Divine angels...?


ok, it got a little spooky towards the end with these ''little helpers''...

but what's the link with Seraphim..

And the very fine ''high plains drifter'' disapearing act....?

Divine angels, one chasing his past and one running from it....hummmm..?

reply

I think it was the devil...if you look at the back of the carriage (in the desert) her name was Louis C Fair (Lucifer).....

reply

yep...they mention that in the bonus feature too...

reply

[deleted]

The whole movie is filled with Christ Imagery and such, for example, when the boy gets knocked off and killed by the bear trap on his horse the bear trap is in a shape of a cross and the boy lands with this arms outspread and his feet crossed. The two different strangers they meet are Christ and Lucifer. The first one makes them pay for their sins, while the women asks for them to sell their soul to her (The gun and the water) It also takes place in the desert, same place where the devil asks Jesus for his soul in the bible. The whole western thing is a covering through the entire movie, that is what makes the movie so great, its much deeper than it seems at its surface which is why the person who reviewed it on the website was retarded for saying "A decent attempt at an already dead genre"

reply

The first stranger (Wes Studi) was not Christ, but Charon, as clearly stated in the credits. In Greek mythology, he was the ferryman who took the newly dead to Hades across the river Acheron, but only if they had a coin to pay for the ride.

reply

I agree and I'm glad you posted this explanation. I do think Wes Studi's character could be interpreted as Charon, but could have a dual meaning...

reply

Aiden-Dean-Jones: Your response is spot-on. Glad to see there are those who were able to read more into it. Great film on many levels. Thank you for such a cool post.

reply

The whole movie is filled with Christ Imagery and such, for example, when the boy gets knocked off and killed by the bear trap on his horse the bear trap is in a shape of a cross and the boy lands with this arms outspread and his feet crossed. The two different strangers they meet are Christ and Lucifer. The first one makes them pay for their sins
The "whole movie" is NOT "filled" with Christ imagery. In fact, when we take away your two incorrect examples (see below) there's none I can recall. So, I'm sorry, but everything quoted above (the entire first half of your post) is wrong:

1. The bear trap is NOT in the shape of a cross. It's in the shape of a 4 - or possibly IX at an angle. (Would you also argue that hockey sticks are shaped like "F", or a U is just an E on its side? Come on.)

2. The Kid lands with his feet WIDE apart. No question about this.

3. The Kid's arms are not outstretched, as if crucified - from one angle they're at his side, and from another angle they're (at most) 45 degrees. Slight continuity error, nothing more.

4. The first stranger (Wes Studi) by the water-hole is Charon. He's even listed in the credits as such, just in case the viewers don't figure it out on their own. I realize most people don't study Greek mythology (and neither do I), but even an Arkansas public-school education should encompass something this basic...

5. And Charon doesn't make you pay for your sins; he charges a price for crossing the water. Morality has absolutely nothing to do with it.



He who is tired of "Weird Al"... is tired of life.

reply

Yes, because New Testement is full of stories of people negotiating with Christ and then moving on to make a deal with the devil. Not the sort of redemption that Christian stories are full of.

"The whole western thing is a covering through the entire movie, that is what makes the movie so great..." Not really, It doesn't get uncovered, it changes the genre of the movie. You point out two Christs and one Devil and yet none of those characters influenced the main characters toward their "happy" "Christian" ending. You failed to notice that both main characters diverged and went in different directions as they fade. Did one go to heaven and one to hell? What did the director tell you about that in the commentary or extra feature?

When a director explains the movie in the commentary, or other DVD extra or any interview, that is not exposition, it's bad writing. Exposition belongs in the movie. If you can't make the audience know what's going on before the credits are over, you need to rewrite it, re-edit it, or not subject us to your failed art project, without warning us. You can't sell us two acts of a (attempted) classic western, then expect us to feel comfortable with a 3rd act transition to avante gard allegory on Christian values, complete with the opposing Christian Devil and Greek toll taking characters dressed up like American Indians. Talk about mixed signals. I love discussing a film when it's over, but if your symbolism is more confusing than contributing, if you can't tell us if the characters are alive or not because you want us to wonder, but you show a close up of the character's name, "HINT: I'm the Devil!!!, then not only is the film not worth intellectual discussion, but not worth seeing either. And certainly not worth the self-praise they gave themselves during the commentary, which happen in many undeserving movies.

reply

Have to agree, the last 15 minutes was like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas Western style. It didn't fit.

reply

[deleted]

Bravo, JX

reply