MovieChat Forums > Hard Times (1975) Discussion > What's The Point???

What's The Point???

posted 18 years ago by m60green
30 replies | jump to latest

I read some of the comments BEFORE I saw the picture this afternoon. The people raved about this movie and the discussion turned to widescreen. The DVD I saw was full screen. The picture quality was dark and the color was off. I could not get in to this movie at all. I fell asleep during the second half, I wake up and Bronson is (again) kicking the daylights out of some poor schmuck. What is the point of the whole damm plot? Nowadays New Orleans has a high murder rate. Rather than using fists the people just shoot. Jill Ireland was such a doll, it's a shame she's no longer with us.......Richard

[–] donottry30 18 years ago

If you don't understand the point, then you shouldn't watch any more movies by Walter Hill. You can skip Sam Peckinpah and Clint Eastwood while you're at it. Go back to your little world and watch a Meg Ryan romantic comedy. That's more your speed.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] thenickatoms 18 years ago

Try watching it in widescreen. The DVD's a good cleaned up version.

It's what people had too do to survive during the depression. My Father did things like this to keep food on the table.

[–] spido507 18 years ago

Yep, that's why it's called Hard Times. Most people don't grasp how tough it was in the 1930's. My own dad also had to fight, but he called it "prize" fighting; maybe it was just this same stuff. These days, men just make a cardboard sign and stand by a traffic light -- people give them money for nothing. This IS Bronson's best movie, bar none.

[–] Christiantodd1 18 years ago

I wanted to add something to this, but everyone else pretty much summed up my opinion. Pay attention to Bronson's character next time you watch it. There's alot more going on with the man other than him just beating people up.

My all time favorite Bronson movie.

[–] blackbrown 16 years ago

Spido, Once Upon a Time in the West is Bronson's best movie among a number of great movies.

[–] fegerter 18 years ago

You knew you wouldn't like it before you sat down to watch.

Why waste your time and ours?

[–] tracytsg 18 years ago

You are a true idot. You admit to falling asleep and then complain of not understanding the film.

Hope no one leaves any sharp knives out near you - you idiot.

[–] garp-26 17 years ago

The point is, I think, that despite Bronson's effectiveness in succeeding at this level of existence, and on his own terms, he still retains a measure of humanity, intellignence and dignity. The harshness of the depression may have forced him into surviving by the most primitive of physical means, but he has not allowed it to reduce him to the level of mindless thug, hophead, compulsive gambler, smarmy exploiter or any of the other half dozen pathetic or obnoxious types that he has to engage with.
By maintaining some personal standards and adhering to them in this brutalising world accords our hero mythic status. It's not that the fact he can knock other guys out which is his most impressive quality, rather it is his ability to form relationships (however short lived), loyalty when it counts and resistance to sadistically enjoying his opponents defeats.
Bronson's fighter may be a loner and existing on the margins but unlike his character in Death Wish, he is not corrupted by the violence he participates in. This surely has a relevence for hard times, all times.

Supernatural perhaps, baloney perhaps not

[–] nickunit13 17 years ago

dont read into it too much its a charles bronson movie. they are all the same. he dont speak very much and he fights. by the way the last fight at the end before the gay country music, was the longest, most boring and *beep* film fight i have ever seen.

[–] alan118552 17 years ago

Nick you are a unit....
"gay country music", damn but you are really showing your intelligence now. It's called cajun music and it is nothing like the "country" music you seem to like. A different world when it comes to music with roots way back to the french and the Acadians.
As for the fight scene, well acted and filmed more realistic than most and it ended with a beautiful left hook counter over a right hand.
Go back and re-watch Rocky 8 or 9, then you will find a real looking fight scene.
Enjoy!!!

I drive real f'ing fast so try to keep up!!

[–] malpaso-7 17 years ago

I was nine years when my dad took me to the theatre to see this film in '75. It really made an impression on me. I was not a spoiled kid by any means, but i was growing in an upper middle class family, even though my dad had grown up in the Great Depression in a family of four with a single mom who was a public schoolteacher (not that well-paid a job, although at least she had a job). So any critics of this film might be correct, but it certainly did an EXCELLENT job of letting me know, at age 9, how easy things were for me.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] topher5001 13 years ago

You really see everything at face value, don't you?

[–] mcjosephsn 17 years ago

garp-26 - well spoken, my friend.
I wish that Charlie had had more material and directors such as this
to work with in his career, for he would surely have left a far more compelling
screen legacy.
Having said that, I've always been a great fan of his work, and his
unique screen presence. You always get the impression with Bronson that he
is not just acting - that he has truly lived through the tough times, and
is the genuine article, not merely an actor.

[–] rogerscorpion 16 years ago

McJoseph--I agree totally. When the legendary director, Ingmar Bergman, came to The States, he said that one of his goals was to 'watch Charles Bronson work'.
Charlie was elemental.

Carpe Noctem

[–] joeparkson 16 years ago

For another example of good work by Bronson, check out the Twilight Zone episode "Two".

Sole survivors of war, enemies Bronson and Elizabeth Montgomery have to sort things out. Interestingly, both Bronson and Montgomery are cast somewhat against type.

All in all, Bronson did OK for an actor who couldn't project a bigger than life persona like Burt Lancaster or Kirk Douglas. Either of those guys could have played Chaney, but Bronson could never have played Elmer Gantry or Spartacus.

[–] rogerscorpion 16 years ago

I'm not convinced he couldn't have played Spartacus.

Carpe Noctem

[–] joeparkson 16 years ago

I'm not convinced he couldn't have played Spartacus.

______________________________________________________________

None of Bronson's work ever showed him as a charismatic spellbinding leader of men. He was more of the taciturn, tight lipped, stoic loner. Very much like Alan Ladd or Clint Eastwood.

I'm not putting Bronson down as an actor. I just think he had a limited range. I also can't imagine Bronson doing the intense roles done by Brando, Steiger, DeNiro or Pacino. You have to have a little ham in you and Bronson was not the least bit hammy.

[–] rogerscorpion 16 years ago

Point taken. You're right. Same reason Kevin Costner sucked so bad as Robin Hood. He's more of an internal actor. Both are.
Morgan Freeman was the one who could rouse the men. You almost need Shakesperean experience for that.
Most of Bronson's acting was w/his eyes.

Carpe Noctem

[–] flickfiend 16 years ago

The point is, I think, that despite Bronson's effectiveness in succeeding at this level of existence, and on his own terms, he still retains a measure of humanity, intellignence and dignity.

By maintaining some personal standards and adhering to them in this brutalising world accords our hero mythic status.

-it is his ability to form relationships (however short lived), loyalty when it counts and resistance to sadistically enjoying his opponents defeats.

-he is not corrupted by the violence he participates in. This surely has a relevence for hard times, all times.

Well said garp-26!

[–] Der_Schnibbler 15 years ago

Beautiful. The most astute analysis on this board.

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

[–] mercycroft 16 years ago

I also read the comments before seeing this film - and though "fight films" are not my bag, I've always liked Bronson (due to my father's idolization of him no doubt) and Ireland (I saw From Noon Til Three when I was a kid and was obsessed by it!) - and I have to say, this is a terrific film. I agree with all of the insightful critics on this board. And I'd like to add, I really appreciated the music, camera work (no weird angles, stupid close-ups of blood and guts, the modern ADHD effect of walking around with the camera bumping and lurching all over the place - just nice, basic shots to tell the story), and the fact that Chaney doesn't DIE at the end, which is often true of 70s antihero films. A+ in my book. And I'm a chick - does that get extra points? ;)

[–] Chaarles 16 years ago

The point of the plot is the telling of a story dealing with themes such as the measure of a life (note the wonderful moment in the opening titles when Chaney's gaze meets the young boy's as the train passes the road crossing), honour, survival, and humanity (Chaney's search for companionship). The themes are universal. And it's all studied with great panache in a taut and textured tale of a man trying to earn some dough.

Because Bronson is in it, the movie seems to get portrayed as some third rate thug fest, because, of course, for so long so many people have been misinformed about Bronson, who was actually a great actor.

But this is a gem of cinema. World cinema. Not that I aspire to or advocate the film notion of gladiatorial honour, but it makes for a gripping drama.

maybe try again; have some coffee, stay awake and get into the story. It's actually a great movie. You're missing out.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]