I had read somewhere that Paul Schrader was unhappy with the outcome of this film. I enjoyed Rolling Thunder, but it felt as if it was a lightweight Schrader film. Definitely not his “type” of film, in comparison to Blue Collar or Hardcore or even Taxi Driver. Anybody know of what changes or what was not in the film that Schrader did not agree with. Does anybody have a link or "something" with the original script?
shareYou raise an interesting point. I had forgotten this was a Paul Schrader film because the writing doesn't seems like it's in the same league as his others. I love "Rolling Thunder," but the elements that stand out are the action and the direction, not the script. I apologize that this doesn't answer your question, though.
shareWow, Paul Shrader wasn't happy with this? I thought it was one of his better scripts, and definitely one heck of a '70s amoral blood-bath. It stands on its own - the cold atmosphere and dark, sadistic subject matter is just what i want out of a '70s movie about a kill-crazed vet! =D What impresses me the most is that the movie always remains in context. Exploitation it may be, but it has a lot of feeling.
"Cain and Abel will go to Heaven... if they can make it through Hell!"
-Los Hijos Del Topo
I can kind of see why. I mean its the polar opposite of Taxi Driver, veteran goes on a bloodbath, only in Taxi Driver we are afraid of them, in this we cheer them on.
shareTaken from the book "Schrader On Schrader":
"I wrote a movie about racism, and they changed it into a racist movie."
"The story of Rolling Thunder was really botched in the rewriting. The main character in the film was meant to be the same sort of character as Travis Bickle, with that same anti-social edge. The character, as I originally wrote him, was a Texas trash racist who had become a war hero without ever having fired a gun, and came home to confront the Texas Mexican community. All his racism from his childhood and Vietnam comes out, and at the ending of the film there’s an indiscriminate slaughter of Mexicans, meant as some kind of metaphor for American racism in Vietnam.
In order to get it made, (the studio) insisted that the racist element be taken out, which is the equivalent of giving Travis Bickle a dog. Once you take out the perverse pathology of these characters, rather than become films about fascism they become fascist films, and that’s what happened to Rolling Thunder."
Interesting insight there lord_kromdar. Although I do like this film, I agree with others that this doesn't have the same depth as a typical Paul Schrader script. The movie is basically a sensationalistic revenge picture, much more in the mold of the 70s Charles Bronson films. There's really not much of a point being made, other than the usual war-is-hell theme for returning vets. To be fair, back in 1977 there wasn't yet the glut of Vietnam films, so I'm sure it seemed a bit fresher to those who saw it during the initial run. And it's pretty amazing the extremes to which a group of 5 or 6 yahoos will go to just to get $2000 worth of silver dollars, especially considering they'd have to divvy it up. A murder rap is worth 400 bucks???
share[deleted]
Wow, in the 30 years ive been a fan of this movie, this is totally news to me. Heavy!
shareI think that the changes made to the script were for the better. Did we really need another movie with a crazed Vietnam vet who comes home and just kills a bunch of people because he's a racist? Yawn. And the movie is facist? I think Mr. Schrader was just a little too full of himself when he gave that interview.
shareI agree.
This is one of the few examples where something being taken away from its creator and changed was a good thing.
I also agree, the script is not preachy at all
If only we were amongst friends...or sane persons!
I wonder if Mr. Schrader would have described BILLY JACK (1971) as "fascist," since Billy used pretty much the same tactics to correct what he saw as wrong? Well, he did give up to the "fascist" law enforcement officers without shooting it out in the end.
share[deleted]
I think he was blinded by the loss of his original script. The only racist part I could find in this movie is that the people who kill him happen to have ties to the Mexicans, otherwise it's really just a movie about insane, Nihilistic revenge. Rolling Thunder makes it incredibly clear that the main characters are not in their right mind.
shareReminds me a bit of the novel of First Blood as compared to the movie. It would have been interesting to see Schrader's version as out and out grindhouse sleaze with Charles Rane just killing scores of Mexicans. All in all, though, I think it fits in his wheelhouse of movie characters that just need to be nudged (willingly or not) to their fate. Taxi Driver (meeting Betsy/Pallentine), Hardcore (daughter running away), Auto Focus (meeting John Carpenter) and Rolling Thunder (murder of remaining family).
shareThe irony of Paul Schrader not liking how his script was rewritten and how the movie turned out?
The poster (which appears here on IMDb) sells the movie with, guess what? Yep, that it was written by Paul Schrader!
"Another Shattering Experience from the Author of "Taxi Driver."
I. Drink. Your. Milkshake! [slurp!] I DRINK IT UP! - Daniel Plainview - There Will Be Blood
Like selling 'Blue Collar' as a Richard Pryor laugh riot.
This spoiler has been deleted by an administrator