Echoes in Eternity, Part I - "Troy"

SPOILERS ahead.

Three podcasts dictate a lot of my viewing habits these days: How Did This Get Made?, The Rewatchables, and Knowing You Know Nothing. Typically, I tend to only write about movies I watch for Knowing because I actually take part in the episode. But if a movie I watch for the other two inspires something, I go with it. In this case, The Rewatchables did an episode of Gladiator, so I decided to rewatch that and write about it. It also made me want to watch other epic films I owned, especially when I thought of a unifying theme among them. In Gladiator, Maximus tells his men before battle, “What we do in life, echoes in eternity.” This line reminded me of themes in Troy and Alexander, as well. I’ve watched all three recently, and I decided to write about them in chronological order (by their setting, not by their release date). The main reason for this is that each film after Troy makes reference to myths and being remembered and whatnot (especially Alexander). There’s also the rabbit hole of director’s and extended cuts I get to go down, too. So with that written, here’s the beginning of the “Echoes in Eternity” Trilogy.

Echoes in Eternity, Part I

Troy is based on a myth (there is debate about whether or not a war really happened, but even if it did, Homer likely dramatized the hell out of it), so it’s ripe with speeches and comments about being remembered and living a life of glory. In fact, one could argue that the film hits you over the head with the theme a few too many times. But myths tend to be simplistic, so I forgive Troy. 

The focus of the film is on Achilles, who is pretty much a dick for the first two-thirds of the film. He only wants to fight in the war so he will be remembered as a great warrior and hero. He’s told early on by his mother that he can go and fight and live on as a legend, or he can stay home and make a life for himself but only his family will remember him. Obviously he chooses glory on the battlefield. I’ll get more into the glory vs. family argument in the next section. For now, I want to focus on this idea of having to fight to be remembered.

While looting and whatnot is shown as a motivation for the soldiers in Troy, they are mainly sold on the idea of fighting as a way to earn glory and have their name live on beyond death. Achilles yells before a battle, “Immortality! Take it! It’s yours!” But Achilles is already famous. His name will achieve immortality, but most of his fellow soldiers will be forgotten; they fight for the chance that their names will be remembered.

Not to go off on too much of a tangent here, but it’s kind of a metaphor for capitalism. Here’s a system that can potentially allow you to become insanely wealthy, but odds are you’ll scrape by and eventually die unnoticed. But we all keep grasping for that slight chance. 

Troy posits that even just trying at least means something. When a boy tells Achilles that he “wouldn’t want to fight” Boagrius, Achilles responds, “That is why no one will remember your name.” The dickishness of that statement aside, it says a lot about the mentality towards war in the film. It’s not about fighting for a noble cause or even fighting for a country; it’s about being willing to fight. It’s a timeless motivation that stands to this day. Look at most ads for military service, and you’ll find a message along the lines of, “Very few are willing or able to take on this challenge.” It’s a great motivator, and I find it to be true. What they don’t do is promise you the chance to become an immortal hero known forever. That bit about being a soldier seems to have been left behind once, you know, following orders became the most important part of the training.

Perhaps immortality is lacking in recruitment ads, but it’s still a part of the soldier experience. With Memorial Day fresh on my mind coupled with Veterans Day, there are yearly holidays meant to honor those who have fought and/or died. The difference is that individual notice is left to the family of the service member. In a way, both family and glory are covered in modern times. As a soldier who fought and/or died, you are commemorated as a whole by the country at large, but it’s your family that remembers your name and story. This seems like a much better way to look at military service, especially since military service is typically entered by people who want to do their part, not by people just wanting recognition. Of course, Achilles would disagree with this (at least the Achilles from the beginning of the movie), although Hector would embrace this.

Family vs. Glory 

Hector is really the hero of Troy, even if more time is spent with Achilles. He fights for his homeland, not for glory. He has a family he wants to protect, and war is thrust upon him rather than sought out. He is living proof that you don’t have to choose between a family life or glory; both are possible, even if most films argue against it.

This made me think of a recent film I wrote about: The Truman Show. In that film, the possibility of Truman having a child with his fake wife seems like the potential nail in his coffin. If he has a kid, then no way will he ever escape the prison of the show and be allowed to live a real life. In film, and often in life, starting a family is seen as the death of any individual goals for the parents, and that’s truly unfortunate. 

Yes, having kids changes things, and if you have normal human emotions, your family becomes more important than yourself. But this does not mean that individual growth and achievement die. As a parent, my family is my main concern, but I still find time to write and learn new things. I’m not trying to be remembered for all time or anything, but I’ve put out enough material that people will likely still stumble across my articles after I’m dead. It’s not Achilles-level fame, but I have produced work that will survive me. But I don’t care; this is something I do for fun. If I was single and childless, nothing would be different in regards to my film writing. So why do movies like this make it seem like a family will hold a person back?

Achilles is told by his mother that a family will bring him happiness, but once a couple generations are gone, his memory will die, too. He must choose to go to war and be remembered or have a family and be forgotten. But why? For mythical reasons, I get it, but why is it not possible for Achilles to simply have a family that he can return to after war? Odysseus has this, so why can’t Achilles?

For the purposes of the film, it’s for character development. Achilles finally learns that a family that cares for you is more important than fame after death. Tragically, he realizes this too late. It takes Achilles’s interactions with Hector, then Priam, to understand that a life with Briseis will bring him happiness. But deciding to be with her is what leads to his death. Choosing to have a family gets him killed. Why? The myth and the film make it seem like only lonely, dead people are remembered for the ages. It’s bleak, but perhaps it’s a good lesson for people to learn: if your sole focus is your lasting name, then prepare for death and misery. For Achilles, he simply realized his error too late. His name is remembered, but as Hector might ask, so what?

Hector tells Achilles when they first meet that eventually they’ll all be dust, so what’s the point of fighting for the glory of it? This is a common theme regarding people who strive to make a lasting impact on this world (“Ozymandias” comes to mind). Try as hard as you like, but eventually all will be forgotten. I wish this film took that a bit further because, some day, it’s possible that everything will be forgotten. I don’t bring this up to bum people out. I see this as even more reason to enjoy those around you. Who gives a fuck if they tell stories about you for a couple thousand years? Will knowing that you’ll be remembered by strangers long after your death fill the void that you’re missing by being alone?

Striving to be remembered by people I will never meet seems so stupid to me. Perhaps this is why no one in the future will remember my name, but at least the people I love know it now.

Troy, the Director's Cut: Now with Baby-Throwing!

Due to the amount of money movies like this cost, creative control is usually taken away from the director in the interest of getting a short, action-packed, PG-13 rated film into the theaters as fast as possible. If a director is lucky, they’ll be given the chance to finish the movie later for a home video release. The best example of this is Kingdom of Heaven, the director’s cut of which is a wholly different, and exponentially better film. Now it’s almost a requirement that a movie like Troy receives the extended or director’s cut treatment. 

There isn’t a Kingdom-level change to Troy with Wolfgang Peterson’s director’s cut, but it is a much better movie. It’s longer, which allows the war to sink in with the audience and characters, but more importantly, it’s much more brutal than the theatrical cut.

Normally, I just like gory action movies more than bloodless ones. I want a bit of realism with the action, but it’s more than just adding “Oh, shit!” moments like legs being hacked or heads being smashed. It’s about war being presented in a miserable light. 

Hector talks to Paris about he knows nothing about war and death, and in the theatrical cut, the audience doesn’t either. With the director’s cut, we learn how horrific war can be. The action scenes are visceral and stay with you much longer than before. And one new element is deeply disturbing.

If you didn’t hate most of the Greeks already, the sack of Troy should push you over the edge in this new cut. It’s bad enough to see defenseless people of all kinds killed, but rarely does a film show what happens to babies during such a situation. There are multiple babies ripped from their mother’s arms and thrown. It’s shocking to see. It’s rare for a war movie to have much of an effect on me these days, but Troy did. These newly brutal scenes make Hector’s dialogue mean something this time around. Not only does Paris learn what Hector meant; the audience does, too, thanks to this director’s cut.

Why Do I Own This?

I bought this when it first came out because I was a fan of the theatrical cut. When I saw the director's cut as part of a 3-pack (along with 300 and the final cut of Alexander), I bought it again. I'm just a fan of epics.

Random Thoughts

“Boagrius!” 

I was in college when this came out, and my Humanities professor was against this movie for the Brad Pitt casting alone. He claimed that Pitt was way too small for the role. I don’t hold the source material so sacred, but I get it. It’s hard not to slightly hate Pitt for being so cocky in the movie. If he was a foot taller and bulked out (you know, like Boagrius), I would feel differently. Still, I’m okay with Pitt in this movie, but overall it’s not a fitting role for him. I found Eric Bana as Hector much more suitably cast.

Eric Bana’s reaction to Orlando Bloom claiming he’ll die fighting is fucking perfect. I can best describe it as incredulous disgust.

It’s strange how much crossover there is with this cast and Braveheart (Brian Cox, James Cosmo, Brendan Gleeson). All these Scottish dudes suddenly became Greek and Trojan.

Orlando Bloom acting like a little tough guy is the funniest part of this movie. I wish Eric Bana would slap him around a bit and shut him up.

“Immortality! Take it! It’s yours!” I’ve never liked Pitt’s line delivery. I think it’s because he is just too laid back most of the time, both in real life and as a character. I can’t believe the dude who’s always snacking in Ocean’s 11 when he talks about gaining immortality through battle.

Pitt making Garrett Hedlund stay back with the boat is a bit of a metaphor for Hedlund’s career. It seemed like he was meant to be the next Pitt at some point in his career, then...it just didn’t happen. He never left the boat.

Ajax’s little announcement when he lands on the beach is a bit silly, but when you’re that badass with a warhammer, I guess you can say stupid shit sometimes.

Eudoros’s complete shock at Achilles’s defiling of the temple is a really great piece of silent acting. Pitt’s chest thumping followed by, “Huh?” as a taunt is a little less effective. 

I wish they would have made a version of The Odyssey with Sean Bean. Not sure how exactly it could be done in the same vein as this movie with how they portray the gods as invisible or nonexistent, but I would have liked to have seen what they came up with. 

Apparently the director’s cut is much more interested in nudity, as well. There are a lot more butts and boobs in this movie. The brutal war stuff is more effective, but the nudity helps, too.

"It is no insult to say a dead man is dead."

Agamemnon is definitely in the running for shittiest cinematic king. "I didn't touch the girl! But I did hand her off to a pack of horny, ill-tempered soldiers."

The odd thing about this movie is that I kind of hate everyone involved except for Eric Bana and Sean Bean. It's weird to watch a war movie told more from the perspective of a villain (the Greeks, and Achilles, at least until he grows a heart after talking to Priam) rather than the hero (Hector).

"I want to taste what Achilles tasted." Agamemnon really wants to be eskimo brothers with Achilles. Weird…

..

"World War Z" - Zombie Movies in the Time of Coronavirus.

 SPOILERS ahead.

I’ve been using movies and writing about movies as a distraction during this pandemic, but my wife and I did decide to watch World War Z because of it. Most people went with Contagion or Outbreak for their pandemic-related stress watch, but we’re zombie people. As it turns out, World War Z is the perfect movie for this situation, as the zombie outbreak is viewed from a disease control point of view rather than just survival. That is what I liked about it the first time I saw it, and that is what I appreciated most about it during my pandemic rewatch. I love zombie movies, but I do find the acceptance of the outbreak to be a bit annoying at times. Even Romero’s films that did deal with studying the zombies (Day) or how they evolved (Land) were not concerned with how it started or how, or if, it could be cured. There’s nothing wrong with that, and Romero’s films are still my favorite, but it is refreshing to see a movie take the unsettlingly realistic approach that World War Z takes, even if it does deviate from its source material in major ways. For me and my wife personally, this rewatch also made us think about a much more terrifying aspect of a zombie outbreak: dealing with the situation with children.

Everything Changes When You Have Kids, Even How You React to Zombie Movies.

Becoming a parent has changed me in many ways, especially how I watch movies. For the most part, it just makes me cry during movies much more often. Watching a zombie movie is different, though. Of course the idea of trying to protect my children during a zombie apocalypse adds to the terror of the genre, but with World War Z it occurred to me that the true nightmare of it all would be forgetting to pack a blankie.

In World War Z, Brad Pitt and his family are stuck in traffic when the outbreak hits. On top of the general chaos of the situation, they can’t find their youngest daughter’s blankie, and they don’t have albuterol for their older daughter’s asthma. Now this is the kind of terrible shit I can identify with. 

Anyone with a child, but especially people with two or more, can identify with what an ordeal it is to simply leave the house. As parents of a baby and a toddler, there’s a fifty/fifty chance we will forget something when we leave home. The hope is that it’s something minor like an extra toy or a burp cloth and not something detrimental like formula or a beloved blanket. When Pitt’s daughter screamed for her blanket, my wife and I exchanged knowing glances: this would totally happen to us in this situation. I could picture my daughter screaming for a blanket as society crumbled around her with perfect clarity. What’s scarier is the fact that I know I would be much more concerned with finding her blanket than I would be with the collapse of civilization around me. Parenting really does a number on a person when it comes to concern for getting a child to shut up being more important than your overall compassion for your fellow man. 

Jokes aside, keeping your children not only alive but also calm would be a monumental task in such a situation. How could I possibly keep my three-year-old daughter calm in this scenario? Even once we got out of the city and things were half-assed calm, we would still have to deal with the barrage of inevitable and unanswerable questions. “Why that man bite that lady? Daddy why you run over that woman? Are monsters gonna eat us? Where their mommies and daddies? Where’s Nana and Pop Pop?” Not to mention dealing the typical declarations of, “I scared” and “I hungry.” 

Tough questions would be one thing, medicine would be another. Thankfully, my children don’t require any daily meds, but it is pretty common for them to need a prescription or an over the counter medicine. Usually, we have plenty on hand, so that doesn’t concern me too much. But one element of World War Z creeped us out: albuterol. Pitt and family have to stop at a store that is being looted to look for albuterol for their asthmatic daughter. When we watched this movie, the pandemic panic had just begun, so empty store shelves were certainly on our mind. But what was truly eerie is that I had to go out and get a prescription for albuterol that same day.

At the mention of albuterol I had a premonition. If a zombie outbreak ever occurred, it wouldn’t be the zombies that got me. I would probably get gunned down by a looter at CVS. With my dying breath, I would try to tell the looter, “I just wanted albuterol. You can have all the fun and addictive stuff. Why the fuck isn’t this stuff over the counter, anyway? (Death rattle.)”

The Best and the Worst Time to Watch This Movie.

Most of us are trying to watch things to distract us from the current situation, which explains the popularity of shows like Love Is Blind and Tiger King at the moment. But there’s also a desire to watch movies and shows that mirror the current situation. I can’t speak to anyone else’s reason for watching such material, but for me it’s twofold. First, I want to see how accurate the film is at predicting the world’s reaction. Second, I want to be able to say, “Hey, at least it’s not as bad as this...yet.” 

As for the accuracy of World War Z, it feels very realistic, mainly because both the zombie outbreak of the film and the coronavirus of our unfortunate reality strike relatively quickly. On top of that, both viruses are new enough that doctors still need to study them to find a cure or treatment. Much like Brad Pitt, we’re learning about this thing as it happens.

World War Z takes its title literally when it comes to learning about the virus. Pitt travels the globe trying to track down the source and learn how other countries are handling the outbreak. Just like the real virus, the origins are Asian, but aside from that hard facts about it are hard to come by. Stories and rumors are aplenty while hard facts take much longer to prove. In the film, it’s revealed that North Korea is surviving it because the teeth of the entire population were removed, giving them no way to transmit the virus. Whether or not this is true is never proven, but it’s similar to conspiracy theories people have about information from countries like North Korea regarding the coronavirus, with many people claiming that, at best, they aren’t reporting true numbers in their country and, at worst, they’re just killing everyone with symptoms. 

Pitt ends up in Israel for a bit because they seem to have been more prepared than most. This is similar to us looking to other countries with smaller outbreaks and asking, “What are they doing that we’re not?” And Israel’s quick building of a massive wall immediately reminded me of the image of countless machines in China hastily building virus hospitals in a matter of days. 

It’s revealed that walls and any other physical barriers won’t stop the virus; only medicine and science can do that. In that case, World War Z is uplifting as they figure out a way to combat the virus pretty quickly. Unfortunately for us, developing a safe treatment for a new virus can take over a year even when all hands are on deck, and it’s given top priority. In that way, World War Z made me feel worse about our situation because no quick fix is going to be revealed. 

But what made me feel the worst about everything was that grocery store near the beginning. People lost their fucking minds, but there were zombies! We hear that we need to stay inside as much as possible and that some basketball games are canceled, and we buy up everything like it’s the zombie apocalypse, and their weakness is reveled to be toilet paper. Sure, our stores aren’t as bad as the one in World War Z, but there is plenty of footage out there of people fighting over resources in stores and of people buying way more than they could possibly ever need while leaving nothing for others.

What’s most terrifying is that I understand what people are doing. We didn’t buy a garage full of toilet paper or a freezer full of meat or a cart full of eggs (why?!), but we did want to stock up on formula for our baby. We didn’t go nuts, but we got enough for a few months. I didn’t fight anyone for any of it, and I didn’t take the whole supply from a store. But I started to wonder what I was capable of if there was a shortage. Would I buy ten containers while others who needed it too looked on? Would I physically fight someone for a container? I hate to admit it, but in the right scenario, I think I would (though I’d probably get my ass kicked in the fight scenario). My mentality is that my kid is going to eat before yours. That said, we’ve remained calm and only bought what we might need for a few months. It would take extreme circumstances for me to take something that someone else also needed. Unfortunately for humanity, a lot of people get to that point preemptively. And it only takes one moron buying ten jumbo boxes of diapers to make sane people think, “Oh shit, I wasn’t going to buy that much, but I better now because it’s all going to be gone soon.” And the psycho domino effect ensues.

Overall, I felt better about our current situation after watching World War Z, but it did make me ruminate on the selfish survival instincts humans have and how having children amplifies those instincts. The film mostly made me thankful because if the proposition of staying home as a preventative measure prompted the behavior we’ve seen so far, how would all these crazy people react if something truly fucked up like a zombie apocalypse happened? I hope, for my children’s sake, we never find out.

Why Do I Own This?

I own a lot of zombie movies, so that’s the main reason why. If this movie came out today, I probably would not buy it. I would only buy it if they did a “Snyder Cut” situation where they go back and finish the original Russia ending and release that, but that will never happen.

Random Thoughts

"Mother Nature is a serial killer."

North Korea gets it! No teeth, no bite.

I like the main theme used for the film. It just feels like zombie music to me for some reason.

Could it be that Brad Pitt is just bad luck? Because everywhere he goes turns to shit.

Israel falls because of music. It's a reverse Mars Attacks! situation.

..

"The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" - Never Meet (and Shoot) Your Heroes

*I write these articles under the assumption that you’ve seen the movie, so...SPOILERS. Though one could argue the title, and history, has already spoiled the main event of the film.

With a lot of people seemingly just now realizing Brad Pitt can act with Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood and Ad Astra, I decided to go with The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for this month’s western. I have liked Pitt’s work for years, and 12 Monkeys was the first time I saw him more as an actor than a face. He has plenty of great roles under his belt, but I consider his work in this film some of his best. The Jesse James of this film is a mean, brutal, reflective, paranoid, charismatic, and generally complex character, and Pitt handles every element with ease. Perhaps it’s the meta-quality of the film that makes it stand out for me, as Jesse James was a celebrity of the time, Pitt could easily find common ground in that area. How often must Pitt deal with people in his life that come to him with a certain expectation of who he is based on performances and tabloid stories rather than his actual self. Jesse James, at least in the film (and probably in real life), also had to deal with perceptions of him compared to the real, very human, man he really was. Watching Pitt navigate that character is just one of the many pleasures of this underseen, understated western. 

Myth Vs. Reality

It should be clear by my previous choices for westerns in recent months that I prefer non-traditional, or modern westerns. I enjoy traditional westerns, but the westerns I want to own and revisit from time to time usually need to be a bit different, and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford certainly qualifies. In fact, the story of Jesse James is the perfect subject for a modern western, because, just like Jesse James, the myth of the Old West time period compared to historical reality is often very different.

In the film, Robert Ford starts off idolizing Jesse James and his gang because he believed the stories he read as a child, which made James out to be a Robin Hood type hero. A big part of the reason Ford eventually betrays James is because he is disillusioned with James after meeting him; don’t meet your heroes, and all that. This allows the film to be a statement about celebrity, as well, and not just in regards to James. Ford becomes a celebrity after killing James, and he gets a taste of the downfall of having your reputation arrive before you. The film is a bit of a condemnation of celebrity culture and the dangers of chasing stardom at the expense of your soul. That element alone resonates with me for days after each viewing because the ending is so depressing and perfect, with Robert Ford dying as a result of his quest for celebrity, with nothing about his life turning out the way he had hoped. 

Much like Robert Ford’s disillusionment, researching the Old West also leads to a bit of disappointment when compared to the Hollywood version we’ve seen for years. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is one of many westerns that highlights the reality of the era rather than glorifying it. 

The most obvious example that this is not a traditional western is the gunfight between Dick Liddil, Wood Hite, and Robert Ford. Dick and Wood shoot at each other at nearly point blank range, unloading their guns without either of them inflicting a mortal wound. Just like Unforgiven (which I will also write about in the future), the shootout is meant to show that when it comes to actually pulling a trigger a lot of factors come into play and the result is more sloppy than cinematic. I love a good Old West shootout as much as anyone, but I also appreciate realism. We all like to think we could be Clint Eastwood when the chips are down, but more likely most of us would be like Dick Liddil, missing shot after shot as we fall out of bed.

Aside from the shootouts, I love it when historical films highlight the mundane day-to-day life of the time period. Travel time and communication plays a big factor in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. People are often gone because a trip from place to place takes weeks. Word travels slowly, so scheming is a bit easier as is hiding from people. Robert Ford is only forced to play his hand when Jesse reads a newspaper article. It’s a slow time, and the film replicates it poetically rather than in a boring manner.

I hate to refer to a film as a “tone poem” at this point, mainly because I’ve overused it over the years, especially in reference to films like those of Terence Malick (whose later films make for an easy comparison to The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford). It’s not that it doesn’t fit, because it certainly does, but I just feel like it has become my go-to descriptor for a movie others might consider boring. I guess I just need to start being blunt about: a lot of people find this film boring, and I can understand why. But I find each frame beautiful and compelling, even when nothing is going on. 

Anyone who might find this film boring is probably just dealing with incorrect expectations. Many people still want their westerns to be old-fashioned, filled with stand-offs and shoot-outs. I still like that stuff, too, but I knew going in that this movie wasn’t promising anything like that. Perhaps it’s the title. Speaking of which...

TAOJJBTCRF, and Other Reasons Why This Movie May Have Failed Financially.

You may have noticed I have made no effort to shorten the title of this film. First off, the facetious shortening in the title of this section looks pretty stupid. Secondly, a title this long should just be embraced at this point. It is the title of the book the film is based on, and, according to IMDb trivia, Brad Pitt insisted that the title remain. 

I like the title, but for years after this movie came out I would always get a weird look when I recommended it. I had similar issues with The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (another movie I love and will write about soon). I would get into a conversation with someone about westerns and recommend these two films and just get a weird look after spitting out these mouthfuls of titles. If just calling this film The Assassination of Jesse James would have made it more popular, I wish they would have altered it a bit.

Title aside, this film was never going to be a huge success. The aforementioned tone poem aspect is usually an indicator that not many people are going to bother with the movie. Plus, it’s on the long side, and it’s just not a traditional film. All the things I like about this movie are also the things that most likely kept it from being a success. I could accept that if this film had a bunch of nobodies in it, but how did this happen with Brad Pitt as Jesse James?

I remember when this movie (kind of) came out in theaters. I had seen the previews and was very excited to see it, even reading the book beforehand. I thought it looked amazing. The release date came and went and no theaters near me picked it up. It eventually left theaters entirely never getting close to me. (I didn’t check Louisville [an hour and a half away] at the time, but Evansville [an hour away and my go-to for smaller films] never got it.) I couldn’t believe it. Brad Pitt’s new movie did not get a wide release. This was the first time I recognized the death of star power. Years ago, just having someone like Pitt in a movie would warrant at least a small wide release. But now, it doesn’t matter. If a studio doesn’t think the film can make a definite profit, then it doesn’t matter who’s in the cast; that movie is not getting a wide release. It’s always annoyed me so much, especially living in the Midwest. I just want studios to let the audience decide. Give the film a week in wide release, especially since everything is digital now and doesn’t require expensive film reels dispersed nationwide. But it won’t happen thanks to streaming and whatnot. I just wish so much that I had the chance to see this on the big screen.

Roger Deakins didn't win for this?

Until he won for Blade Runner 2049, Roger Deakins’s losing streak at the Oscars for Best Cinematography was a cruel joke. This man has made some of the most beautiful films ever made, and he somehow got passed over each year, including the year The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford came out. Deakins lost to Robert Elswit for There Will Be Blood, so it’s hard to be too mad about that, especially when you realize Deakins was double nominated for this and No Country for Old Men, and he most likely split votes because of it. This film is special, though, because he created such a unique western look for the film.

The narrated moments that show parts of Jesse’s daily life look like moving daguerreotypes of the time, and it’s a magical effect. Not to mention the train sequence early in the film, which Deakins claims is one of his finest achievements. His work in this film is why I want to see the longer cut of the film that was released at festivals. 

Deakins claimed in an interview that Criterion isn’t interested in releasing it (pretty much the only way it could happen). Why the people who chose to give Armageddon a special edition won’t touch this is beyond me. Of course, I want just want to see more of this movie overall, but I also want to see all the work Deakins did that didn’t make it. Apparently there was a four-hour cut originally, but writer/director Andrew Dominik claims he’s happy with the theatrical cut. With all due respect, let us be the judge of that.

I suppose that sums up how I feel about this movie. It’s a nearly three hour, slow moving treatise on celebrity and myths, and I want at least another hour of it.

Random Thoughts 

"The president of the Confederacy discerned his wife's needs and satisfied them, with the utmost skill and the utmost courtesy."

Bob sitting down just as chow is called and everyone else gets up is such a perfect introduction to his awkward, out of place character.

God, Garrett Dillahunt is so good at looking stupid.

Sam Shepard sees through Bob's bullshit immediately. 

"Well, what am I supposed to say to that?"

"Sidekick?!"

"So you can examine my grit and intelligence."

"I don't know what it is about you, but the more you talk, the more you give me the willies."

I don't know why, but it makes me laugh when Frank calls Jesse "dingus."

The approach of the train has so many beautiful moments: the train hitting the camera and continuing forward, the flashing lights revealing the robbers, Jesse's silhouette as the train approaches, etc. Not to mention the score.

"I about heard all I want to about sidekicks."

I wish Shepard was in this longer. I could watch him talk shit to Casey Affleck and Sam Rockwell all day.

What happened to Paul Schneider? After he left Parks and Rec, he has worked sparingly. He gave an interview about being more selective in his work, but it just seems strange to drop off as much as he has.

Brad Pitt's fake laugh when he visits the Fords after Renner's death is amazing. 

This movie could also be called The Many Tense Conversations of Jesse James with Ed Miller, Dick Liddil, Charley Ford, Robert Ford, and Others.

Ted Levine!

I don't mind the casting of James Carville as the governor, but it is a but distracting.

The noise Pitt makes when he says he could see the "gears grinding" after he almost cut Bob's throat might be my favorite moment from his career.

So much of this film is shot through that old timey glass that obscures the view a bit. It's like the era itself: everything we know about it is a bit blurry, the full vision forever elusive. Sorry for the poetic analysis; this movie brings that out in me.

The actual death feels staged like a play, which is, of course, fitting since the Fords would go on to put on the play.

Sam Rockwell is so good during the play sequences, first acting terribly, and finally becoming incredibly dark.

Everything after Jesse is killed is my favorite part of the film. The transition of Bob from annoying murderous fanboy to tragic man of regret is perfect.

"Charley was only expected not to slouch, or mutter. And to transport his sicknesses to the alley before letting them go."

I love Nick Cave's score, and his cameo singing a folk song about Jesse James.

I can't think of another film that truly made me end up liking, or at least sympathizing with, a character I initially hated. A lot of that is because of Affleck’s performance, which I still consider the best of his career.

Because of that, the last moment of the film now gives me chills and nearly made me cry this time.

..