The hearse scene


There's one thing I don't get. They drive the hearse up, dodge a cheap shot along the way, challenge the ones blocking the cemetery, and then they just immediately turn around and drive back. Are we to assume that nobody will block the cemetery after that, and they will just bury the body later?

reply

I know it is heresy to criticize this movie. I have always loved it and the cast is superb as is the music. But over the years as I see this film more and more some of the plot devices seem a little far-fetched.

The hearse scene is a case in point. Would you really risk getting shot to death in order to bury someone? Conversely, would you risk getting shot to keep someone from being buried? It just doesn't seem very realistic. Another scene that bothers me is the first time the 7 fire on the bandits. They have the element of surprise and all the bandits are just sitting on their horses. I would think the first volley would kill at least six or seven of them and that many more would be gunned down before they moved very far. Yet, no matter how many bandits get shot, their numbers never seem to diminish. That is in contrast to the Kurosawa film in which we watch the bandit force get whittled down one by one. The knife throwing scene is another one. Who would take a chance with their life on something like this? Does anyone else feel the same way?

reply

[deleted]

Chris (Yul) calls for 6 volunteers amongst the townsmen, who take the casket out of the hearse and they carry it into the graveyard, just before they turn the hearse around. So it's assumed those 6 men will put the casket into an open grave, but the rest of it is left for the imagination. I do agree fully though that the whole scene seems contrived purely for the sake of introducing us to the bravery (and coolness) of the main characters.

Some other small events also have me somewhat puzzled, but none more than the final shot that kills O'Reilly (Bronson). The fight is already over as far as everybody else in the village is concerned. They're standing around fussing about this or that. But off to the side we see O'Reilly hiding and the three kids come around and he makes a fuss of protecting them, and out of the blue we hear the shot that kills him. Yet we don't see who fired the shot, we don't see any reaction whatsoever from anybody else, who carries on in the next scene as if the bandits have disappeared and there's no danger any more. To me it seems like a tacked-on scene to resolve one of the story lines, but it doesn't tie in with events prior to and following that specific scene. And editing oversight? (Which is heretical, I know, to cast doubt on the acclaimed Ferris Webster.) Or, more probable, I'm still missing something after six views.

Having said that, it remains a movie that doesn't bore for a single second, no matter how well I know every scene. A testament to fine movie making, warts and all. Eight out of ten for me. Wish I could get my hands on The Seven Samurai.

Please click on 'reply' at the post you're responding to. Thanks.

reply

Ya, the first battle: 40 versus 6 (Doesn't Lee sit it out?) doesn't make sense. Too many "misses". Should've started with 60 versus 6, then 20-25 kills among the 60 would've made sense and we need at least one of the 6 with a minor wound.
Also, Calvera letting them go free AND giving them their guns after they'd killed so many of his men??

reply

The undertaker, Chamlee (Whit Bissell) says the grave is already dug. At the cemetery gate, six guys volunteer to carry the casket in to bury it. That's when Brynner turns the hearse around and returns down the hill. It all makes sense.

reply