MovieChat Forums > High Plains Drifter (1973) Discussion > Why can't everyone just agree that the d...

Why can't everyone just agree that the drifter was some sort of

posted 10 years ago by Clemens21R
10 replies | jump to latest

...Avenging Angel which the townspeople brought upon themselves. All of these arguments about whether or not he was the Sheriff's ghost, or Satan himself, etc. etc., can't see the forest for the trees. They all basically represent the same theory. I kinda like it to the movie "Pumpkinhead." The horrific murder and subsequent murder of the Sheriff, unleashed a supernatural "avenger" who assumed the physical form of the Drifter. Is everyone agreed on that simple point?!

[–] yusef-ghanima 10 years ago

you mean the devil

i mostly will not be able to answer your reply, since marissa mayer hacked my email, no notification

[–] sillyspaghetti 9 years ago

I think the film resembles some sort of apocalypse or Armageddon. It's a very disturbing film in may ways with the sheriff being bull whipped and various other scenes.

[–] strntz 9 years ago

The drifter was human. Mortal. A man.

He never drifted in an out of a scene, he needed sleep, he needed to eat, he needed to shave, he needed to bathe, he shot through a newspaper to catch those thugs off guard and avoid being shot, he ducked under water to avoid being shot, he backed down the rube with the knife to avoid getting stabbed, he hid behind rocks when ambushing the brothers, he snuck out of bed to avoid being bashed by clubs, he used dynamite, and apparently was very good at being physical with the ladies..

Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.

[–] sfmar 9 years ago

The problem is that nothing in your initial statement is proven by the paragraph that follows it. Supported perhaps, but proven? Not at all. Granted, none of what you stated proves he was a spectre or an avenging angel, but none of it disproves it either.

Admittedly, the original screenplay had the stranger identified as the dead marshall's brother, but Eastwood decided to drop that and leave the stranger's identity intentionally ambiguous - and I believe that was a smart decision.

If the stranger was just a mortal man, how do we address the following:

Why did he have nightmare visions of the marshall's murder? How did he know the marshall was mudered, and the method used (bullwhipping)? The stranger arrived just a day or two before the marshall's killers were to be released from prison and immediately killed the three gunslingers the town had hired to protect them from the killers. Let's face it, that's an incredibly convenient coincidence, isn't it?

Also, while it could be attributed to the hot desert atmosphere on the sand, the stranger did indeed fade in at the beginning and out at the end. It's all left questionable, but to me he was far more than a mortal man.

[–] Stevicus-2 9 years ago

Another thing I might add is that, at the very least, we know that Mordecai knew the stranger's name. In the last line, the stranger says "yes you do" after Mordecai notes "I never did know your name." This is when he's marking the gravestone with Jim Duncan's name on it.

This doesn't conclusively "prove" that the stranger was the ghost of Jim Duncan, but it seems to be strongly implied by this.

[–] strntz 9 years ago

Why did he have nightmare visions of the marshall's murder?

Ooh ooh! I meant to use that as an example to defend my position! If he was a ghost, why did he dream?

I rushed out this morning when I posted, but I did leave out that I'm not implying there wasn't something supernatural going on (I believe there was), only that the Stranger himself was mortal.

How did he know the marshall was mudered, and the method used (bullwhipping)? The stranger arrived just a day or two before the marshall's killers were to be released from prison and immediately killed the three gunslingers the town had hired to protect them from the killers. Let's face it, that's an incredibly convenient coincidence, isn't it?

We're on the same page for the most part. I agree that the Stranger was supernaturally involved in what happened to Marshall Duncan. My only point is that I don't believe he's a ghost, wraith, avenging angel, etc. When Mordecai asks his name, the Stranger says he already knows it. I believe this means he was the Marshall's brother.

Also, while it could be attributed to the hot desert atmosphere on the sand, the stranger did indeed fade in at the beginning and out at the end.

I can cite so many films that used this artistic filming technique where nothing supernatural was implied.

Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.

[–] doubl3 9 years ago

Well we know who he literally was supposed to be, but always possible they were being symbolic on another level as well.

[–] Bobby_vs_Satan 8 years ago

Maybe he was a mortal man possessed by Jim Duncan's ghost?

"God Damn, dipsh!t Rodriguez, gypsy dildo...PUNKS!"

[–] spectrx 8 years ago

Interestingly enough, Eastwood has said that the character was not a supernatural entity, etc. but that he wanted that inference in the movie. I guess one of the other possible alternate endings would have depicted that the former Marshall's ghost had possessed the Stranger's body and made him do all those things.

[–] TheManInOil 8 years ago

Yep.