MovieChat Forums > Joe Kidd (1972) Discussion > Some random thoughts on Joe Kidd (spoil...

Some random thoughts on Joe Kidd (spoilers?)

posted 17 years ago by BigShoe62
13 replies | jump to latest

I somehow missed seeing this movie until just recently, and having seen it last night I have a few random thoughts about it.

First off, the photography in this movie is just lovely. Some of the colors are amazing, and the print that I saw was stunning. There was one scene of the little Mexican town in particular where I just had to pause the DVD. Nothing was really happening in the scene, but the brilliant pastel colors were just awesome. I guess that's cinemascope and panavision and so forth for ya...

Anyhow I understand some of the criticisms I have read here. Certainly the ending leaves something to be desired, and the shifting "morality" (or complete lack of it) is kinda odd and hard to keep up with. I mean, you have to feel kind of bad for Ramone. "Ramone, you take the lead and ride into town first..." <<BANG!!>>

Also, having some experience with steam engines I can tell you that running an engine and firing it at the same time is difficult at best. There had to be a fireman crouched behind him to open and close the draft to the boiler, work the injectors, atomizer, etc. or Joe (and everyone in the bar) woulda choked on the smoke (or maybe been destroyed in the giant boiler explosion. Now THAT woulda been an ending).

I found the sniper vs. sniper scene to be oddly satisfying in some way I can't put my finger on. Totally gratuitous violence of course, but satisfying. This has to be one of the very few sniper scenes in a western...

...and what is up with the unfinished "romance" between Eastwood and Duvall's girl? She could have been cut from the movie and no one would have missed her. Maybe there are scenes from her that wound up on the cutting room floor as the say.

And here is one I can't believe no one has commented on: He makes a sandwich and walks out into trouble eating it, in an obvious nod to his "Dirty Harry" persona. Just greatness! I love stuff like that.

Anyhow I think this movie is better than the rating it gets here. The time period is interesting, and Clint as always is fun to watch. The holes in the plot are large, but just big enough to drive a train through.

Anyone else?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] c-huddleston 17 years ago

I agree that this movie has some flaws, but it is fun!

The slightly fluffed scene with the pan in the jailhouse with Nacho almost worked, but it set the relationship with Ramone - Joe killed Nacho in the bar and Ramone tied his worker in barbed wire with a message that he would get Joe.

Joe's method of despatching Ramone was morally interesting but understandable given the circumstances...

[–] BigShoe62 17 years ago

Oooooh haha OK Now I understand. All I can say is.. "DOH!" I completely missed the reference to Ramone from that scene. Now his cruel(?) death makes much more sense.

Thanks for explaining that; I will have to go and watch again with that in mind. This does make me wonder also, if Joe had a ranch then why bother with all the rest? Maybe ranching wasn't too profitable then. Heck, maybe it isn't too profitable now, I don't know.

Anyhow thanks for that explanation.

[–] c-huddleston 17 years ago

You're welcome!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mississippi20 17 years ago

Kidd's free spiritedness and defiance for authority makes him a likeable character. Eastwood played the wry lines and serene toughness to a tee.....there's almost a Dirty Harry-esque quality to the performance - just more relaxed.

In addition to Sturges' beautiful cinematography, I think Lalo Schifrin (who also did Dirty Harry) produced a fantastic score. And of course, Robert Duvall whose always fabulous.

The movie touches on some thematic value, but I don't think it is its particular strength......it's just a fun movie.

[–] rad1025 17 years ago

I am in the middle of watching it on Hulu.com and just wanted to read a little about it.

My take on the Kidd character as Clint is playing him is that unlike the quietly lethal "Lone Stranger" he played in the spaghetti westerns this character is much more flamboyant...as far as a lone lethal non braggart man could be. He clearly fears no one, but isn't above pissing off folk by doing things like sneaking into their girlfriend's bedroom.
While there are of course a lot of similarities in the characters I sense that Clint was stretching a bit and playing with the stereotype a bit.

As far as the ranching not paying well, I suspect it is like all things, some do very well, like the Duvall character, while others struggle. It is the same old writers cliche used in Unforgiven and many others of the reformed gunman trying to make a go of it as an "honest" farmer/rancher. But they just can't seem to make a go of it or are just barley making it work.

Overall, so far, I agree this is a bit better than made out on the boards I have read. But in a few spots it has gotten to truly bad but then seems to recover some. I read on one of these that the director was having some personal issues and Clint was too in awe to take charge. If that is true it answers some of the ....choices...I have seen. Maybe this experience is what prompted Clint to become the very fine film maker he has become. If that is the case, then we all owe this director a debt of gratitude.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pyrrhus819 16 years ago

One thing I've always wondered was, why was Joe fired? I know it serves the plot, getting him on the right side, but there seemed to be no good reason for it.

[–] glpatton 16 years ago

He wasn't needed any longer and it was evident that he was not going to help capture Chama. Duvall's character was a businessman and had "hired" Kidd at $1000 per day to go "hunting." Not needing him anymore, he fired him to prevent having to pay. In the end, of course, it didn't really mean anything.

One poster mentioned the locomotive and how to run it. It could be operated by just releasing the brake and opening the throttle, but for any long distance operation, you are correct, plus the pressure had not been released from the boiler, so, yes, BOOM. More importantly, some questions have been raised about the setting....some saying 1900. The loco was a 2-8-0 or a 4-4-0 (didn't get a good look at it) wood burner which was truly an anachronism by 1900 and would not have been a line locomotive.

[–] jmix66 15 years ago

^^^^

Actually,it was $1000 total to capture or kill Chama.
And from what I gathered,the reason that Harlin fired Kidd was that he felt Kidd betrayed him when Kidd told the wounded man in Spanish to lie and was caught in the act.

No offense...but your style of writing makes reading even that more difficult

[–] g-moff 15 years ago

I just saw it and agree, the story isn't really special but there are nice shots (including the sniper scene, ha ha) and the stuff looked pretty accurate to me. It is actually a rather slow movie with longer scenes than you'd expect from a movie made nowadays, but still a lot of things happening.
Good old Western movies: a fight lasted 2-3 strokes and not after a series of hard-to-believe-because-of-all-the-CGI-and-excessive-violence-action. <sigh>

A 7.x is a fair rating imho. I mean, "Transformers" has 7.3 as of today - arrrghhh.
Br,

A man builds. A parasite asks "Where is my share?" - Andrew Ryan