MovieChat Forums > Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974) Discussion > What bothered my in '74 bothers me today

What bothered my in '74 bothers me today

posted 9 years ago by thomas196x2000
10 replies | jump to latest

Occasionally, I'll go back and look at a film I didn't particularly like when it came out and give it another try, usually with mixed results.

What I missed when this came out was the fantastic cinematography. This guy made the suburbs of a small town in Montana pop. The bit with the little 3 wheeled Mr. Frosty vehicles, putting in the sprinkler system, etc...the work deserved a better movie.

Look at the movie poster. That massive gun, "He has 7 minutes to get rich quick!" Anyone seeing this thinks of a lot of action and thrills--which is what I thought.

The main heist is at the very end of the movie, and it is anything but "daring". There is little suspense. This isn't a heist film, it's a "character film". Problem is, we don't give a damn about any of these characters. The big gun is on screen for about 10 seconds. Wow. There's your thunderbolt. Up to then it's a bunch of whorin', talking over beer, walking around, a crazy guy shooting bunnies in his trunk, Jeff Bridges giggling. And then there is the comedy. A useless cross-dressing Jeff Bridges scene (Ha ha, we see his butt because he is not used to wearing a skirt!) At one point "Red", probably one of the most despicable characters of the time, is a goofball for laughs, the next moment, he is just a cold-blooded buzzard. Why on Earth, after this guy was ready to kill T and L, would they then go "Hey, let's do the heist again!!!" knowing how insane Red is? And they are shocked at the outcome that everyone else saw coming.

The 7.1 rating is kind of shocking. This is a 6.0 film in my opinion.

Thoughts?

[–] SunCanyonRoad 9 years ago

***SPOILERS***

I will preface my response by admitting that I am biased as this is my favorite film.

That being said, I can see where someone pining for the typical Eastwood "guns-a-blazing" movie would not get this film. Also, I think it's interesting you quote the UA tagline used to sell the film (the 7 minutes to get rich, quick line) Eastwood HATED, absolutely HATED the promotion for this film. That's why he dumped UA and set up shop at Warner Brothers. I agree, it IS misleading, but UA probably thought no one would go see a Clint Eastwood film if they let on to what it was REALLY about... which is male relationships (not homosexual) just how a friendship can cultivate through interesting events/circumstances. The "heist" is a thin, secondary layer in reality. It's merely the realm in which they are living and the vehicle that leads to our tragic end.

The entire first half of the film is this "bonding" of Thunderbolt to Lightfoot through shared experiences. (some wacky, some life threatening but all of them shared) For me, I end up caring A LOT about those two and their friendship. Neither had a friend, by chance they met, through circumstance they stayed together and ended up becoming best friends. Yeah, if you're hung up on seeing the "gun" more, then it won't have the effect on you that it does for many.

When they go to that school house at the end, the one with the money from the FIRST heist, the one Lightfoot was not a part of... Why do you think Thunderbolt doesn't bat an eye when Lightfoot takes half? It wasn't his loot, it was Thunderbolt's. Why does Thunderbolt buy the Cadillac? That was Lightfoot's dream, not his... the answer is the film isn't about the heist, it isn't about the money, its ALL about the friendship. That's what makes the ending so tragic. Bridges deserved the Oscar for his performance and Eastwood was right to have been upset to not have gotten an Oscar nod as well. When Lightfoot dies and he snaps that cigar and drives off, Eastwood says nothing, but everything is right there on his face. He's lost his best friend in the world.

"I don't want your watch, man. I want your friendship!" - Lightfoot

[–] McCartney42 9 years ago

What an excellent observation of this movie you have. This has been my argument when trying to explain it to people who've said that "it wasn't really a great action movie". Thanks SunCanyon for posting that. It's nice to see someone else see it this way.

[–] SunCanyonRoad 9 years ago

Glad I'm not the only one who sees it this way. Thanks for the compliment.

"I don't want your watch, man. I want your friendship!" - Lightfoot

[–] amikelhenry 8 years ago

I am with you 100%...I missed this movie and just watched it..and unlike dated films of this era...this 1 holds up well just because it is all about male friendship..from the inane like getting crap on your hand and your friend saying hold it outside the window to let the rain was h it off and to not pick your teeth..to the tragic end with Lightfoot and the affect it has on Thunderbolt...the actors were superb..and it some ways reminds me of another film I like, Reservoir Dogs..which was less about the heist itself and much more the interaction between characters...

[–] xplorar 8 years ago

Just saw it for the first time on bluray. I completely agree with OP in all points. Doesn't deserves anything more than 6.0
Here is why -
- Uninteresting story. "Its-supposed-to-show-pointlessness-of-life" is no excuse.
- Clint Eastwood is not much fun to watch here
- Uninteresting heist.
- Excessive and uninteresting car driving/chases
- Badly written & underused female characters
- George Kennedy's villainous flip near the end seemed forced and unconvincing
- Lightfoot's death seemed forced and stupid. Hence bad climax.

On the other hand, it was fun to watch Jeff Bridges looking so young. I now realize that "young" CGI Jeff Bridges in 'Tron Legacy' wasn't really a bad impersonation. He indeed looked like that in his youth.
Also, I never knew that Jeff Bridges had worked with Clint Eastwood on an equal footing. It was fun to see them sharing screen.

Also loved the full-frontal nudity, orgasms & non-pc dialogues....God bless the 70s!

[–] SunCanyonRoad 8 years ago

- Uninteresting story. "Its-supposed-to-show-pointlessness-of-life" is no excuse.
(OPINION)
- Clint Eastwood is not much fun to watch here
(OPINION)
- Uninteresting heist.
(OPINION)
- Excessive and uninteresting car driving/chases
(OPINION)
- Badly written & underused female characters
(OPINION - Where is a female lead needed?)
- Red's villainous flip near the end seemed forced and unconvincing
(OPINION - What did you miss? Red was an *beep* from the start)
- Lightfoot's death seemed forced and stupid. Hence bad climax.
(OPINION)

Everyone of these points are based on OPINION with nothing substantial to back them up. You use the word "uninteresting" several times. Again that's YOUR opinion but if it was so damn uninteresting why did you continue to watch it?

You are more than entitled to not like the film, but the tone of your post suggests your opinion is the end all, be all and a fact, which it is not. You lose credibility and come across as a hating troll by not adding an ounce of commentary/film theory as to "why" something is uninteresting.

"I don't want your watch, man. I want your friendship!" - Lightfoot

[–] xplorar 8 years ago

Really? Calling a movie 6/10 is being a "hating troll"?
Word of advice - Please build in more maturity within yourself if you want to engage in any meaningful discussion with anyone.

[–] arthurab 8 years ago

Lightfoot's death is a culmination of the beatings and harassment Red had given him previously. Like Worm in 'Rounders', Lightfoot can't help who he is-a smarta$$ who can't shut his mouth and a know-it-all who can't stop telling people he knows everything. He's destined to meet his end this way, as Thunderbolt is destined to be the only survivor of the 4, and yet it is to be a hollow victory for him, as the money is no consolation for losing his friend.

[–] yourfns 8 years ago

I don't know good acting or direction or writing or cinematography.
All I know is what I like. I gave it a 9

[–] fredgarv79 7 years ago

I was just re-watching this again and thinking this is like a modern day "indie" film. but was released as this major motion picture back then. but that was the era, a lot of great movies in the early 70's were sort of indie films. short on action but more thoughtful. it was a true golden age of film, from roughly the late 60's up to the mid 70's. I read that producers/directors were given free reign to do what they wanted and they tried to be different from everything that had gone before. this is one of those movies. I'm absolutely positive that if I had gone seen it in 1974 as a teen, I would have been dissapointed, it's got clint in it! bank robbers! yah! but seeing it today I appreciate it for what it was,and it's a great movie, a true classic. funny thing I just watched the latest jeff bridges movie hell and high water and he looked soooo old, then to watch this, where he was like a kid. wow