I watched Bite the Bullet last night. My take
on the ending was that Coburn's decision was based on friendship.
He wasn't willing to take the victory away from Hackman,
particularly when Hackman was only fading because of compassion
for his horse. But the message of the film certainly was not that
winning is irrelevant. Coburn was willing to help Hackman, but
the two didn't slow down for the third place rider. For Hackman,
compassion for his horse was more important than winning. For
Coburn, it was compassion for his friend.
In fact, compassion was the entire underlying
theme of the movie. There are countless instances of characters
helping each other out of a jam, right from the beginning (Hackman
helping the colt, Hackman and Coburn defending the Mexican,
Coburn helping the Englishman when he falls in the canyon, the
Mexican killing the rattlesnake, Coleman trying to bend the rules
after the horse theft because he doesn't want to win to win like
this" and many many more). Jan Michael Vincent is the
holdout, laughing at the plight of others and driving his horse
to death, but even he eventually comes around.
I think it is tough to argue that Hackman
served as an example for anyone other than Jan Michael Vincent.
Instead, the film seemed to be making the point that while
winning is important, it is less important than compassion for
other people, or animals.
I enjoyed the film, but I found myself getting
annoyed at endless shots of horses walking over rocks. I also got
seriously pissed at the film when the horses got stolen, and it
is revealed that the only reason that Candice was in the race was
to help free her man. Feminist, my ass. It was also 15 minutes of
wasted film time trying to get the horses back.
They also never adequately explained how they
passed the leader, riding the Arabian. The guy was ahead for the
entire film, and everyone is trying to catch him, but at the very
end he is suddenly in third place. Maybe I missed it.
