MovieChat Forums > Bend of the River (1952) Discussion > Jimmy Stewart's most violent Western?

Jimmy Stewart's most violent Western?


*WARNING*! This post contains spoilers. I do believe this is the most violent of all the Westerns in which Jimmy Stewart appeared. Consider the body count. First, McLyntock (Stewart) and Cole (Kennedy) dispatch five Indians who have attacked the wagon train. In Portland, Cole kills a gambler caught cheating. Later, when McLyntock returns to claim supplies the settlers have paid for, a fight breaks out in the casino and three of merchant Tom Hendricks’ men are killed. The fight continues at the riverboat dock, where three more fall. That makes the body count 12. Hendricks chases after his supplies, but McLintock lays a trap for him in a box canyon. There Hendricks and seven of his men die in the ensuing shootout. After Cole hijacks the wagons on the mountain, McLintock tracks down three of Coles’ men and Cole kills another who questions his order. Finally, at the riverbank, five miners are shot off their horses and Cole dies at the hands of McLintock as they grapple in the river. That makes of a total of nearly 30 dead, three quarters of those coming as the result of a fight over some wagons and cattle. One wonders if maybe a better way could have been found to settle that dispute. Had I been one of those delivering the cattle and wagons to the settlement, I wouldn’t have been smiling when I got there, thinking about all the carnage.

reply

*MORE SPOILERS*

I was watching it with my wife and remarked that it was like Jack Bauer from 24 in a Western. But that's the wild west, right? In one scene, where the workers first try to rebel, they say forcing them to go is against the law. And Jimmy Stewart's reply?

"What law?"

So yea I think it captured the true danger of the wild west. Its just amazing that one guy could handle it all. I guess whatever those Missouri Raiders did prepared him for it all. So I guess that's how he kept a level head even at the end, which was supposed to be happy - since he got the food and supplies to the 100 settlers, keeping his word and restoring his honor.

reply

Yep, Jack Bauer, Rambo, John McClane; Jimmy Stewart's Glyn McLyntock seems to be the precursor to them all. That's exactly what I was thinking when I watched this for the first time a few months ago. He's like a ninja at times.

"All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all." -- Matt Hooper, JAWS

reply

I consider Bend of the River my "comfort food" movie. It was necessary to watch this movie while I suffered through a cold a few weeks ago. My daughter and her boyfriend wanted to know how many characters had to die before I was "comforted". There is no answer!





"Fortunately, I keep my feathers numbered for just such an emergency."

reply

Watch the classic Sergio Corbucci western, "Django" and you will think "Bend of the river" is a peace convention.

I honestly didn't think of it that way but more people do die in this western than just about any other that Stewart stars in. I guess the shootings are spaced out to not be noticed that much.

Absolutely great film.

reply

"Django" is a junkyard of a film and what it enjoys most is an undeserved reputation. Many spagatini westerns were just excuses to get peeps into the drive-ins. Disposable film stock.

Let it be unsaid: insignificance is the locus of true increpation.

reply

Django is a classic. An exercise in style and broke the mold for violence in film. You must only like the lame traditional westerns that drag on and on

reply

Ever notice how few horses get killed in Westerns?

reply

I think it's exactly the opposite.

It shows a very harrowing ordeal for most of the way, when Stewart feels like it's kill or be killed. However, Kennedy kills for sheer greed (the man questioning his order).

Stewart is the total opposite, killing out of need. Granted, he takes zero chances. That seems to be the key. He doesn't take one single chance on being under anyone's thumb. He is the epitome of King David, while Kennedy is Absalom or Saul.

This comes to light when in the one moment in which Stewart no longer feels the threat, when Henry Morgan and the other two little guys run away, he stops the others from gunning them down. This moment of mercy shows the "method to his madness" and motivation.

The motivation is that he was a cornered animal, treed by dangerous foes earlier, but when it comes to these helpless hapless souls, he is all too ready to show mercy, even though they were in the very gang that could have caused his death, and other deaths.

That's why I think Stewart's character is anti hero, not full of hate. Compare this to the Leone psychopathic hero who kills three rival bounty hunters for sheer greed. There, we see an equal to the evil of Kennedy's character.

It's sickening to see how many completely wacko people actually think the Eastwood psycho is a nicer guy than Stewart's survivalist.



I fart in your general direction

reply

[deleted]