many obstacles in their way and violent acts being taken against them.
Europeans at the time viewed the United States as a very greedy and violent nation. This is depicted in the film The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly; the plot surrounds three men in search of a buried treasure which included a large sum of coins. All three men are on separate paths to find this treasure, but many times run into each other and either try and take the other out or form an alliance with them. They will kill anything in their way, having no discretion on the amount of violence they use. One of the men sneaks up upon a woman in the dark and she shrieks Bill, the man he is in search of. So he beats the woman until she gives up the location of Bill, who happens to be the confederate soldier that knows the location of the buried coins. It isn’t till the revisionist western that there is physical harm done to women; there were times in traditional westerns were the woman would be viewed as objects but when they were seen playing the role of the housewife they were treating with nothing but respect. This view however could be the Italians pointing out the growing rate of domestic abuse in the United States in relation to the feminist movements. Another point that can be seen in relation to the culture of Italy is the portrayal of the Civil War going on in the movie. During the times these films were made Italy was a post-war society so many Italian directors would substitute the American Civil War into films in place of WWII.
The film Navajo Joe opens with a very violent and gruesome first scene. It pictures Duncan shooting an innocent Native American woman and scalping her. He would then bring the scalps into the sheriff; however the sheriff told Duncan he was now considered a murder because he was no longer killing troublemakers, but instead killing innocent women and children. Duncan is an example of how little respect many Americans gave to minority groups at the time. The protagonist of the film and character that could most be related to an alpha-male was Joe. But both Joe and Duncan do not carry characteristics typically associated with an alpha-male cowboy; both are very violent and their motives are either money or seeking revenge, neither is looking to carry out a “duty” to society. This is one of the major differences between Spaghetti Westerns and Traditional westerns, the main characters are much more violent and greedy and sometimes acting just out of revenge.
Navajo Joe shows a minority character moving out of a background role, but he is still looked down upon in some scenes such as the one in which he tells the town men that he will do the job but in return wants a dollar for every head and to be appointed sheriff. When he tells them this they all look at him with a dumbfound look, saying “an Indian as sheriff?” This portrayal of the Indian shows that in the United States minorities were beginning to take steps into society, but there were still many obstacles in their way and violent acts being taken against them.
RT Navajo Joe and The Good the Bad and the Ugly
"Spaghetti westerns" such as Navajo Joe and The Good the Bad and the Ugly reflect European ideas of what makes a typical Western film and the European view of America as a whole. Such films fixate on the current American society and greed, as well as the relationship to the U.S. wars and relations with minorities. The dominate male in such films also has few followers and must prove himself, unlike a typical Western where their reputation is known.
Both Navajo Joe and The Good the Bad and the Ugly fixate on greed and allow it to be essential to the plot of the film. The fixation on greed is a direct expression of the capitalist American mentality at the time. The European films mimic the undesirable traits of the United States through the plots of the films. Both plots focus around stealing a large sum of gold from others and highlight this undesirable level of greed.
Additionally, both films have a large amount of civil war characters whom obtain a much larger influence in these films then in a typical western. In The Good the Bad and the Ugly the Confederate captain is a drunk who lets "the good" and "the bad" simply walk through his base before he eventually dies. In Navajo Joe troops are stationed to protect a train of money but are later easily killed by a group of thieves. The films depict the troops as foolish men, perhaps implying the foolishness of the Vietnam War as a whole. The troops within both films are easily convinced and never shown as glorified or respectable individuals. The way the audience views these men is quite similar as to how many Americans and Europeans viewed the Vietnam War.
The dominate male in Navajo Joe is a Native American, something that is far from typical in the average western film. Although the town is hesitant to ask for his help, they eventually allow it. Nevertheless, the town finds it very difficult to trust this man, since he is Native American and is surprised that he actually sticks to his word. While in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, a man tests out a gun on cut out Native American figures, eventually shooting them to pieces. The films express the hostility towards minorities that was currently going on in America with the Civil Rights movement and the woman's rights movement through such characters as the Native Americans. In addition, in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, "the ugly" is played by a Mexican character, further promoting the idea of distaste for minorities. The fact that a character played by a man of Mexican ethnicity is the one looked at as "ugly" represents hostility for minorities within the film.
In both films, the dominate male's reputation is unknown to those around him and the alpha male does not act based on a duty based system of ethics. The character must prove to the town, or his enemies, that he is to be respected. Also, the alpha male role in The Good the Bad and the Ugly does not act based on a system of duty based ethics as is traditional for the alpha male in a Western, rather he acts out of greed for the gold. In Navajo Joe the dominate male acts based on revenge and expects a reward for his actions. The lack of duty based ethics further promotes the negative view on the American mindset at the time. The European view of America places the U.S. as a country that is unable to act based on duty or a strong form of ethics. This view is so strong that the alpha male character is totally revised to match this type of mentality.
Both Navajo Joe and The Good the Bad and the Ugly fixate on greed and allow it to be essential to the plot of the film. The fixation on greed is a direct expression of the capitalist American mentality at the time. The European films mimic the undesirable traits of the United States through the plots of the films. Both plots focus around stealing a large sum of gold from others and highlight this undesirable level of greed.
Additionally, both films have a large amount of civil war characters whom obtain a much larger influence in these films then in a typical western. In The Good the Bad and the Ugly the Confederate captain is a drunk who lets "the good" and "the bad" simply walk through his base before he eventually dies. In Navajo Joe troops are stationed to protect a train of money but are later easily killed by a group of thieves. The films depict the troops as foolish men, perhaps implying the foolishness of the Vietnam War as a whole. The troops within both films are easily convinced and never shown as glorified or respectable individuals. The way the audience views these men is quite similar as to how many Americans and Europeans viewed the Vietnam War.
The dominate male in Navajo Joe is a Native American, something that is far from typical in the average western film. Although the town is hesitant to ask for his help, they eventually allow it. Nevertheless, the town finds it very difficult to trust this man, since he is Native American and is surprised that he actually sticks to his word. While in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, a man tests out a gun on cut out Native American figures, eventually shooting them to pieces. The films express the hostility towards minorities that was currently going on in America with the Civil Rights movement and the woman's rights movement through such characters as the Native Americans. In addition, in The Good the Bad and the Ugly, "the ugly" is played by a Mexican character, further promoting the idea of distaste for minorities. The fact that a character played by a man of Mexican ethnicity is the one looked at as "ugly" represents hostility for minorities within the film.
In both films, the dominate male's reputation is unknown to those around him and the alpha male does not act based on a duty based system of ethics. The character must prove to the town, or his enemies, that he is to be respected. Also, the alpha male role in The Good the Bad and the Ugly does not act based on a system of duty based ethics as is traditional for the alpha male in a Western, rather he acts out of greed for the gold. In Navajo Joe the dominate male acts based on revenge and expects a reward for his actions. The lack of duty based ethics further promotes the negative view on the American mindset at the time. The European view of America places the U.S. as a country that is unable to act based on duty or a strong form of ethics. This view is so strong that the alpha male character is totally revised to match this type of mentality.
ID The Good The Bad and The Ugly/ Navajo Joe
The Western film genre provides American directors with the opportunity to showcase the changing culture of their country. Through the years, directors have picked apart issues ranging from manhood, to containment, to the women’s movement. However, when European directors tried their hand at the Western genre, a much different result occurred. Instead of showing the changing culture of America, European directors used the Western as a canvass to show European views of Americans. Two particular spaghetti westerns, Navajo Joe and The Good The Bad and The Ugly, both released in 1966 show America as a land full of violent people who only care about money. This is seen through the development, or lack thereof, of the main characters in each of the films.
Navajo Joe begins with a scene of Duncan and his men brutally massacring an Indian village. Like most of the violent scenes throughout the film, this massacre comes with no explanation. During the 1960s, many Europeans described America as in decline. The actions of the gang and the members of the town of Esperanza are perfect embodiments of the European view of America. Duncan and his men kill Indians only to get money for the scalps. However, when they discover that they will not be paid because they are killing innocent Indians, they run wild and destroy the town. This unjustified violence continues throughout the film as Duncan and his men continue to kill in an effort to steal money from the train. Money is also displayed in an aggrandized light in the film. The people of Esperanza care about nothing more than the $500,000 grant that they have recently received. However, no one in the town is willing or able to fight to defend the money when Duncan and his men ride into town. Instead, they want it handed to them. This shows the view from Europe that America was in decline around the end of the 1960s. It is also strange to note that the ruthless villain rides into town on a white horse, typically symbolic of a king or a hero. The film also lacks a truly discernable alpha male cowboy. Joe may seem like one, but there are many characteristics that he lacks. The fact that he is not white makes it difficult to see him as a true alpha male, since before this time there had not been an alpha male cowboy that was not a white Anglo Saxon. However, the fact that Joe desires to be paid a great deal, and is only fighting Duncan and his men for vengeance make Joe more of an Indian mercenary than an alpha male cowboy. Joe’s desire for vengeance and money only further the European view that America is violent and money hungry.
Another film directed by a European that showcases America’s lust for violence and money is The Good The Bad and The Ugly. Released in 1966, the film stars American icon Clint Eastwood in the role of Blondie or The Good. The film showcases the journey of three men in an effort to find $200,000 buried in a cemetery. Like Navajo Joe, the film features a large amount of seemingly meaningless violence. Scenes with Angel Eyes, Tuco, and in some cases even Blondie killing for no reason does little to add to the overall story of the film. Even Eastwood himself recognizes that the film had little story behind it: “take those things I did with Sergio [Leone]; if you analyze the stories, there wasn’t a whole lot said in them. They were great fun but more or less operas you know? They had a lot of shooting and crazy one-upmanship” (Tibbets 15). Like Eastwood says, the film showcases little more than the efforts of three men desperately trying to get to the treasure before the other. The only bonds of friendship in the film are fake. “Friends” try to keep one another alive only to gain the valuable information as to the location of the treasure. The film again lacks an alpha male cowboy hero. The three men are ruthless, but act out of no duty, and are not guided by a moral compass. They are just violent men out to find the money and they do not care who they have to kill in order to get it. This film, like Navajo Joe shows a strong European view that all Americans care about is money, and they will resort to any means necessary in order to get it.
Work cited
Tibbets, John C. “Clint Eastwood and the Machinery of Violence.” Literature/Film Quarterly. 21, 1, 1993. Proquest. Web. 14 November 2010.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
PS "The Good, The Bad, The Ugly"/"Navajo Joe"
As the 1960’s hit the United States many issues begin to arise. The key focal points in these issues were the women’s movement and racial segregation. Also emerging in the 1960’s were spaghetti westerns. These were western films usually paid for, produced, and directed by an Italian and had roles of characters that were of European decent and some American decent. These spaghetti westerns portrayed their views of us as a country in dealing with these issues.
In the film The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly we see Spanish characters as well as white characters. In a cultural studies aspect this film really shows the battle over racial segregation. The film portrays us American’s as very manipulative, confused, greedy, and aggressive when dealing with the issue of racial segregation. Blondie (white) had a relationship with Tuco (Spanish) and wants to end it. Blondie leaves Tuco to dehydrate in the desert, but Tuco survives the hardships and survives and finds Blondie. He wants to get revenge on Blondie, but is unsuccessful in his attempt as he grows distracted by a treasure. Tuco is beaten for information on the treasure and when the men find out he does not know anything they move on to find the man who knows. Later in the film Blondie kills the bad guy and has Tuco do all the work to dig up the treasure. Once it is unearthed he ties Tuco up by the neck to be hung. He takes half the treasure and takes off shooting Tuco free as he rides away. Through this film the Europeans view us as only caring about money as business and culture are growing in our country. We forget about our friendships and as segregation takes place you see the country grow divided. Some men beat people who are different while others treat them well. People of different race have to face many hardships and struggles trying to survive. In Blondie’s case there are some American’s who are friends with someone of a different race, but do not necessarily know how to act around them. They get caught up in what is going on around them where they might do something they might normally not do to someone of a different race. In Blondie’s case that means leaving Tuco to die, making him do work for him, and tying him up to hang.
Navajo Joe is another spaghetti western film where the United States is further evaluated by the Europeans. In this film the alpha male is a Navajo Indian who goes to get revenge on a gang who has murdered his tribe. The fighting and killing in this film is extremely violent and Navajo Joe is a very skilled fighter. In the eyes of the Europeans the United States is very violent and ruthless in dealing with people of different races. It is not easy being a non white in the United States in the 1960s. Many people were murdered and beaten because of the color of their skin. Many people risked their lives to fight back and stand up for what they believe. Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks are very similar to Navajo Joe in the European’s eyes. They are standing up for what they believe and trying to make things right for the people of their race who lost their lives in the battle for equality. They are battling their lives to bring equality. We, American’s are looked as of being almost evil. It is understandable to be against equality, but to murder and beat innocent men, women, and children because of the color of their skin is wrong. I think the spaghetti westerns truly give a good view of what is going on in our country through others perspective.
In the film The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly we see Spanish characters as well as white characters. In a cultural studies aspect this film really shows the battle over racial segregation. The film portrays us American’s as very manipulative, confused, greedy, and aggressive when dealing with the issue of racial segregation. Blondie (white) had a relationship with Tuco (Spanish) and wants to end it. Blondie leaves Tuco to dehydrate in the desert, but Tuco survives the hardships and survives and finds Blondie. He wants to get revenge on Blondie, but is unsuccessful in his attempt as he grows distracted by a treasure. Tuco is beaten for information on the treasure and when the men find out he does not know anything they move on to find the man who knows. Later in the film Blondie kills the bad guy and has Tuco do all the work to dig up the treasure. Once it is unearthed he ties Tuco up by the neck to be hung. He takes half the treasure and takes off shooting Tuco free as he rides away. Through this film the Europeans view us as only caring about money as business and culture are growing in our country. We forget about our friendships and as segregation takes place you see the country grow divided. Some men beat people who are different while others treat them well. People of different race have to face many hardships and struggles trying to survive. In Blondie’s case there are some American’s who are friends with someone of a different race, but do not necessarily know how to act around them. They get caught up in what is going on around them where they might do something they might normally not do to someone of a different race. In Blondie’s case that means leaving Tuco to die, making him do work for him, and tying him up to hang.
Navajo Joe is another spaghetti western film where the United States is further evaluated by the Europeans. In this film the alpha male is a Navajo Indian who goes to get revenge on a gang who has murdered his tribe. The fighting and killing in this film is extremely violent and Navajo Joe is a very skilled fighter. In the eyes of the Europeans the United States is very violent and ruthless in dealing with people of different races. It is not easy being a non white in the United States in the 1960s. Many people were murdered and beaten because of the color of their skin. Many people risked their lives to fight back and stand up for what they believe. Martin Luther King Jr. and Rosa Parks are very similar to Navajo Joe in the European’s eyes. They are standing up for what they believe and trying to make things right for the people of their race who lost their lives in the battle for equality. They are battling their lives to bring equality. We, American’s are looked as of being almost evil. It is understandable to be against equality, but to murder and beat innocent men, women, and children because of the color of their skin is wrong. I think the spaghetti westerns truly give a good view of what is going on in our country through others perspective.
Andrew Goodman Navajo Joe
Navajo Joe (1966), a spaghetti Western, clearly differs from the classic Western film. Most importantly, the film does not feature a white alpha male cowboy. Joe, the film’s protagonist, is a Navajo Indian who wreaks vengeance upon the gang of outlaws who slaughtered his entire tribe. Although Joe is not a white alpha male cowboy, he does meet the requirements of being an alpha male. He acts as a result of his duty to avenge his tribe, including his wife, who was murdered by Duncan’s enormous gang of outlaws. As he acts out of duty, he does not reveal to Estella, who is half-Indian, why he chooses to fight Duncan’s gang. Joe is a proficient marksman, is skilled with a knife, and is also skilled in hand-to-hand combat. As a result of his fighting capabilities, he is able to single-handedly kill dozens of men. Joe also reveals himself to be a taciturn loner, as although he interacts with various townspeople, he does not speak any more frequently than he needs to.
Note that spaghetti Westerns are produced in Europe and are directed by European directors. The spaghetti Western is, essentially, a European version of an American Western film. Thus, these films reflect European perceptions of American culture and of American values. Overall, the spaghetti Western reflects the belief, held by Europeans that Americans are a violent people who are attracted to portrayals of brutal violence. Additionally, these films reflect the European perception that Americans are a materialistic and intolerant people.
Specifically, Navajo Joe is a very violent film. The opening scene features Duncan killing and scalping an innocent Indian woman. Then, his large gang emerges and destroys an Indian village. As the film progresses, Joe attacks Duncan’s enormous gang by killing a few men at a time. After each killing, however, Duncan and his men become more ruthless and violent as they kill many townspeople after seeing the Wanted posters. After learning of the $500,000 heading to Esperanza, Duncan’s men kill not only the soldiers defending the train, but innocent men and women who just happen to be riding in the passenger compartment. In Esperanza, Duncan and his men brutalize the townspeople, even after it becomes clear that they do not know where Joe has hidden the money. In regard to materialism, the townspeople are shown to value the $500,000 more than they value Joe’s life as, on multiple occasions, comments are made which suggest that the money is more valuable than Joe. In regard to intolerance, Duncan is revealed to hate all Indians as he attacks and kills them in order to sell their scalps for $1 per scalp. Also, the townspeople make many rude comments about Joe as he is an Indian.
Thus, Navajo Joe, a typical spaghetti Western, reflects European perceptions of American culture as the film is very violent, reveals that Americans are materialistic, and portrays Caucasian Americans as being intolerant of racial minorities. As these are commonly thought of being negative attributes, from a cultural studies point of view, this genre is reflective of the notion that many Europeans view Americans and American culture in a negative light.
Note that spaghetti Westerns are produced in Europe and are directed by European directors. The spaghetti Western is, essentially, a European version of an American Western film. Thus, these films reflect European perceptions of American culture and of American values. Overall, the spaghetti Western reflects the belief, held by Europeans that Americans are a violent people who are attracted to portrayals of brutal violence. Additionally, these films reflect the European perception that Americans are a materialistic and intolerant people.
Specifically, Navajo Joe is a very violent film. The opening scene features Duncan killing and scalping an innocent Indian woman. Then, his large gang emerges and destroys an Indian village. As the film progresses, Joe attacks Duncan’s enormous gang by killing a few men at a time. After each killing, however, Duncan and his men become more ruthless and violent as they kill many townspeople after seeing the Wanted posters. After learning of the $500,000 heading to Esperanza, Duncan’s men kill not only the soldiers defending the train, but innocent men and women who just happen to be riding in the passenger compartment. In Esperanza, Duncan and his men brutalize the townspeople, even after it becomes clear that they do not know where Joe has hidden the money. In regard to materialism, the townspeople are shown to value the $500,000 more than they value Joe’s life as, on multiple occasions, comments are made which suggest that the money is more valuable than Joe. In regard to intolerance, Duncan is revealed to hate all Indians as he attacks and kills them in order to sell their scalps for $1 per scalp. Also, the townspeople make many rude comments about Joe as he is an Indian.
Thus, Navajo Joe, a typical spaghetti Western, reflects European perceptions of American culture as the film is very violent, reveals that Americans are materialistic, and portrays Caucasian Americans as being intolerant of racial minorities. As these are commonly thought of being negative attributes, from a cultural studies point of view, this genre is reflective of the notion that many Europeans view Americans and American culture in a negative light.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
JM "3:10 to Yuma"
One of the most useful ways to see the effect that revisionism can have on a movie is by examining original and remakes of a movie. One prime example of a movie effected by revisionism is the film 3:10 to Yuma which was originally produced in 1957 and later remade in 2007. The concept of revisionism is easily seen in its effect on the idea of family relations. In the original movie family relations is a topic that is very minimally touched upon, while in the remake the family relations aspect proves to be a driving source for motive for one of the main characters Dan Evans.
Dan Evans in the original film is a poor farmer family man who is bound by the idea of masculine duty. Throughout the film Evans strives to prove his masculinity by helping t transport the alpha male character of Ben Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma. In the remake however, Evans is a former injured war veteran who must work to gain the respect and approval of his oldest son. This difference in family relations is most noticeable because of the way that the two movies begin. The remake unlike the original starts with the foundation of an understanding for the family’s dynamics. In the remake when the Evans family barn is burned to the ground because of the debt that Dan has, we see the disapproval of Dan’s actions in the eyes of his son. By starting with this scene instead of with the stagecoach robbery, it alters the apparent motives for Evans cooperation in escorting Wade to the train to Yuma.
This idea of family relations is further present in the scene where Wade takes the horses from Evans and his sons, in the original the boys tell their mother that there was nothing more the father could have done to stop this from happening, while in the remake the oldest son William is highly critical of his father’s “cowardness”. Throughout the movie’s remake we see the actions of Dan move from the idea of masculine duty to that of fatherly duty and the desire to appease his son’s expectations. In the hotel scene in the remake we learn that Evans was discharged from an injury resulted from friendly fire and is doing this journey in order to redeem himself in his sons eyes. It is this need to make the family proud that Ben Wade builds his respect for Dan off of. In the end of the 2007 film it is this built up respect that in the end makes Wade both kill the remainder of his crew and put himself on the train after Dan is murdered getting him to the trains door. The character of William also takes a much more substantial role in the newer film due to his importance as the motive for Dan's action. In the original he was merely a side character used to support the film instead of containing a key role in the movies importance.
The 1957 alpha male that is seen in Dan Evans is slightly more absent in the newer version. He is less of an alpha male due to his moral compass being clouded by his desire to improve his standings as a father, and not as a man. The violence that he portrays in the 1957 film is made into actions that are seen as reprehensible instead of as something that is chalked up to being part of a man. This evolution in the idea of how violence is perceived is another clear aspect of how revisionism has changed societies association of alpha males with violence. In conclusion, although the story is the same, the violence is present, and the scenes and even some dialogue is the same throughout the films, the actual motives, and social importance’s on male expectations is clearly different. This is clearly seen in Dan Evans transformation from trying to meet masculine expectations, to his desire to be a better father figure.
Dan Evans in the original film is a poor farmer family man who is bound by the idea of masculine duty. Throughout the film Evans strives to prove his masculinity by helping t transport the alpha male character of Ben Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma. In the remake however, Evans is a former injured war veteran who must work to gain the respect and approval of his oldest son. This difference in family relations is most noticeable because of the way that the two movies begin. The remake unlike the original starts with the foundation of an understanding for the family’s dynamics. In the remake when the Evans family barn is burned to the ground because of the debt that Dan has, we see the disapproval of Dan’s actions in the eyes of his son. By starting with this scene instead of with the stagecoach robbery, it alters the apparent motives for Evans cooperation in escorting Wade to the train to Yuma.
This idea of family relations is further present in the scene where Wade takes the horses from Evans and his sons, in the original the boys tell their mother that there was nothing more the father could have done to stop this from happening, while in the remake the oldest son William is highly critical of his father’s “cowardness”. Throughout the movie’s remake we see the actions of Dan move from the idea of masculine duty to that of fatherly duty and the desire to appease his son’s expectations. In the hotel scene in the remake we learn that Evans was discharged from an injury resulted from friendly fire and is doing this journey in order to redeem himself in his sons eyes. It is this need to make the family proud that Ben Wade builds his respect for Dan off of. In the end of the 2007 film it is this built up respect that in the end makes Wade both kill the remainder of his crew and put himself on the train after Dan is murdered getting him to the trains door. The character of William also takes a much more substantial role in the newer film due to his importance as the motive for Dan's action. In the original he was merely a side character used to support the film instead of containing a key role in the movies importance.
The 1957 alpha male that is seen in Dan Evans is slightly more absent in the newer version. He is less of an alpha male due to his moral compass being clouded by his desire to improve his standings as a father, and not as a man. The violence that he portrays in the 1957 film is made into actions that are seen as reprehensible instead of as something that is chalked up to being part of a man. This evolution in the idea of how violence is perceived is another clear aspect of how revisionism has changed societies association of alpha males with violence. In conclusion, although the story is the same, the violence is present, and the scenes and even some dialogue is the same throughout the films, the actual motives, and social importance’s on male expectations is clearly different. This is clearly seen in Dan Evans transformation from trying to meet masculine expectations, to his desire to be a better father figure.
DB - 3:10 to Yuma
3:10 to Yuma, a very famous western, was originally filmed in 1957, and a remake was made in 2007. Both films share the same basic plot line, but there are some important differences, some of which cause the 2007 version to fall under the category of revisionist westerns. The most important revisionist aspect of the film is the way that in the 2007 version Dan, the alpha male cowboy, is much weaker and less respected than in the 1957 version. He is a reflection of the shift in American perceptions of masculinity. As time has passed, men in the US have been increasingly encouraged do behave in some ways which have traditionally been considered feminine. For example, men are now more encouraged to share and talk about their feelings, whereas in the past silence was golden. Additionally, in the 1957 version Dan is saved by Wade at the end because Wade felt a manly duty to return the favor, while in 2007 Dan talks about his need to impress his son, who doesn’t really have any respect for him, which convinces Wade to go. This contrasts with the culture of the 1950’s when it would be almost unthinkable that a son would not have a special reverence for his father.
Additionally, the 2007 remake of the film had other differences which showcased a change in American values. For example, the 2007 version features far more violence that the 1957 version. This can largely be attributed to warfare footage being viewed by the American public for the first time during Vietnam and afterward, as well as the excessively violent video games currently sold. In the late 50’s the American populace was becoming more and more bothered by the violence of the wars, and they didn’t desire for it to overlap into their personal lives or entertainment. However, over time, these things and others have led to desensitization to violence, and especially in a day and age like today when we have been at war since 2001 and it really has little to no effect on our lives other than what is discussed on the nightly news. Nothing causes desensitization to violence more swiftly than when actual violence does not make any kind of meaningful impact on most American’s lives.
Additionally, the 2007 remake of the film had other differences which showcased a change in American values. For example, the 2007 version features far more violence that the 1957 version. This can largely be attributed to warfare footage being viewed by the American public for the first time during Vietnam and afterward, as well as the excessively violent video games currently sold. In the late 50’s the American populace was becoming more and more bothered by the violence of the wars, and they didn’t desire for it to overlap into their personal lives or entertainment. However, over time, these things and others have led to desensitization to violence, and especially in a day and age like today when we have been at war since 2001 and it really has little to no effect on our lives other than what is discussed on the nightly news. Nothing causes desensitization to violence more swiftly than when actual violence does not make any kind of meaningful impact on most American’s lives.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
J.O. 3:10 to Yuma
The 1957 film 3:10 to Yuma and its 2007 remake are similar in that they follow the same story and the characters remain constant in both films. Other than these similarities, the films differ in the way Dan is represented as the alpha male cowboy, as well as more violence evident in the remake. Dan, in the 1957 film, is portrayed as a tough, rugged, and highly respected cowboy most notably because of his excellent shooting skills. In this film, Dan has a set duty to get Wade to Yuma for the sake of those who died while confining Wade. Contrastingly, in the 2007 remake, Dan is nothing like his alpha male cowboy counterpart seen in the 1957 film. Instead of being tough and a well-known excellent gunslinger, Dan is portrayed as a weakling. His sons are not impressed with him, nor do they look up to him as a role model. Dan, in the remake, is desperate and in need, which is why he wants the job to escort Wade so that he can get the money being offered. He has no duty; here Dan only works for personal motives – saving his ranch and gaining the respect of his sons.
Each film, through its portrayal of the alpha male cowboy and the violence levels, presents the differences in culture during the times these films were produced. During 1957, Americans were beginning to detest the violence and wars occurring at the time. Violence was frowned upon, and this is demonstrated in the 1957 film as there were much fewer violence scenes in this film than the remake. However, in the 2007 remake, violence seemed to be the drive of the film. There were numerous cases of bloodshed and brutality in the film, portraying that Americans today have come to accept violence as a common aspect of their lives. The culture of today is more impervious to violence than it was in 1957, and this is represented in the violence levels of the films. Moreover, in terms of the portrayal of the alpha male cowboy, Dan in 1957 was much tougher and displayed traits of one who does not look to please others but acts according to duty. This could represent the duty America believed it had to defend South Korea in its fight against communism. On the other hand, Dan in the 2007 remake only works to help himself rather than others. The Dan of 2007 displays the culture of America as how Americans now look to take care of everything relating to their personal life. They want to be on top, look out for their family, and meet personal goals. Survival of the fittest at its best, Americans of today want to be respected and so work to gain that approval from others. This description is what the 2007 Dan represents, a persona of selfish desires, much different than the past persona of caring and working for the sake of others.
3:10 to Yuma Ryan L
3:10 to Yuma was filmed in 1957, and fifty years later the remake was made. Although they share the same plot, there are some key distinctions that must be made. These key distinctions demonstrate what is revisionist of the 2007 one. Furthermore, the changes in the alpha male cowboy must be noted.
Firstly, the excess violence seen in the remake is a reflection of the cultural aspects which exist now. The remake demonstrates how Americans have become desensitized to death. For example, the opening scene when the barn is burnt down as punishment of not paying a debt is not seen in the original, rather he just asks for money. Throughout the remake, gratuitous violence is seen that was not in the original. This is a reflection of society as a whole. Americans, through video games, movies, and cultural events, have become desensitized to violence and death. It surrounds them more than fifty years ago, and because of that is taken far less seriously than it previously was.
The most important revision is the change in the alpha male cowboy. He is far weaker than a traditional alpha male cowboy should be. This is a reflection of the western dying in today's society. Dan is not respected by the town, and struggles to make ends meet, and must take the job of escorting Wade. Furthermore, his child doesn't respect him, which is unheard of for the classic alpha male cowboy. The weakening of the alpha male cowboy is a reflection of the death of the western.
Firstly, the excess violence seen in the remake is a reflection of the cultural aspects which exist now. The remake demonstrates how Americans have become desensitized to death. For example, the opening scene when the barn is burnt down as punishment of not paying a debt is not seen in the original, rather he just asks for money. Throughout the remake, gratuitous violence is seen that was not in the original. This is a reflection of society as a whole. Americans, through video games, movies, and cultural events, have become desensitized to violence and death. It surrounds them more than fifty years ago, and because of that is taken far less seriously than it previously was.
The most important revision is the change in the alpha male cowboy. He is far weaker than a traditional alpha male cowboy should be. This is a reflection of the western dying in today's society. Dan is not respected by the town, and struggles to make ends meet, and must take the job of escorting Wade. Furthermore, his child doesn't respect him, which is unheard of for the classic alpha male cowboy. The weakening of the alpha male cowboy is a reflection of the death of the western.
KLR 3:10 to Yuma
In watching a remake of an old film, one would expect the same story with modern characters and a better quality film. In comparing the 1957 and 2007 version of 3:10 to Yuma, cultural changes in those 50 years added new elements into the plot, noticeably changing the character of the alpha male.
In 2007, the United States was still part of the Iraq war, which brought many men to other countries to fight for their own. Life during war is not easy, neither the home life nor life in a foreign country. In the modern version of the film, evidence of war is evident throughout the film. Dan has a wooden leg, and later reveals that he has been back from war for three years. In the twenty-first century, the American culture is much more accepting of violence that it was 50 years ago. Dan’s younger son, a mere child, says “Maybe we should shoot him like Will says.” The idea of death and violence are far from radical. In the modern version, blood is not scarce. Every time someone gets shot, the camera surely captured the blood and pain. Showing what really happens and being explicit about it is no longer a shock but something expected. Dan in the modern film also shows his lack of faith in God saying, “I’ve been waiting for God to do me a god dam favor, and he ain’t listening.” This demonstrates how Dan’s motive in accepting the job is because he has to out of a sense of duty instead of wanting to provide for his family in the older version.
In 2007, the United States was still part of the Iraq war, which brought many men to other countries to fight for their own. Life during war is not easy, neither the home life nor life in a foreign country. In the modern version of the film, evidence of war is evident throughout the film. Dan has a wooden leg, and later reveals that he has been back from war for three years. In the twenty-first century, the American culture is much more accepting of violence that it was 50 years ago. Dan’s younger son, a mere child, says “Maybe we should shoot him like Will says.” The idea of death and violence are far from radical. In the modern version, blood is not scarce. Every time someone gets shot, the camera surely captured the blood and pain. Showing what really happens and being explicit about it is no longer a shock but something expected. Dan in the modern film also shows his lack of faith in God saying, “I’ve been waiting for God to do me a god dam favor, and he ain’t listening.” This demonstrates how Dan’s motive in accepting the job is because he has to out of a sense of duty instead of wanting to provide for his family in the older version.
NL "3:10 to Yuma"
The difference that fifty years makes in American cultural attitudes between 1957 and 2007 is remarkable. The American attitudes have shifted in many various ways the past fifty years; quite a few differences of shifts in American culture can be seen in the two versions of the film 3:10 to Yuma. Right from the beginning, there is a different cultural value placed heavily in 2007: "family values".
The remake begins wit the burning of the Evan's family barn and both Alice and Dan discussing what their family needs to do. The original on the other hand, starts right off in the attack on the stagecoach; the beginning of the original places all the value into the hands of the alpha male villain: Ben Wade. This trend continues throughout the remake, as family and fatherhood are the main motives of the 2007 alpha male cowboy; fatherly duty of 2007 takes place of manly duty of 1957. The differences in these films make that clear. William Evans does not play any real role in the original film: children were to be seen and not heard (mainly not seen or heard). Yet in a culture with an emphasis on fatherhood, William Evans is Ben's motives and we see him playing a critical role throughout the entire film.
Another interesting thing that proves cultures have changed is the manners which time has portrayed the alpha males. In 1957, we see the alpha males in the film as clean-cut strong men; Glen Ford's face is almost to the point of shining. Yet in 2007, the cowboy and his violence and acts are reprehensible; as a result, in 2007 we see him as a well dressed, yet rugged, bearded man. The 2007 alpha male cowboy is no longer the hero the 1957 alpha male cowboy was; the difference is just in the appearance. 2007 America also cleans up the 1957 American addiction to cigarettes; Ben is shown smoking in the bridal suite in the 1957 film and no such thing happens in 2007. In fact, 2007 gives Ben almost some sort of odd artistic/emotional side where he has some fascination with sketching. America obviously has shifted more towards emotional expression in men since 1957.
That then leaves what America wants in a conclusion: the victory of the alpha male in Dan in 1957 and then the death of the alpha male in Dan in 2007. Really, by 2007, as a genre, the Western had died, much like Dan does at the end of the film. Yet in 1957, he is the victor, the hero, the champion that 1957 America adores. American values no longer are in the alpha male as they were in 1957; America today values more than just the white man (though using the term "equality" still may be a stretch).
The remake begins wit the burning of the Evan's family barn and both Alice and Dan discussing what their family needs to do. The original on the other hand, starts right off in the attack on the stagecoach; the beginning of the original places all the value into the hands of the alpha male villain: Ben Wade. This trend continues throughout the remake, as family and fatherhood are the main motives of the 2007 alpha male cowboy; fatherly duty of 2007 takes place of manly duty of 1957. The differences in these films make that clear. William Evans does not play any real role in the original film: children were to be seen and not heard (mainly not seen or heard). Yet in a culture with an emphasis on fatherhood, William Evans is Ben's motives and we see him playing a critical role throughout the entire film.
Another interesting thing that proves cultures have changed is the manners which time has portrayed the alpha males. In 1957, we see the alpha males in the film as clean-cut strong men; Glen Ford's face is almost to the point of shining. Yet in 2007, the cowboy and his violence and acts are reprehensible; as a result, in 2007 we see him as a well dressed, yet rugged, bearded man. The 2007 alpha male cowboy is no longer the hero the 1957 alpha male cowboy was; the difference is just in the appearance. 2007 America also cleans up the 1957 American addiction to cigarettes; Ben is shown smoking in the bridal suite in the 1957 film and no such thing happens in 2007. In fact, 2007 gives Ben almost some sort of odd artistic/emotional side where he has some fascination with sketching. America obviously has shifted more towards emotional expression in men since 1957.
That then leaves what America wants in a conclusion: the victory of the alpha male in Dan in 1957 and then the death of the alpha male in Dan in 2007. Really, by 2007, as a genre, the Western had died, much like Dan does at the end of the film. Yet in 1957, he is the victor, the hero, the champion that 1957 America adores. American values no longer are in the alpha male as they were in 1957; America today values more than just the white man (though using the term "equality" still may be a stretch).
PS "3:10 to Yuma"
3:10 to Yuma is one of my favorite films. I have always enjoyed western films and the remake of the original film has a bit of everything that interests me. After watching the original I find many differences between the two films. The newer version has much more of a revisionist feel with the scenes it adds and changes. Something also noticed between the two films is the difference between Dan.
The biggest difference between the two films is the added scenes in the newer film as Dan takes Wade from his home to Yuma. In the newer film we see a deeper story line with Dan and his son Will and the relationship with Dan and Wade. Also in the newer film Dan volunteers to take Wade to Yuma because his family needs the money badly. Dan is not one to go asking for money he likes to do things on his own. He along with Butterfield, Tucker, Doc, and Byron go on an extreme journey to transfer Wade. On the journey Wade kills Tucker and Byron two men who he really does not like and does not respect. Joining the remaining men on the journey is Will after Wade saves everyone’s lives one night from Indians and then tries to escape. Wade does end up escaping and gets captured by rail road developers who touchier him. Dan, Will, Doc, and Butterfield come and rescue him and Wade even helps the men battle to escape the rail road men. Unfortunately Doc gets killed making the numbers get even lower. Wade tries to make himself look like a good guy to Dan and Will and tries to convince Dan to get Will home.
When the group arrives to town Butterfield gets a hotel room they can sneak in and wait for the train. Butterfield calls upon the town sheriff and his men to protect them and get them to the train safely. Dan knows he needs to get Wade to the train to impress Will and have him look up to him. Will looks at Wade as a hero even though he is a criminal. Charlie comes with the gang and tells the town he will pay them for whoever kills Wade’s captors. The sheriff and his men surrender because now they are outnumbered, but are killed anyways. Butterfield tells Dan to leave and that he will pay him the $200 for his troubles. Butterfield does not want part of this anymore. As Dan waits for the train Wade offers Dan a lot of money just to let him go and save his own life. Dan does not because of pride. Wade then tries to escape and tries to choke Dan, but once Dan tells him about his reasoning for why he had to do this Wade lets him go. Wade agrees to go on the train to Yuma. Butterfield promises to keep Will in a safe room and pay $1000 and allow water to run through his property. Wade and Dan take off to the train amid gun fire. Wade helps Dan pick out his men and where they are shooting from so Dan can kill them and they can keep going. Will escapes the room and lets cattle loose to help his dad and Wade get to the train. The train arrives and Wade gets right into the cell and tells Dan he did it. Charlie appears and shoots Dan killing him as Wade yells not to. Wade gets out of the cell and kills Charlie and then gets back aboard the train to go to Yuma. Will comes to his father’s side and makes it be known that he is proud of him.
Dan is a different man in the newer film compared to the original. Dan is all about impressing his son who he feels like he has disappointed and let down his entire life. Dan is too proud to not complete a mission and tell people his true feelings. It takes dealing with Wade for him to speak the truth. Wade grows respect for Dan and everything he has done since meeting him. Dan is strong man and does things on his own after getting a handicapped after the war. He lives a lie to his family and ashamed he has to do it. He just wants to be loved by his family and not see disappointment in his kid’s eyes. In this film we see Dan slowly have a relationship with Wade. Wade would never kill Dan and Dan understands this fact. Wade however does not want to think Dan has the upper hand, though at points he tries to negotiate with Dan. In my opinion it is not because Wade wants to escape and not go to Yuma, it is because he does not want Dan to be killed. He wants Dan and Will to be safe because they have gotten themselves into a situation they cannot get out of. In the eyes of his gang they are trying to put Wade away and no matter what he tells his men they will not listen because of anger.
The biggest difference between the two films is the added scenes in the newer film as Dan takes Wade from his home to Yuma. In the newer film we see a deeper story line with Dan and his son Will and the relationship with Dan and Wade. Also in the newer film Dan volunteers to take Wade to Yuma because his family needs the money badly. Dan is not one to go asking for money he likes to do things on his own. He along with Butterfield, Tucker, Doc, and Byron go on an extreme journey to transfer Wade. On the journey Wade kills Tucker and Byron two men who he really does not like and does not respect. Joining the remaining men on the journey is Will after Wade saves everyone’s lives one night from Indians and then tries to escape. Wade does end up escaping and gets captured by rail road developers who touchier him. Dan, Will, Doc, and Butterfield come and rescue him and Wade even helps the men battle to escape the rail road men. Unfortunately Doc gets killed making the numbers get even lower. Wade tries to make himself look like a good guy to Dan and Will and tries to convince Dan to get Will home.
When the group arrives to town Butterfield gets a hotel room they can sneak in and wait for the train. Butterfield calls upon the town sheriff and his men to protect them and get them to the train safely. Dan knows he needs to get Wade to the train to impress Will and have him look up to him. Will looks at Wade as a hero even though he is a criminal. Charlie comes with the gang and tells the town he will pay them for whoever kills Wade’s captors. The sheriff and his men surrender because now they are outnumbered, but are killed anyways. Butterfield tells Dan to leave and that he will pay him the $200 for his troubles. Butterfield does not want part of this anymore. As Dan waits for the train Wade offers Dan a lot of money just to let him go and save his own life. Dan does not because of pride. Wade then tries to escape and tries to choke Dan, but once Dan tells him about his reasoning for why he had to do this Wade lets him go. Wade agrees to go on the train to Yuma. Butterfield promises to keep Will in a safe room and pay $1000 and allow water to run through his property. Wade and Dan take off to the train amid gun fire. Wade helps Dan pick out his men and where they are shooting from so Dan can kill them and they can keep going. Will escapes the room and lets cattle loose to help his dad and Wade get to the train. The train arrives and Wade gets right into the cell and tells Dan he did it. Charlie appears and shoots Dan killing him as Wade yells not to. Wade gets out of the cell and kills Charlie and then gets back aboard the train to go to Yuma. Will comes to his father’s side and makes it be known that he is proud of him.
Dan is a different man in the newer film compared to the original. Dan is all about impressing his son who he feels like he has disappointed and let down his entire life. Dan is too proud to not complete a mission and tell people his true feelings. It takes dealing with Wade for him to speak the truth. Wade grows respect for Dan and everything he has done since meeting him. Dan is strong man and does things on his own after getting a handicapped after the war. He lives a lie to his family and ashamed he has to do it. He just wants to be loved by his family and not see disappointment in his kid’s eyes. In this film we see Dan slowly have a relationship with Wade. Wade would never kill Dan and Dan understands this fact. Wade however does not want to think Dan has the upper hand, though at points he tries to negotiate with Dan. In my opinion it is not because Wade wants to escape and not go to Yuma, it is because he does not want Dan to be killed. He wants Dan and Will to be safe because they have gotten themselves into a situation they cannot get out of. In the eyes of his gang they are trying to put Wade away and no matter what he tells his men they will not listen because of anger.
DL "3:10 to Yuma"
3:10 to Yuma was originally made in 1957 and was recently remade in 2007. Film remakes are a powerful tool when looking at cultural studies because it allows you to see how the changes in culture have affected the filming of the movie. By watching both versions of 3:10 to Yuma you are able to see the ways in which the most recent version is seen as revisionist. The 2007 version has a very similar plot to the original, even using some of the same lines, but there have been some changes made.
The alpha-male cowboy in both of the films is Dan Evans, a poor rancher who is married with two sons. However in each film the two sons view and respect for their father is slightly different. In the first movie they don’t see anything wrong with the life they are living and respect what their father is trying to do for the family. When Wade and his gang steal their horses they run back to their mother and tell her everything that happened being sure to point out there was nothing that their father could do. But in the second film the eldest son, William, takes more of a stand against his father. Some officials from the town come out and burn the family barn because Evans is in so much debt and his son William tries to run into the barn to stop it. When his father holds him back William questions his father as to why he did nothing to try and stop the men who burned the barn. In both movies, part of the reason Evans goes on the journey to bring Wade to Yuma is because he needs money for his family and also because he wants his boys to be able to look at him with respect.
The opening scene in the remake shows revisionism with the burning of the barn. The barn was burned because of how much debt the Evans family was in; the town officials also shut off the water and were threatening to next take their land. The time in which this film was made was a recession in the United States. Many people were struggling to get by and losing their land to the government, very similar to the Evans family struggles.
In the second film the alpha-male is a retired, Civil War veteran with an injury to his leg. All the men around him view him as a hero for getting injured in battle but later on in the movie he tells Wade that he was really shot by one of his own men and that there was no glory behind it. Wade and Evans develop a mutual respect for each other as the movie goes on and it is developed through their use of language. When they are out on their own together they began to talk to each other; telling each other things that an alpha-male cowboy would not normally talk about. This shows revisionist characteristics as well as the increase in violence in the film. The remake was much more violent than the original film as seen through both the characters of Wade and Evans. Wade was especially more violent, killing multiple people along the road to Yuma and in the end shooting down his entire gang. The increase in violence in the films may be in relation to the times it was made in.
In the first film Evans plays the typical role of the alpha-male cowboy, he is well-respected by those around him and brings Wade to the 3:10 train at Yuma out of duty to his family and community. In the second film Evans begins to go off the path of the typical alpha-male, he is still a strong man but there is a sense of disappointment with his family. However, he is still fulfilling his duty by bringing Wade to the train station and won’t stop till he gets them there ultimately losing his life doing so.
The alpha-male cowboy in both of the films is Dan Evans, a poor rancher who is married with two sons. However in each film the two sons view and respect for their father is slightly different. In the first movie they don’t see anything wrong with the life they are living and respect what their father is trying to do for the family. When Wade and his gang steal their horses they run back to their mother and tell her everything that happened being sure to point out there was nothing that their father could do. But in the second film the eldest son, William, takes more of a stand against his father. Some officials from the town come out and burn the family barn because Evans is in so much debt and his son William tries to run into the barn to stop it. When his father holds him back William questions his father as to why he did nothing to try and stop the men who burned the barn. In both movies, part of the reason Evans goes on the journey to bring Wade to Yuma is because he needs money for his family and also because he wants his boys to be able to look at him with respect.
The opening scene in the remake shows revisionism with the burning of the barn. The barn was burned because of how much debt the Evans family was in; the town officials also shut off the water and were threatening to next take their land. The time in which this film was made was a recession in the United States. Many people were struggling to get by and losing their land to the government, very similar to the Evans family struggles.
In the second film the alpha-male is a retired, Civil War veteran with an injury to his leg. All the men around him view him as a hero for getting injured in battle but later on in the movie he tells Wade that he was really shot by one of his own men and that there was no glory behind it. Wade and Evans develop a mutual respect for each other as the movie goes on and it is developed through their use of language. When they are out on their own together they began to talk to each other; telling each other things that an alpha-male cowboy would not normally talk about. This shows revisionist characteristics as well as the increase in violence in the film. The remake was much more violent than the original film as seen through both the characters of Wade and Evans. Wade was especially more violent, killing multiple people along the road to Yuma and in the end shooting down his entire gang. The increase in violence in the films may be in relation to the times it was made in.
In the first film Evans plays the typical role of the alpha-male cowboy, he is well-respected by those around him and brings Wade to the 3:10 train at Yuma out of duty to his family and community. In the second film Evans begins to go off the path of the typical alpha-male, he is still a strong man but there is a sense of disappointment with his family. However, he is still fulfilling his duty by bringing Wade to the train station and won’t stop till he gets them there ultimately losing his life doing so.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)