|
I don't think that McCabe is actually a Western.
The subtext of any true Western is that the
story is just one of thousands that comprise the mosaic of the
growth of this country--the opportunities, the ongoing
destruction of the predominant way of life (and the way of life
is always changing), the people (the individualists, the
communities, and the clash between the two), the dangers, the
isolation, the laws that grew out of dealing with both dangers
and isolation.
The finest Westerns succeed not only in terms
of their story and execution of it, but in how they add to the
knowledge and presentation and mythos of the West. Even
revisionist Westerns, in seeking to destroy the myths and present
what is believed to be reality, must nonetheless operate with the
knowledge of the mosaic--how else can they demolish the tradition
if they don't know what it is?
It is not so much that McCabe doesn't put
another story in the mosaic--the presentation of the Western
mining towns, the early opportunity, and the foreshadowing of the
corporate domination to come is fascinating and detailed. There
is also little question that Altman wishes us to know that, for
the purposes of his story, the West is dead. He kills it off in
one of the most brutal and heartbreaking deaths ever portrayed in
any Western--and symbolically, in a way that only one familiar
with the Western would understand.
So McCabe undoubtedly has the body of a Western.
But the soul?
A true Western, I believe, operates within the
mythos--either to explore it or explode it. While you can watch a
Western without any knowledge of it, it is impossible to do so
without realizing that something is being missed. The very
essence of a Western can't be completely grasped without a sense
of the mosaic, and one of the joys of watching Westerns is
building your own knowledge of it.
But the theme of McCabe transcends time and
place, and exists independently from the trappings of the Western
genre. It is not directly about the death of the west, the
ruthlessness of the corporations that took its place, not about
whorehouse management, the life of women and men in mining towns,
nor is it about the best way to damn near survive a gunfight that
pits three against one.
No, McCabe is first and foremost a story with
an object lesson, and demonstration of this lesson takes
precedence over all the Western themes that resonate in its wake.
The object lesson is simple: Every so often, a choice is
presented from which there is no backing down, no negotiating, no
revisiting. The choice won't present itself with a bow, or
considerately emblazon itself in neon lights. It will show up and
maybe hover for a bit, then disappear forever. Woe betide the
person who doesn't seize the chance and make the right choice.
One doesn't require any working knowledge of
the Western to understand this, and nothing of the West itself
adds to it. In fact, the same story could be moved to corporate
America, the farm, space, the sea, or Shakespeare.
So--while I think McCabe and Mrs. Miller is a
terrifyingly good movie, I am unconvinced that it is a Western--
Altman just uses the trappings of the Western with the skill of a
consummate story teller.
I don't have a great deal vested in my theory;
I just thought it'd be interesting to throw out there.
At this point I'm not saying much about the
movie itself; I'm interested in others thoughts. I will mention
the following:
- I *hated* that damn song.
- I thought the use of the overlapping dialog
and editing during the first half of the movie was distracting.
Along with the song, my only complaint.
- The script is incisive and revealing. Certain
scenes are perfection. The Beatty/Auberjonois negotiation at the
beginning; the companion faux negotiation between Beatty and
Millais at the end. Christie's opening monologue. Sears and
partner with Beatty, when he unknowingly makes his choice. Beatty's
touching apology to Christie in their last scene together.
- I was cold watching the entire movie, finally
wrapping myself in a blanket. While we are having the coldest May
in recent history, I blame Vilmos Zsigmond and that damn snow.
The cinematographythroughout is justly praised.
- I am unable to watch Keith Carradine's last
scene. Fortunately, some choices are negotiable and have no
serious consequences.
Comments on Review:
23831 . 109109 - June 2, 1999 - 11:08 AM PT
Cal
"A true Western, I believe, operates
within the mythos--either to explore it or explode it. While you
can watch a Western without any knowledge of it, it is impossible
to do so without realizing that something is being missed. The
very essence of a Western can't be completely grasped without a
sense of the mosaic, and one of the joys of watching Westerns is
building your own knowledge of it."
I think this is limiting. I agree about the joy
of knowing the genre, but I think you go too far about grasping
the essence. For example, I don't think institutional knowledge
lends anything to understanding of McCabe (or the equally dour
"The Ox-Bow Incident"), whereas, it is critical to
enjoying derivative schmaltz like "Silverado."
23833. CalGal - June 2, 1999 - 11:18 AM PT
Niner,
I disagree wholeheartedly about The Oxbow
Incident; I agree without reservation about McCabe, which is why
I don't think it's a Western. I presented it in that light
because there has been considerable debate about it--when it
first came out it was labelled an anti-Western, or revisionist.
Then when it was rereleased, more people hailed it as a Western.
And this has always puzzled me, since I don't think it's a
Western at all.
...
24085. TabouliJones - June 4, 1999 - 12:55
PM PT
...
CalGal's Talking Points: I am unfamiliar with
the Western genre, however, I was intrigued by CalGal's
suggestion that McCabe and Mrs. Miller has the body of a Western
but not the soul. Generally, if a movie has dudes on horses,
poker, guns, and a frontier landscape, I take it as a Western,
and I felt this way when first watching the opening sequences of
the movie. But then Altman inserts a quirky little scene in which
two rugged looking cowboys discuss the aesthetic niceties of
their beards and sideburns (which has a hilarious cousin in the
Iggy Pop scenes of Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man). And at this point,
Altman seems to signal that he is just borrowing the Western as a
backdrop to a character study that goes beyond the genre. And I
think this holds true for much of the movie. Then, however, the
movie reaches its final acts and Altman starts to reckon with and
manipulate the conventions of the Western. In particular, I am
thinking of the scene in which Keith Carradine is shot on the
bridge. The evil little dude manipulates our awe-shucks horndog (and
hero) into “drawing” his gun – (“Let me look
at it. Maybe there's something wrong with it,” he says,
after Carradine says he can't really “shoot nothing with it”
because he's an inept shot) -- so that he can die a proper cowboy
death, and it breaks your heart, because you can see it coming
and there is nothing anybody on screen can do about it. Now, not
only is Altman suddenly reverting to the Western form, he is
manipulating its conventions for strong emotional effect; and
this manipulation grows as the final shootout unfolds –
forcing you to tussle with the fact that two, maybe three, of the
shooting “victims” are shot in the back, a cowboy no-no.
So, while I think that CalGal is correct to say
that McCabe and Mrs. Miller is not a Western or anti-Western per
se -- it doesn't contrive a duality of White Hats vs. Black Hats
or a central “cowboy” protagonist with a beguiling
moral flexibility -- I do think that Altman is using the Western
form as more than just a skeleton for his character study to move
around in. He seems self-conscious about the effect his Western
dressing has on his film and (somehow) uses it to force a
consideration of the morality involved in the lives of McCabe and
Mrs. Miller.
CalGal,
Your talking points re. the Western really got
me to thinking about what Altman was doing with the movie,
especially at the end. I may try the same with Jim Jarmusch's
wonderfully quirky Dead Man, starring Johnny Depp.
|
