MovieChat Forums > The Wild Bunch (1969) Discussion > Thornton quite a clairvoyant

Thornton quite a clairvoyant

posted 10 years ago by pullgees
12 replies | jump to latest

How could it be possible that Thornton was so sure the Bunch would rob the train of arms, considering the Bunch themselves had no plans to? First they had to meet Mapache against the high odds of being killed by him first - which came close to - then it just so happened that Mapache was planning to rob the train, so fortunately for him the Bunch came along. Then, and this is the main gripe, Thornton just happened to be on the right train that was going to be robbed. And as he was so certain it was going to happen, why was he just sitting in the carriage when it was going on?
I found that all a bit too contrived. It would have been better if Thornton had got word that the Bunch were working for Mapache and then he could have put two and two together.
But of course we will never know what was left on the cutting room floor.

[–] sirako 9 years ago

He explains this, he talks about how they are probably meeting Mapache and robbing the train cause of thia

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

Yes I know that and I have covered that above.

[–] johnnyparker 9 years ago

Hi pullgees. Good question.

I think I may just have the answer! There's a version of the script for TWB posted online, here:

http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Wild-Bunch,-The.html

In that, Thornton has a line of dialogue which was either never shot or cut from the final edit. It occurs shortly after the Bunch have escaped from Starbuck, and before they cross the border into Mexico. Thornton and the bounty hunters have just come across the body of Buck in the desert. Thornton tells one of his men to go back into town and

"tell Harrigan to get me a list of every Army garrison and payroll schedule on the border."

Reckon that does it?

Cheers

Johnny

If they move, kill em!

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

That was useful info thanks. Also it make the campfire scene more coherent where you can see there are some obvious cuts in the final cut so to speak.

[–] ScopeWatcher 9 years ago

I found that all a bit too contrived. It would have been better if Thornton had got word that the Bunch were working for Mapache and then he could have put two and two together.

Thornton does "put two and two together," pullgees -- but you didn't appreciate it.

Deke Thornton is Pike's former partner and his friend; and as a veteran professional robber himself, Thornton has the capacity to predict Pike's strategies and moves, based on knowing how his former partner operates. (Isn't that the very reason that Harrigan went to the trouble of springing the man from prison?)

So in fact, it would have been blander writing had Thornton needed to hear that the Bunch were working for Mapache in order to make his own plan. Thornton is a more formidable character (with a stronger role in the story) for being able to figure out Pike's next likely plan before Harrigan or anyone else could.

How could it be possible that Thornton was so sure the Bunch would rob the train of arms, considering the Bunch themselves had no plans to?

Because Pike is a professional train robber, which Thornton knows well.

Thornton is aware that the train-office robbery netted the Bunch nothing but bags of washers, so they'll need to find money somewhere. (Do you agree that from experience, Thornton can figure that the failed heist was expensive for Pike to set up, with the acquisition of Army horses, uniforms, and weapons? Even if the Bunch stole all that themselves, palms had to have been greased to secure access to that stuff.)

Forget the cutting-room floor -- think back to what the film itself tells us. As soon as Thornton hears from bounty hunter Coffer who Mapache is, and that he is based in "the closest town of any size," his ex-partner expects that Pike to head there ... and that he'll likely to seek contact with Mapache for opportunity. And isn't that exactly Pike's plan? True, his first intention is only to try selling the Bunch's extra horses to the "general" (since at that point Pike knows nothing about Mapache's designs on a scheduled U.S. arms shipment). But instead of continuing their pursuit, Thornton chose to lead the bounty hunters back to Starbuck and wait for developments.

Thornton is not clairvoyant; but he looks further ahead than Pike does. And how has the film already established that? In the first flashback which Peckinpah himself added to the script: As a prostitute moved to answer a knock at their door, Thornton tried to stop her; yet the more heedless Pike intervened, telling him, "Relax, it's just some champagne we ordered." The woman then opened the door to a lawman, who shot and wounded Thornton as Pike escaped through the back. (Brief business ... but one of the film's many examples of how little narrative details in different parts of the story dovetail with each other.)

First they had to meet Mapache against the high odds of being killed by him first - which came close to - then it just so happened that Mapache was planning to rob the train, so fortunately for him the Bunch came along.

That's right: It IS fortunate for Mapache that the Bunch came along, as his German "military advisor" even said. ("It would be very useful to us to find some Americans who did not share their government's naive sentiments.") Just as it was Teresa's misfortune for her murder to provide the opening for Pike and Mapache to get introduced.

Then, and this is the main gripe, Thornton just happened to be on the right train that was going to be robbed. And as he was so certain it was going to happen, why was he just sitting in the carriage when it was going on?

On your next viewing, listen to the dialogue in the last Starbuck scene between Thornton and Harrigan (starting, I think, with "...and you want to gamble everything that this one train will be attacked"). Thornton explains quite satisfactorily, to both the railroad boss and the viewers, that Mapache needs guns because he's been losing to revolutionary Pancho Villa; and his reasoning that with Mapache's sniffing out that arms shipment, Pike would have made a deal to rob the train to steal them for him. Because Pike is a professional train robber.

Thornton predicts that this is "the right train that was going to be robbed" because it's the only scheduled train shipment of Army weapons; he had access to that information by working for the railroad. And earlier, he must have seen the advantage in returning to Starbuck for some research, rather than wasting time trailing the Bunch any farther into Mexico.

But now I come to your issue about Thornton sitting inside the train, during the robbery. This isn't to poor Deke's credit; but it's the case that while Thornton can still think further ahead than Pike does, he's also a bit older than Pike is (as Robert Ryan was older than William Holden) -- and Deke is slowing down.

When we first see Thornton, he's asleep on a roof before the opening ambush: He was already in position, but has to be awakened from a nap. Think of another point in the picture when Coffer and T.C. play a vicious joke on Thornton by slapping a holster behind his back, only to laugh at the older man's slow reaction to the sound of a threat. (Offhand, I'm not absolutely sure of whether Thornton was nodding off in his saddle at the moment, but I think he was.*) But link that back to his capture during the first flashback -- when Pike was still quick enough on his feet to escape, while Thornton wasn't.

So the answer to your final question is that Thornton was clear-thinking enough to predict Pike's next step and even place himself aboard the arms train in advance. But because Deke is slower in action than he used to be ... he was caught (figuratively) asleep inside the rail car, when he should have been outside keeping watch personally -- instead of leaving vigilance to the "green recruits ... not worth a damn."

That's not clairvoyance, pullgees. But do you now agree that it's great screenwriting?

*EDIT: For full disclosure, I admit that when rechecking the movie, I found that Thornton was not falling asleep in the saddle when he was startled by hearing Coffer's slap of a pistol holster from behind him. But I maintain my reasoning that the film makes a deliberate point about Thornton's diminishing responses.

Most great films deserve a more appreciative audience than they get.

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

I think you're stretching it bit.
Disregarding the original unedited script which has a lot more info to support Thornton's hunches, you cannot give Thornton such credibility.
What Pike wanted to do before he met Macpache was rob the army's payrolls on the border, and that would be what Thornton's first and foremost assumption should have been. Yes he knows Mapache is losing the fight across the border and needs more arms but it's a huge leap to believe that the Bunch would actually be working for him. Mapache doesn't know these men, how good they are, can they be trusted? Then there are political implications of a Mexican planned mercenary attack on US soil, which could go disastrously wrong - considering the Bunch were greatly out numbered by the troops and the posse - whereupon it could cost Mapache his life by his superiors. With these considerations the payroll would have been the likely next job.

[–] ScopeWatcher 9 years ago

I think you're stretching it bit.
Disregarding the original unedited script which has a lot more info to support Thornton's hunches, you cannot give Thornton such credibility.

I haven't opened that link to read any more of that script draft than the single line quoted above in this thread. But between you and me, pullgees, it's only you who finds the content of the film (as released) unsatisfactory, or at all unclear. From that one line of dialogue above, my view is that Peckinpah personally dropped the material you're referring to, as it was unnecessary for audience understanding; for most of us, anyway. Since this movie's release in 1969, I have never heard nor read your complaint about Thornton's reasoning shared by any other viewer or critic.

What Pike wanted to do before he met Macpache was rob the army's payrolls on the border, and that would be what Thornton's first and foremost assumption should have been. Yes he knows Mapache is losing the fight across the border and needs more arms but it's a huge leap to believe that the Bunch would actually be working for him.

No, that should not have been "Thornton's first and foremost assumption." Do you recall that when Pike floats the prospect of robbing an army payroll, Dutch's sarcasm ("That kind of information is ... kind of hard to come by") shows that he (Dutch) doesn't consider that to be much of a plan? Since Thornton understands Pike so well AND can see further ahead than Pike does, it makes perfect sense that Deke would have reasoned beyond Pike's likely first substitute plan, to figure out what he was more likely to reach for -- and that meant Mapache.

Yes he knows Mapache is losing the fight across the border and needs more arms but it's a huge leap to believe that the Bunch would actually be working for him. Mapache doesn't know these men, how good they are, can they be trusted? Then there are political implications of a Mexican planned mercenary attack on US soil, which could go disastrously wrong - considering the Bunch were greatly out numbered by the troops and the posse - whereupon it could cost Mapache his life by his superiors.

Why do you think Peckinpah has Pike ask why the general doesn't just cross the border and rob the American army train himself? It's so that the German military advisor Mohr can inform him -- along with us, the audience -- that Mapache's superior, General Huerta, "is anxious to better relations with the United States ... not to cross the border and destroy them."

So if you think about that, from Mapache's viewpoint it makes perfect sense to hire these American gringos -- despite not knowing how good they might be -- exactly because if they fail, there is NOTHING, no tie leading from the bunch back to him. Mapache's troops are not involved in the attempted robbery on U.S. soil, and (even though it was kind of you to worry about his standing with his superiors) he'd have faced no repercussion from his own corrupt government.

As for the bunch being "greatly outnumbered by the troops and the posse," neither Pike nor Mapache is aware of Thornton's posse at that point. But Mapache wouldn't have cared if he had known. He only wanted the weapons.

Most great films deserve a more appreciative audience than they get.

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

I haven't opened that link to read any more of that script draft than the single line quoted above in this thread. But between you and me, pullgees, it's only you who finds the content of the film (as released) unsatisfactory, or at all unclear. From that one line of dialogue above, my view is that Peckinpah personally dropped the material you're referring to, as it was unnecessary for audience understanding; for most of us, anyway. Since this movie's release in 1969, I have never heard nor read your complaint about Thornton's reasoning shared by any other viewer or critic.

You say no else mentioned this...oh! well when you complain in a shop they usually have the ready reply, that no one else has said anything. Are you really following criticisms that closely? Did you catch the one about why the Bunch didn't check at least one bag of washers before they left the railroad office? That was a fair point. You should be happy there is a fresh original topic to complain about instead of attempting to undermine my criticism by "I never heard nor read your complaint..."
As we all know Peckinpah never got on with the studio bosses and he had to fight tooth and nail to get the finishing result he got. His original cut was 3hrs and 45mins long, before he was ordered to slash it.
So for you to imagine that the finishing cut is perfection on Peckinpah's behalf is way off the mark.

No, that should not have been "Thornton's first and foremost assumption." Do you recall that when Pike floats the prospect of robbing an army payroll, Dutch's sarcasm ("That kind of information is ... kind of hard to come by") shows that he (Dutch) doesn't consider that to be much of a plan? Since Thornton understands Pike so well AND can see further ahead than Pike does, it makes perfect sense that Deke would have reasoned beyond Pike's likely first substitute plan, to figure out what he was more likely to reach for -- and that meant Mapache.

It does not make perfect sense that Thornton would see beyond Pike thinking. That is really being fanciful and as I said before, you are stretching credibility. And that sort validates my point of Thornton being some sort of mentalist or clairvoyant. Second guessing wily old outlaw like Pike would a fools game.

Why do you think Peckinpah has Pike ask why the general doesn't just cross the border and rob the American army train himself? It's so that the German military advisor Mohr can inform him -- along with us, the audience -- that Mapache's superior, General Huerta, "is anxious to better relations with the United States ... not to cross the border and destroy them."

So if you think about that, from Mapache's viewpoint it makes perfect sense to hire these American gringos -- despite not knowing how good they might be -- exactly because if they fail, there is NOTHING, no tie leading from the bunch back to him. Mapache's troops are not involved in the attempted robbery on U.S. soil, and (even though it was kind of you to worry about his standing with his superiors) he'd have faced no repercussion from his own corrupt government.

Yes I remember that scene but I was emphasizing how Thornton should have considered a Mexican planned mercenary raid on American soil as not as likely as a payroll job. This whole topic is about Thornton's viewpoint no one elses. All it needed to make the weapons heist credible was for Thornton to have got word that the Bunch were staying as guests of Mapache. He didn't even know that they ran into Mapache, just that they might.

We both love this film, in fact it is in my top ten all time, but I can see flaws as there are in them all. I'm going away without computer so can't get back for a while.

[–] ScopeWatcher 9 years ago

You say no else mentioned this...oh! well when you complain in a shop they usually have the ready reply, that no one else has said anything. Are you really following criticisms that closely? Did you catch the one about why the Bunch didn't check at least one bag of washers before they left the railroad office? That was a fair point. You should be happy there is a fresh original topic to complain about instead of attempting to undermine my criticism by "I never heard nor read your complaint..."

Yes, pullgees, I figured that you and I "both love this film." It's good to know that THE WILD BUNCH is on your list of favorites, as it is extremely high on mine. But rather than intending to "undermine" your criticsm, I was trying to help you where I perceived a flaw in your interpretation. Although we both love the picture, I'm not insulting you to say that you might not have studied it (and Sam Peckinpah's career) for 46 years, as I have. Since you still reject my extensive discussion about Thornton's "clairvoyance," there's no point in my trying further. So I won't.

However, when I stated earlier that I had never come across your complaint before, I meant I've never heard it from among the dozens of people to whom I have personally introduced this movie since 1969 -- or in the countless published reviews and essays on it which I have read. I have not peeked inside every IMDb discussion thread on WILD BUNCH; and anyway, the Internet is loaded with a lot of uninformed opinions, or just plain faulty thinking. "Why didn't the Bunch check at least one bag of washers before they left the railroad office?" That wasn't a shopping trip -- it was a robbery! Whoever came up with that thought must never have heard Kenny Rogers declare this one:

You never count your money / while you're sitting at the table.
There'll be time enough for counting / When the dealing's done.

But to reply seriously: a) if the outlaws HAD opened a bag in that office, they still would have had to fight their way out of the town anyway; and b) dramatically, it's much more effective to delay the discovery about the "loot" until after the ordeal of the coming gunfight and escape. (Anyone who would argue with that simply doesn't share my sense of dramatic construction.)

As we all know Peckinpah never got on with the studio bosses and he had to fight tooth and nail to get the finishing result he got. His original cut was 3hrs and 45mins long, before he was ordered to slash it.
So for you to imagine that the finishing cut is perfection on Peckinpah's behalf is way off the mark.

THESE points I'll correct with facts, for the sake of anyone who reads this thread in the future.

Peckinpah was able to make his greatest film exactly because in this one instance, he did have a supportive, appreciative studio head above him. In May 1965 at the Cannes film festival, the director was introduced to Kenneth Hyman, a producer who was there premiering his film THE HILL (directed by Sidney Lumet). Hyman was already a fan of both RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY and Peckinpah's early TV series, The Westerner; and he told the director that if he (Hyman) was ever in charge of a studio, he wanted to make pictures with Peckinpah. Two years later, Hyman was running Warner Bros. and called him -- which led to THE WILD BUNCH. (In fact, Ernest Borgnine got cast in BUNCH, over Peckinpah's initial resistance, because of Hyman pushing for him ... having also been the producer of THE DIRTY DOZEN.)

Peckinpah fought a lot of battles during and after filming on THE WILD BUNCH. But the director's real friction with Warner executives -- including the recutting -- only began after his (and the film's) benefactor Hyman had left the studioe.

As for the length of Peckinpah's original WILD BUNCH cut, I have no idea where you came across that 3-hour-45-minute figure -- but you were misled, and here's why. Multiple books and articles have quoted the director as having stated that he was "94 to 96 percent satisfied" with the 145-minute version. To me this matters, so I'll provide evidence from three sources. (Forgive my resorting to name dropping.)

1) In his book Peckinpah: The Western Films - A Reconsideration (1997), critic and Peckinpah specialist Paul Seydor discusses the notorious, May 1969 sneak preview in Kansas City of a version that ran 151 minutes. In a footnote on pg. 138 Seydor wrote: "The figure has often been reported erroneously (in, among other places, the first publication of this book) as 190 minutes. That was, in fact, the length of the first cut of the film -- finished shortly after completion of principal photography, before any fine cutting had begun -- obviously much too long and, like all first cuts, in a form that nobody, the director most of all, would ever release."

2) Next, I personally flew to New Mexico the night before Peckinpah's scheduled guest appearance at the close of the Santa Fe Film Festival in April 1981. (Even though I couldn't attend the whole weeklong event, I had to take what did turn out to be my only chance to meet Sam Peckinpah in life.) Early on in a private, 10-minute conversation before anyone interrupted us, I asked him the length of his truly uncut version of THE WILD BUNCH, and identified the frequently deleted sequences which were in the longest print I had viewed. He confirmed to me that I had seen "his" version.

3) Seven years later, I got advance word that in June 1988 (shortly before the Peckinpah family was to donate the director's private files and materials to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences), his personal 35mm Technicolor print of THE WILD BUNCH would receive a tribute screening in Healdsburg, CA. I traveled across the country to be there, too -- not only for whomever I might get to meet, but to satisfy my curiosity about whether Peckinpah's private print of the picture might somehow have represented a "one-of-a-kind" version. His own print of the picture ran 145 minutes. And specifically, what he had for himself was a 143-minute print (the inital USA edition, before the studio made its post-release cuts), into which the Aurora Clavel flashback (which the director had agreed to let Warner Bros. cut domestically, although the footage remained intact abroad) had been manually spliced in. Total length: 145 minutes, essentially the same as the DVD release.

You may decide whether to accept that a 3-hour-45-minute "director's cut" of THE WILD BUNCH is just rumor. There's no need for me to argue that any further, either.

Most great films deserve a more appreciative audience than they get.

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

I got the 3hrs 45mins from here, it might be wrong, but in any case this is a side issue to the topic,
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HjfHumwniU4C&pg=PT144&lpg=PT144&dq=peckinpah+wild+bunch+3+hours&source=bl&ots=aMNemx-Ysf&sig=JXGgaIhEsxq-_aW0Xsep2ntIMTU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBmoVChMI44f68uaGyQIVxegOCh0gYAla#v=onepage&q=peckinpah%20wild%20bunch%203%20hours&f=false

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=HjfHumwniU4C&pg=PT144&lpg=PT144&dq=peckinpah+wild+bunch+3+hours&source=bl&ots=aMNemx-Ysf&sig=JXGgaIhEsxq-_aW0Xsep2ntIMTU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CEQQ6AEwBmoVChMI44f68uaGyQIVxegOCh0gYAla#v=onepage&q=peckinpah%20wild%20bunch%203%20hours&f=false/

It doesn't follow that all the authorities of the film of which you are well read would find every plot weakness, or if they did, bother to mention it. Nearly every film has it's incredulous plot leaps where the audience need to put their critical faculties away. With all your inside knowledge and peer connections it must be hard to accept a layman's criticism. But it is here on IMDB forums that often these thing come to light of which all those involved in a production never noticed. I wonder if you will hear any criticism of TWB?

To go back to the subject, I will say again that Thornton could not know with certainty that The Bunch would run into Mapache, then do a deal with him; he had no real evidence. It was a long shot. He was full of inner conflict and self doubt. Maybe that explains the why he was caught off guard at the engine water stop; he really wasn't sure.

[–] ScopeWatcher 9 years ago

Obviously "laymen" can have opinions. I was one when I first saw THE WILD BUNCH at age 15, yet I still appreciated that it was the most powerful film I had ever seen. (It even changed forever the way I watched and thought about movies.) But there are informed opinions, and less informed opinions -- and both types are spread all through the IMDb forums.

To say that WILD BUNCH is among the very best films ever made is not the same as claiming that it's flawless; nothing of human invention is absolutely perfect. And of course I can "hear" criticism of the movie, since I could offer some myself. But that does not mean that what I could nitpick about it would be the same as what you do, pullgees. The failings which you raise (Thornton's "clairvoyance") or consider (the gang not inspecting their loot during a heist) are definitely not flaws to me.

You see Thornton's power of deduction as a weakness of the film. I tried earlier to help you see that it's among the picture's strengths; but since I didn't succeed, I don't need to spend more time on this. So go ahead and tie that criticism head-down over a saddle, and lead it back across the river to Texas.

I'll just sit here by the gate and watch you ride off, pulling your viewpoint behind you.

Most great films deserve a more appreciative audience than they get.

[–] pullgees 9 years ago

Like many posters who love a particular movie they wont hear a word of criticism and will stretch credulity to fit their belief of it's flawlessness. Love is indeed blind and that not only applies to lovers but to works of art as well.
For Thornton to expect Pike to rob the train was a long shot in my opinion while the story made out it was inevitable. That's the difference we hold and you believe it, I don't.

I saw this film when I was 28, it impacted on me more than any other film I have ever seen, very powerful indeed.

Now while you are leaning on the gate post with some makin's, I'll be riding off into the sunset maybe bump into Freddy and co, drink some tequila.