Controversy?


Someone told me that this film created some controversy at the time of its release. Does anyone have details on this?

reply

well i wasn't there but i could see why this would cause controversy: it had children and adolescents in a Western ensemble, drinking and meeting whores, as well as a very unsportsmanlike shooting in the back. Also consider this quote from Victor Canby's contemporary review: <i>"You immediately know that a numbingly contemporary, adult sensibility is at work when one of the boys turns out to be Jewish, when another turns out to be the half-caste son of a Mexican whore, and when Roscoe Lee Browne, whose diction is only slightly less melifluous than Sir John Gielgud's, turns up as the chuck-wagon cook. This cattle drive seems to have been organized not in desperation, but to conform to some odd Appellate Court decision."</i>

reply

Let's not forget here that this film was release in 1972. Bruce Dern's character get's no name in the credits other than "Long Hair." There is definitely a lot of 1972 in the film. Setting it in around 1872 is an interesting choice given that the film is as much about 1972 as it is about 1872.

reply

the film is as much about 1972 as it is about 1872.


Exactly.

reply

However, the movie was a screenplay from the book by the same name and many of the characters and attributes were identical. But, I can see the 1972ness of the film.

reply

Canby was an old lizard.

We all know there were no Jews west of the Mississippi; that among the freed slaves of the era, there were none who were well-spoken or took any pride in it, and there certainly weren't any bastards born to Mexican whores in the Southwest.

More seriously, yeah it's unlikely that a group of this ethnic mix would come together by happenstance, but The Cowboys is a romantic fable, not a documentary.

But then, in the 70s, there was an impetus toward realism that had little tolerance for fabulation, which critics have nowadays largely outgrown.


reply

We all know there were no Jews west of the Mississippi; that among the freed slaves of the era, there were none who were well-spoken or took any pride in it, and there certainly weren't any bastards born to Mexican whores in the Southwest.


The film is certainly striving for some contemporary relevance, but I would not be so absolute in my historical claims, especially since education and literacy indeed proved very important to many slaves or freed slaves.

reply

Here in the UK we just thought it was another very good John Wayne film. Personally I thought it was one of his best. We Brits didn't take part in the Vietnam war so any US politics or hidden messages, if there were any, would have gone straight over our heads. At the end of the day it is entertainment, a good story well told.

reply

According to what I have heard, since this was a Vietnam era movie, the media (and others)got very upset by the fact that children were using guns to seek justice/vengence(depending on your point of view)on the Bruce Dern character and his cronies. Sort of a "What are we teaching our children?" response.

reply

The critics got thier panties in a wad over Mel Gibson's "The Patriot" because he had his two sons killing British soldiers. Most of these critic's ideas of roughing it is when, sitting at a mist-cooled cafe, they receive a chabli instead of the zinfendel they ordered. That's adversity!
If you liked the film(The Cowboys or The Patriot)that is your perogative. Piss on the critics.

"How about my mama in Ceder City. She's only ninety-two!"

reply

"The critics got thier panties in a wad over Mel Gibson's "The Patriot" because he had his two sons killing British soldiers. Most of these critic's ideas of roughing it is when, sitting at a mist-cooled cafe, they receive a chabli instead of the zinfendel they ordered. That's adversity!
If you liked the film(The Cowboys or The Patriot)that is your perogative. Piss on the critics."

LOL!

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

reply

The film was especially controversial because Wayne's character is shot in the back and killed. See my post here:

It is Wayne's murder that ultimately makes The Cowboys memorable. Again, Wayne does not just die at the end of the film or in battle or off-screen, as in Sands of Iwo Jima or The Alamo or The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence. Instead, he's gunned down in the back after winning a fight fairly, well in advance of the film's conclusion. On the set, Wayne reportedly warned Dern that he'd become the most hated man in America, to which the younger actor exclaimed, "Yeah, but they'll love me in Berkeley." And television talk show host Dick Cavett told Dern that his on-screen murder of the Duke was akin to "raping the Statue of Liberty." Clearly, the act was a bold move, and yet with the children eventually avenging Wayne's death, it didn't harm The Cowboys commercially. It achieved a strong return of $7.5M in domestic theatrical rentals in 1972, as much as 1971's Big Jake and more than 1970's Chisum and Rio Lobo.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068421/board/thread/35993643?d=36148818#36148818

The Cowboys also might have been controversial for its reactionary subtext, which I discuss in that post.

reply

Guess I won't be renting this one now. Thanks a lot.




give me a stage where this bull here can rage and though I can fight I'd much rather recite.

reply

Strawdawg,

It's still really worth a look. Some excellent dialogue in this one. It's one of my favorite movies of all time. (whether you know some of the plot or not)

reply

...Strawdawg, don't let the nay-sayers in this post keep you from checking out "The Cowboys." All this pseudo-intellectual crap that reads right-wing reactionary dogma between the lines in every picture John Wayne's ever appeared in is just that: crap! The "Cowboys" is just a straightforward Western with a coming-of-age theme. Not as good as some Westerns, but better than many...

reply

[deleted]

...Umm, actually, the Duke was 68 when he made "The Shootist" and the source material pre-existed, before it was made into film, about the "aging gunfighter." Nor does Wayne's character go around looking for fights, but the character's prior reputation in his younger days still haunted him and there were either old scores that old enemies wanted to settle with him (most of them weren't exactly spring chickens either, e.g., Richard Boone and Hugh O'Brien) or gun-toting fools out to prove their "street cred" by challenging the Wayne character to gunfights and such.

Almost any given picture starring George C. Scott would merit an Oscar for him as lead; but we all know what happened when he won for "Patton," right?

"Robbing Dustin Hoffman of the Oscar," my a**! You make it sound like the Duke swaggered up the Academy Award stage when the Oscar was being handed to Hoffman, pulled out his six-shooter, and told Hoffman, "Hand it over, pilgrim!"

"Midnight Cowboy" is an example of the "indy" style of filmmaking whose day had not yet come for sweeping all the most significant Academy Awards. Sure, it won Best Picture, but there were other categories in the competition that nailed Oscars for other pictures. Where's your outrage that "Easy Rider" didn't even get nominated for, let alone win win, "Best Picture" instead of MC?

Wayne was nominated before ("The Sands of Iwo Jima") and didn't win. He outdid himself in pictures like "The Quiet Man," "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon," "Rio Grande," "Hondo," and especially "The Searchers." The Duke was ideally cast in "True Grit," and his LOOK, alone, at villain Robert Duvall and his henchmen and the final shootout with that bunch was worth the price of admission and Academy Award nomination for John Wayne. He had a solid career in A-list pictures and remained a top draw on the motion pictures charts for most of his career after 1939's "Stagecoach." Who the hell are you, marm, to talk s*** about John Wayne?

Dustin Hoffman was/is great, sure, but the nature of winning Oscars is a funny animal and does not always get bestowed on fledgling film actors. The top talents who don't always win often have to wait almost as many years as the Duke did before receiving this special token of recognition by their peers.

Your problem, marm, is that you're incapable of "giving the devil his due." I have as little use, personally, for Robin Williams as you do for John Wayne, but I'm pleased as punch that Williams won for "Good Will Hunting" because the man deserved it!

reply

"Guess I won't be renting this one now. Thanks a lot."

I don't quite understand this. Are you annoyed that someone ruined a 36-year old movie plot for you? You're kidding, right?

reply

Why would I be kidding? 36 year old movie or 2 month old movie, what's the difference if you haven't seen it. I saw my first John Wayne movie about 2 months ago and while he wasn't very good in it, the movie was great. The person who loaned me The Searchers, also recommended The Cowboys and I came here looking for more info on it. Everything was going fine until the guy posted a killer spoiler and now I don't have any plan to rent it. That's why people are kind enough to post when there is a spoiler ahead. Do you like it when people tell you that a character dies in the end before you see it. I don't, I guess I'm just weird.





give me a stage where this bull here can rage and though I can fight I'd much rather recite.

reply

I assume your comment "He wasn't very good in it" was NOT referring to "The Searchers", correct?

Because his performance in that movie is one of the best in history.

reply

Yes, I was referring to The Searchers. It was a great movie, I just can't see what the fuss over John Wayne was. I'd heard that he played a racist character now and then, but yikes, this character in the The Searchers just makes you cringe. Everything else about the movie was fantastic.




give me a stage where this bull here can rage and though I can fight I'd much rather recite.

reply

As I stated before you really should take a look at the movie. I'd heard about John Wayne's fate in this movie before I had a chance to see it on t.v. also (by way of my WONDERFUL older brother).

The story line is nowhere near what you'd expect from a typical JW movies. And although the tides of his westerns were turning in the 70's (True Grit, Rooster Cogburn) from that formulated cowboy hero stuff they churned out time and again then his comedic Maureen O'Hara movies in the 60's, it's edge is what I liked.

That's what I absolutely LOVED about it. The story line was brilliant and brilliantly acted by everyone in it. I never would have expected it to turn out the way it did when I saw it on t.v. It was a breath of fresh air because he wasn't one of my favorites actors, but the chemistry between Wayne, Brown and all of the kids was a welcome spin on the cattle drive theme that I hadn't seen in a western at that time and even now.

The closest thing I've seen is Lonesome Dove and that still doesn't even come close to the dynamics with kids/cowboys. Just rent it. I don't think it would be a bad choice.

Watch for Roscoe Lee Brown's lines alone if for nothing else in this film.

reply

You've sold me on it Nisa. I will see it now. I just recently (within the last year or so) started watching old westerns. It was a genre that never really appealed to me, but after seeing more recent movies about the old west, I've kind of changed my attitude towards them and I have to say, I'm enjoying them.

It would have been nicer not to know how it ends though.




give me a stage where this bull here can rage and though I can fight I'd much rather recite.

reply

Glad you're gonna take the plunge.

If you'd really like to see an EXCELLENT western and have a WHOLE afternoon to kill you've really got to see the mini series "Lonesome Dove" if you haven't already.

On the whole I was never really a big western fan because they were always so sanitized with the good/bad figures and not much in between but the standard dangers along the way. But Larry McMurtry's Lonesome Dove is a MASTERPIECE. It's Robert Duvall's, Tommy Lee Jones' and Robert Urich's best performances. (Urich couldn't act his way out of a paper bag in my opinion but I had to take it all back when I saw him in this. He took my breath away in some parts.)

Duvall has frequently said his portrayal of the retired Texas ranger was his favorite character of his entire career. Thank God they made this into a mini series because any butchering of this would have been a pure crime. The cast is huge and STELLAR. Chris Cooper (before he made it big), Anjelica Huston, Diane Lane, Danny Glover, Ricky Schroeder, Steve Buscemi, Glen Headley and Frederic Forrest to name a few.

It's a breath-taking, sprawling, addictive, gritty, heartbreaking, hysterically funny and very, very realistic portrayal of the west. Duvall's and Jones' rapport is a riot and is loosely but partly based on the some real events from the start of the Goodnight-Loving Trail. The memorably funny lines are too numerous to mention and come fast and furious in some spots. I truly hate to give the standard review of "I laughed and I cried!" but I really did. I bawled like a baby in some parts.

I sat down and watched it on tape at my sister's house all in one day and except for a couple of slow spots in the very beginning, I hardly left my seat the entire time. In the film the night before the actual cattle drive starts is when all of the excitement begins and never ends. But the set up in the beginning although slow paced is chocked full of witty realistic banter. Just like two good friends would actually make.

I missed it when it premiered on CBS in 1989 the first time. But I sure as hell taped it the next time it was on. If you've already seen it forgive me, if not....you need to view it. A MASTERPIECE!!!!


See how others viewed it: (BEWARE IF UNMARKED SPOILERS THOUGH)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096639/usercomments

also see the production stills and script clips on the shoot at this website here:

There is spoiler info here also so watch out.


http://alkek.library.txstate.edu/swwc/ld/ldexhibit.html





reply

Wow, Lonesome Dove sounds fantastic. What an amazing cast. I had heard of it before, but never read anything about it. I'm going to rent this series right away if it's available. The Wild Bunch is the most recent one I've seen and it's great as well. My brother highly recommended the HBO series Deadwood, but for some reason I just couldn't get into it. Normally swearing doesn't bother me at all in films, but it just seemed so out of place here and seemed to make it all very unrealistic. Anyway, thanks for the recommendations. If you think of anymore, pass them on.



give me a stage where this bull here can rage and though I can fight I'd much rather recite.

reply

[deleted]

I'm sure you absolutely love it. Glad you liked Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch". It was deemed too bloody when it came out but I liked it as well.

Now, I'm not a really big fan of the Clint Eastwood "man with no name" genre, since it really became monotonous after about the 20th take on that theme. I actually decided to see "The Outlaw Josie Wales" when it came out in '76. It was a refreshing change and it really drew me in. There was no mystery as to why he acted the way he did which revealed itself in the beginning of the movie, whereas in the zillion of other Eastwood spaghetti westerns he was just pissed off all the time and no one knew why.

It was gritty, sad and humorous at the same time with lots of drama in between. No Italian actors badly dubbed in this movie. There are yankees, rebels, redlegs, carpetbaggers, a group of settlers w/ a feisty old bible-thumping granny, comancheros, comanches, gunfights you name it.

It's a very well crafted odyssey without being outlandish like some of Clint's westerns a little before that time. The dialouge seemed to fit the era, the atmosphere had a true feeling throughout the film and they used authentic Native Americans like Chief Dan George(who was a laugh a minute) and Will Sampson as chief of a Comanche tribe.

It's no Lonesome Dove but it close enough.

If you're looking for a fun, exciting movie with excellent dialouge that seems to fit era then Tombstone might be what you're looking for.

Although it's full of factual characters but kind of loose on the facts it's still very, very entertaining. Val Kilmer as Doc Holliday outshines Kurt Russell in EVERY SINGLE scene they share. And he has all of the best memorable lines in the movie. You'll find yourself repeating them off and on after you see the movie. Look for the scene with Doc Holliday and the whiskey cup.

This one is a fast paced, tense movie with a wonderful score. Full of stars like, Russell, Kilmer, Bill Paxton, Billy Bob Thornton, Dana Delaney, Charleton Heston, Stephen Lang, Michael Biehn, John Corbett, Billy Zane, Powers Boothe, (and the man I'd slap my momma to see in person) Sam Elliot. It's a great Saturday evening at home movie.

reply

[deleted]

strawdawg, with all due respect, if you didn't like Wayne in The Searchers, you might want to skip watching his movies. He was so incredibly good in that movie that if you didn't like him in it, it probably means you just don't like him.

reply

<<It would have been nicer not to know how it ends though.>>

I'm afraid that a risk you'll always run with old movies on these boards. People are really only going to (consistently) post spoiler warnings for newly released movies, not ones which have been out for a couple of decades, and so have plots and plot points that most people may reasonably assume have been published, discussed, or alluded to in many places, from books and film schools to online forums like these. If you don't want to see the spoilers, don't visit these boards! If you want info but no spoilers stick to the more formal reviews until after you see the movie. (That said, I was recently astonished to find that Bosley Crowther, the film critic of the New York Times, had posted major--and I do mean MAJOR!--plot spoilers in his review of another John Wayne movie, "In Harm's Way", which must have annoyed filmgoers no end in its day.)

That's what I do. Like you I've been re-discovering the old westerns in recent years (John Wayne films like "Stagecoach", "Rio Bravo", "The Cowboys", and "El Dorado", James Stewart ones like "Bend of the River" and "Winchester '73", Glenn Ford and William Holden's "The Man from Colorado", and Henry Fonda's "My Darling Clementine", amongst others--all of which I would recommend, BTW) but I generally steer clear of places like IMDB's discussion boards until AFTER I see the movie.

That said, you generally have to expect to know at least the general gist of any old movie, especially the better known ones like "Stagecoach" and "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance". That shouldn't stop you seeing them though. That's the beauty of many of these old films. You can enjoy them even though you may know a lot about their respective plots. Some in fact (eg "Stagecoach") you can enjoy multiple times without significant lessening of the viewing pleasure.

reply

I make sure I watch the film before I read about it

reply

[deleted]

His character in The Searchers is SUPPOSED to make you cringe. But he changes his opinions in the end. That's the whole point of the movie. His prejudice came from a source of great pain, after what happened to his family. That's not condoning it, but it does explain why he has the attitude toward Native Americans that he has.

reply

I know I am six and a half years late in replying to this, but I just now saw it. If you had seen the Cowboys at a theater in 1972, as I did, you would have already known John Wayne's character's fate in it then, too, also as I did. Everybody was talking about it. So, it's not really a spoiler at all.

reply

erudite, joekidd.

reply

According to what I have heard, since this was a Vietnam era movie, the media (and others)got very upset by the fact that children were using guns to seek justice/vengence(depending on your point of view)on the Bruce Dern character and his cronies. Sort of a "What are we teaching our children?" response.


Not only that, but Wayne's character "drafts" the children out of school. The Cowboys can be read as a pro-Vietnam allegory.

reply

I grew up and was of draft age just as this movie came out. No one that I knew took it as an allegory for a pro-Vietnam movie. What many of these posters are missing is that Long Hair (Bruce Dern) and his gang, murdered Wil Andersen and took his cattle. The boys went after them both for revenge and to get back what was rightfully Mrs. Andersen's cattle. Instead of trying to read messages into some movies, how about sitting back on a rainy day and enjoying one of the better westerns to come out in the 1970s?

reply

homer 900
very good,very true,you have hit the nail on the head,you should review movies

reply

Why thanks for the compliment tietjen. But I think I'd fall into the same trap that too many other "professional" movie reviewers do and believe myself to be more important the the product I was reviewing. I like well made, finely crafted movies where, when explosions, gunfire, nudity and chases exist, they exist for a reason to move the story along, not just to exist because they can. Like the first three Star Wars movies vs. the latest three. Sorry, but story line, acting and even effects for the first three were better. The effects were better because they moved the story, not showcasing what ILM can do inside a computer for added business later.

reply

homer900
and you're humble too, is there no end to your perfection,to me there are very few sequels that live up to the original, and NO remakes that even come close,oops!i've become opinionated,sorry.

reply

Interesting that you should say that. I first saw this movie in '72 or '73 and last saw it maybe 3 months ago. Until reading some of these posts I NEVER regarded it as a Vietnam allegory, just a darn good western built on an interesting "what if" premise with one of the more memorable scenes filmed in any western.

reply

I agree with Homer900 in that The Cowboys was not seen as a pro-war movie during the Vietnam era. I, too, was just approaching draft age at the time and was pretty aware of what was going on around me concerning the war. The only controversy that arose out of this film at the time was John Wayne being killed. Although he had died in other movies, this was such a cold and cowardly way in which he was killed. Bruce Dern did an outstanding job as Longhair. I have to say that his performance generated such large amounts of hate mail because he was so convincing in the role.

On a lighter note, I was working at our small hometown theater when The Cowboys was first released. I was the assistant manager (which meant I sold the tickets and worked the snack bar in the lobby). The only other employee was the projectionist upstairs (also a teenager like me). As you can imagine, after running a movie a couple of times a day over the course of a week, you get so you know the dialogue very well and know what's happening in the movie just from hearing it from the lobby. Near the end of the week after showing The Cowboys over and over, I was standing in the lobby as the fight scene between John Wayne and Bruce Dern was starting. Just as Bruce Dern says "Do I look like a man who would beat on an innocent boy to you?", the door leading to the projection booth burst open and my buddy was mouthing Bruce Dern's part. I immediately came back with "You look like the vermon ridden son of a bitch that you are." We proceeded to act out the entire scene until he said "take everything but the fire", slamming the projection booth door behind him and running upstairs to make the reel changeover. This is my favorite John Wayne movie because I got to be part of it...LOL.

reply

Was the cook supposed to be Henry Kissinger?

I wanna buy your carbon offsets.

reply

Yeah, and the Madame is Bill Clinton dodging the draft. ;-)

reply

<<Was the cook supposed to be Henry Kissinger?>>

That post made me laugh OUT LOUD!!!!!

reply

It was a shame that Bruce Dern got so much hate mail and abuse because he was just a great professional actor doing his job. I noticed in later years when he was a guest on a talk show he didn't seem to like to talk too much about this role. He should have got a best supporting nomination for this role.

reply

I think one of the main controversy in this movie was a scene which has never been shown on tv or the dvd version but was in it when I saw it at the theater during its first release. I'm speaking of the scene following the first encounter with the madame and her "girls". Later all the boys came to the travelling cathouse after the first two reported what they had scene. There was a hilarious scene in which each boy's reaction is captured upon exiting the wagon. I guess it was too controversial to show these young boys getting their first...well you know. Also it was controversial to show these young boys getting revenge for the murder of their trail boss and surrogate father Will Anderson. I and my friend had a debate whether these boys were too young to kill so easily. My argument being that by that time they had actually become men being made to grow up under the tough conditions of the cattle drive and the tough time of the early west.

reply

dparker, I saw this as a first run and as far as the girls go, there were suggestion by the ladies to some of the boys, most of whom rode off scared. A. Martinez's character stuck around but was insulted by one of the ladies and he too rode off. As I recall it, none of the boys was ever serviced by the ladies.

reply

Just for the record, in the book they were.

Another thing in the book a little too shocking [I suppose] to put on the big screen at that time was the rustlers captured Weedy, as in the film, but they tied him to a stake and burned his bare feet with red-hot embers. Though he did rejoin the outfit, he was unable to walk and could only help in the revenge plot at a stationary post.

reply

I need to get the book!

This has got to be one of my all-time favorite movies, in ANY category. And yes, I have gotten pulled into the "but only Slim and Cimarron were old enough..." HELLOOOOO!!!! Have any of you talked to grandparents/ great-grandparents? When quite often, a lad entered the work force at 10 or 11 and stayed in it until he died.

Two things I detest...when someone makes a period film, and pays NO attention to the period they are in (Which this movie is NOT guilty of) and people who watch period films and try to judge them by TODAY'S standards....

reply

With all due respect, I think dparker and others who remember the scene with the traveling brothel girls continuing to show the boys all riding up to lose their cherries have conflated the book (where the scene takes place exactly as described -- after Mr. Nightlinger bargains with the madame and gets her to agree to charging the boys a discounted group rate!) with the movie, which never took it to that point. Maybe the sequence was filmed and edited out before release, but I saw the movie shortly after it opened, and the scene ended with Mr. Nightlinger sweet-talking the madame into moving on.

Sparrow 13
the Extremely DeLux One

reply

I saw this movie when it came out in 1972 and I was a big John Wayne fan back then (still am too for that matter), so I was tuned in to what people were saying about the movie. The "controversy," as others have noted, was about the fact that John Wayne's character gets shot in the back by the "bad guy," dies, and his death is climacticly avenged by others. This was not the John Wayne formula.

Ironically I had just left Vietnam when I saw this movie. If it was supposed to be allegorical about Vietnam, I never heard that, I never personally saw that in the movie at the time, and it never even occurred to me as a possibility until I read it in this thread. Maybe it's so. But that's not what the buzz was about in 1972. Wasn't even talked about.

And, yes, Bruce Dern inhabited as a character the most evil and loathsome villain in the history of westerns, before or since.

--------------------------------------------------
Get the facts first - you can distort them later!
--------------------------------------------------

reply

Producer-director Mark Rydell is a liberal, and he's the one who got the ball rolling on THE COWBOYS after he read the unpublished novel. John Wayne was brought on because he was the perfect choice to play Wil Andersen. Discussion of politics was avoided on the set, and afterward both Rydell and the equally-liberal Roscoe Lee Browne continued to speak glowingly of Wayne and what a genuinely nice guy he was.

I doubt very much that Mark Rydell set out to make a pro-Viet Nam war allegory. He did make one hell of a great Western, though.

http://www.bumscorner.com
http://www.myspace.com/porfle

reply

Probably because, despite having top billing, Wayne is killed half way through the pic.


And it was probably Wayne's most violent western up until that time... if you don't count BIG JAKE.

reply

This is from Wikipedia...

Characters, controversy and symbolism

This survival story of learning and maturation through hardship, hard work and discipline, propounds the values of truth, loyalty, and fighting for what you believe in.

The Nightlinger character teaches the boys diversity and respect in their initial exchange after Jeb enters the bunkhouse. In the comical tension-relieving scene, Fats says, "Well sir, you're the first *beep* we've ever saw [sic].", After some prodding, Jeb confirms that he's black everywhere, "Except for the whites of my eyes." The oldest boy, Slim, then proclaims, "See he's the same as us, except for that color." Jeb laughs-off being "just like you" with a fantastic Moorish tale of seduction, mayhem and heroism that thrills the boys, who ask if it is true. Jeb only says, "If it isn't, it ought to be."

Anderson and Nightlinger are both Civil War veterans. On the trail, the ramrod Anderson, accepts counsel from the outspoken Nightlinger on perhaps being too rough on the boys. The world-weary Jeb diplomatically manages an encounter with Kate (Colleen Dewhurst) and her traveling brothel.

Around the evening campfire, Slim picks out a Vivaldi tune (Largo from the Lute concerto in D major, RV 93) on his guitar in stark contrast to when the boys later are caught raucously singing Home on the Range while getting drunk on stolen liquor.

After accidentally coming across the rustler gang, Long Hair threatens to slit Dan's throat if he reveals their presence. Out of mortal fear Dan betrays the trust of the group by remaining silent (until after it is too late). The reality of death is confirmed that very night when Dan is responsible for Charlie's death.

The film is known for depicting Wayne's cold-blooded killing after being shot in the back by Dern's character. This resulted in co-star Dern becoming typecast as a villain, which made it difficult for him to get worthwhile subsequent roles. During filming of this scene, Wayne warned Dern, "America will hate you for this." Dern wryly replied, "Yeah, but they'll love me in Berkeley."[1]

Another well-known scene was that of a minor using profanity. "Stuttering Bob" was unable to alert them to danger. After Wayne chews the child out, the boy mutters, "Son of a bitch.", only to have Wayne coax him to say it repeatedly. The boy angrily builds longer curses until the boy is no longer stuttering, with, "You God damned mean, dirty son of a bitch!". To which Wayne finally responds, "I wouldn't make it a habit calling me that, son.".

Fatherhood, and more specifically, the father-son relationship is a recurring theme. Andersen has lost two of his own sons. He becomes a surrogate father to his "cowboys" during their cattle drive and eventually risks his own life to save them from a deranged killer. This father-son dynamic takes on a Christian resurrection metaphor at the end when his cowboys, baptized by violence in their quest to avenge his death, return to the scene of Andersen's murder with a tombstone and are mysteriously unable to locate his body. The tombstone inscription reads: "Wil Andersen: Beloved Husband and Father".

This is another insight I have wondered about. The name Nightlinger. I have never heard it before but if you take the first 3 letters and the last 3 letters, you have the N word. Did they do that on purpose?

reply

[deleted]


Coleen Dewhurst and Roscoe Lee Browne ... in one movie! I adore this movie.

reply

I saw it in 1972 and do remember the controversial nature of the film. No one mentioned or thought about Vietnam. It was all about the fact that the boys take revenge and kill Asa and his band of rustlers. It was all like "Children killing people! Resorting to violence! What does this teach our youth?" Etc, etc.. You have to remember that the early Seventies were culturally still an extension of the Sixties, and there was still a lot of belief that the world could be perfected if only everyone turned to Peace and Love. That's what it centered on, and it wasn't much of a controversy; a few letters to the editor, a few negative reviews (Gee, this isn't The Strawberry Statement!. Nothing much, really.

reply