The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly / Navajo Joe SH

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly as well as Navajo Joe are spaghetti westerns created by europeans as a critique of American ideology during the times in which the films were created. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly presents a critique of capitalism, racism, and morality in America throughout the film.

The Good, Blondie, is a white, blond male by no mistake. He is also involved in a bounty hunting scam. He is entirely motivated by money, as this is the only reason he keeps Tuco (the ugly) alive on their search for the gold. He is clearly a critique of American capitalism and the anglo-right connotations given to this capitalism. The Ugly, Tuco, is a mexican. He is presented as a fool and somewhat of a comic relief. As mexicans were commonly portrayed in the classic western, he was only a secondary character that Blondie uses to make money. This is the european critique of racism in America that was prevelant in the mid nineteenth century toward most non-anglo ethnicities.

Navajo Joe can be seen as a criticism of America's treatment of the Indian. As Navajo Joe is a strong, dominating male, motivated by revenge, he takes on the role of an alpha male cowboy and transcends the role most indians are doomed to in the classic American western. Never before had a Native American taken such a strong role in a western, which shows the european influence on this film. They took a type of person previously oppressed in both America and the Western genre and gave him the power and dominance of the alpha male cowboy.

310 To Yuma SH

A major difference between the original 1957 version and the 2007 remake of 3:10 to Yuma is the relationship between Dan Evans and his son William. In the older version, he leaves his wife to take Ben Wade to Jail. In the remake, there is a definate strain on the relationship between Dan and his son. Dan has had a leg amputated and struggles to show his son he is not a failure. His farm borders on being taken by the bank, and he initially avoids any action. He takes the job to escort Ben to the railroad for the money to support his family. The film touches on many concerns of families of the early 21st century. There has been a recent surge of emphasis on our children as our future, with the No Child Left Behind Act as an example of legislation resulting from this surge. As the divorce and unemployment rates continue to rise, parents constantly face departing from the traditional model of an American family and struggle to uphold trust or respect from their children. The focus on the father-son relationship and the son's respect for the father as portrayed in the remake of 3:10 to Yuma echoes the struggles of the modern family.

Good, Bad, and Ugly/ Navajo Joe Blog JY

Spaghetti westerns are westerns that are created by directors not from the United States, mostly Italian and European directors. These spaghetti westerns show the outsider view of American society through a western film. In the American made westerns we see how America views itself, but now with these spaghetti westerns the audiences are allowed to see how outsiders view American society and culture. The major difference in these spaghetti westerns as opposed to American westerns is how the directors portray the alpha male cowboy and “others.” We can see the differences clearly when we look at the films The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Navajo Joe, which are both spaghetti westerns.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly was directed and written by Italian writers and directors. So before I even started watching this film I had an idea that the views on the alpha male cowboy and the “others” would be different. In this film the alpha male was not viewed as the courageous hero that American westerns portrayed him as. Instead, as we see in all three of the main character, they were villainous characters that were fixated are getting money anyway they could. Blondie and Tuco resorted to scamming towns by having Blondie catch Tuco and getting the reward money and then freeing him only seconds before Tuco is hung. Also Angel Eyes was another alpha male cowboy that would kill anyone for money. All three of these alpha male characters throughout the whole movie were looking to find the hidden money and would do anything to get rid of the other two. The portrayal of these characters as money hunger characters shows that outsiders view American culture and society as being based around money and material things. Another thing that stuck out to me is that the directors labeled the immigrant (Tuco), The Ugly. This just shows that the directors of this film sympathized with the treatment of immigrants in American society. They believed that immigrants and America were treated as an “ugly” class and were considered outsiders in our eyes. In a way the directors of this film were right. America society has labeled immigrants outsiders by creating law such as the one in Arizona were anyone can be pulled over and checked to see if they are citizens.

In Navajo Joe the directors really focused on the Native American. In the movie a group of white men come into an Indian village and kill everyone but one man, Navajo Joe. In a fit of rage he vows to himself that he will avenge this massacre. The directors portray Joe as a savage that is only focused on getting revenge. This portrayal sympathizes with the Native Americans and is saying that Americans have assumptions that Native Americans are savages. On part in the movie Joe steals a train of money back for a town and then asks them if they would like him to protect them from Duncan and his gang for a small fee. But have the typical stereotypes, the people of the down decline because Joe is and Indian and “they don’t make bargains with Indians.” Another point that the directors of this movie make is that Duncan and his gang are only fixated on money much like the characters from The good, the Bad, and the Ugly. The main part of the movie is based around Duncan and his gang trying to steal a train of money and Joe trying to stop them. Again the directors of this movie are portraying the white settlers as money hungry people. This is how outsiders portray American culture, that we all base are lives around money and obtaining a lot of it.

Rooster Cogburn JL

The film Rooster Cogburn is vastly different from the classic Western. While the setting may be similar, the “other” character takes on new levels of importance. The time period that this film was produced helps the viewer to understand why the film has its characters acting the way it does. The film was shot when the Women’s Rights Movement was making progress and women were gaining rights. They had been given equal pay within the work place, given the ability to take birth control pills, and now could not be discriminated against for gender when applying for jobs. The idea of women becoming equal to men is shown in Katharine Hepburn’s character, Eula Goodnight. The way in which women are represented in this film is very different from the classic view that Western’s portrayal women. Typically women are seen as weak, over emotional, and dependent.

However, in Rooster Cogburn, Eula Goodnight is an extremely strong, independent woman. Her role is as important as Rooster’s and more important than Hawk and his men. She grabs the viewer’s attention with her sophisticated language and polite manner. Rooster calls her out on her speech and asks her where she is from. She says she is from the Boston and that she supposes she should “learn some southern phrases” (Rooster Cogburn, 1975). Another interesting aspect about Eula Goodnight is even though she speaks frequently, her language is strong and purposeful and does not do what it typically does to other women; makes them weak and crumble. Eula does not show a great deal of emotion when she talks in comparison to women in other Westerns. You can tell what kind of mood she is in but nothing exaggerated: instead, her language to shows her power. For example, when Hawk rides into her settlement, she greets them and when they refuse to obey her requests she simply continues talking and remains calm while being shot at. We normally see a woman at home tending to the house and children while her husband is at work. Conversely, Ms. Goodnight states that she does not need a man by saying she choose not to marry one and not to reproduce one either. Ms. Goodnight shows the viewers very early on that she does not fear guns nor does she approve or use them. This is a typical portrayal of women’s use of guns in Westerns. What is unusual is how Ms. Goodnight does not hesitate when buying a gun or using it. We find out later that she has an extremely accurate shot when she shoots one of Hawk’s men before he can shoot Rooster. She does not brag about the shot just explains that she has all brothers so they taught her.

Rooster Cogburn also incorporates Native Americans into the movie. In this film, they were not the “enemy”. Instead they are seen as living peacefully among whites and trying to learn the language. They are portrayed as harmless human beings who are very innocent. They do not drink or use guns. When Hawk and his gang attack the Native Americans are left to defend themselves with their bare hands. The way in which Rooster Cogburn portrays both women and Native Americans is representative of a time period in the United States when rights were being distributed evenly and equality was starting to set in.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly/Navajo Joe NC

These spaghetti Westerns differ from most Westerns of their time by the method in which the story is told. Both films start out with violence; TGTBTU shows Tuco shooting down bounty hunters and Navajo Joe starts with Duncan killing Joe's wife. The American Western film norm of the time did not start with such chaotic violence, in so much that early violence almost always included some character development to understand the reason for the violence. In these spaghetti Westerns, the audience is plunged into violence from the start, which continues until the end. The violence itself, much more prevalent, also almost always includes much more gore. The texture of the colors of nature in these films (the colors of the brown dirt, red/grayish mountains, and faded green grass) bring out the red of the blood. The films tell stories, but much of the films is devoted to conflict and death. Scenes are reserved in traditional Westerns that help develop the story, but spaghetti Westerns seem to be exclusively about violence at times. The violence is harsh, but it seems nonsensical at times. The doctor's death as well as his wive's in Navajo Joe, while not comic, almost invokes laughter due to its ridiculousness. The American Western builds up to serious scenes of life and death with talking and interaction, but the doctor and his wife seem to be senselessly shot down.

Besides the more common violence, greed and capitalism are also subjects more deeply explored. The gold in TGTBTU is on everyones mind, and characters are hurt and killed in its search, just as the bank's money in Navajo Joe is sought by the doctor (doctors are often well paid anyways, showing the intense greed of the character) while Joe acts in good will to be paid.

Though Blondie and Navajo Joe may arguably be the alpha male cowboys of these films if they carry alpha male cowboys, they portray the roles around the money. Joe's aim is to collect his pay for acquiring the money for the town, and Blondie rides off with the gold. Though The Searchers presents a John Wayne playing a character who had mysteriously acquired gold at the beginning of the film, the film does not center around this fact. The strength of greed in these films questions the idea of the alpha male in spaghetti Westerns altogether.

With the ideas of violence and greed, these foreign-produced films express from a cultural studies point of view the global view on America. As these films were created during a time when world travel was not the norm as it is today, most people living abroad might judge a people by what their respective medias said about them. Foreigners recognized the place of America in wars, and in seeing past Westerns and how American's acted, foreign stereotypes of the US may be thought to be exaggerated, but it may say how those abroad really do think of America. The world could think that Americans are violent and greedy by how the film was produced and the way the stories were told. Whether this is true or not, American Westerns have been seen as a mark of heritage and pride of American culture and expansion. Spaghetti Westerns try to say not-so-subtly how they believed Americans truly behaved and acted.

Unforgiven NC

Unforgiven is undoubtedly a revisionist film. Beginning with the lawlessness of the West and the bounty on killing the cowboys, the film expresses the complications and undesirable consequences associated with the hunt for money. The enforcement of 'justice' by the sheriff criticizes the government's system of handling crime, and as a result, the ideas of good and bad are twisted throughout the film, leading up to the climactic battle between the main characters and the 'law.' The men on the search for money seem to be good at heart, especially exemplified by their remorse from murder, making them anti-heroes.

Morgan Freeman appears as an equal to these men, even as being a black man in the setting he is in, but seems much calmer and wiser than the rest as seen in the campfire scenes. He is married to a Native American in the film. These groups were not cast in roles as cowboys in traditional Westerns, even from the position of the anti-hero. The very fact that he appears in the film is important, but the importance of his character shows how revisionist the film truly is.

As mentioned, these men are anti-heroes, best shown by Clint Eastwood's character William Munney. As a settled down father, he had relaxed from a life of killing and stealing and worked towards reforming his life and redeeming himself. Reluctant to accept the job, he does so under the pretense of money and not justice, but the end of the film in which Little Bill and his deputy are killed shows that William's actions did in fact lead to some good. In some way, justice was served.

The film breaks away from the old mold of the traditional Western, but tells a story just as well. Accepting other groups and being more tolerant of race, this revisionist Western shows that Westerns do not have to be exclusively white and censor elements of reality that are often forgotten in older films. The application of revisionism in my opinion does not make Westerns better, but helps to show the change that Westerns have moved through and grown from, culminating in the continuation of the American story through the placement of cultural elements.

3:10 to Yuma NC

The differences between the 3:10 to Yuma films do not take away from the basic plot, but in certain ways they seem as if they are almost two different Westerns. The first film follows the common older Western pattern of having scattered moments of violence, having large buildups in plot development beforehand. The newer film follows the common Hollywood trend of today, packing as much violence and special effects as possible. Though the older film uses the scenery of the West in the hardboiled fashion, the colorful update uses similar settings, yet the focus remains on the characters and the action throughout the entire film. In short, the first seems like a common Western, but the new version is updated for the times and lacks certain elements of the older Westerns.

What truly separates them above all else is the idea of revisionism. Though both can be considered great films, the difference in endings shows that the new film breaks the traditional Western pattern. As revisionism deals with reality, Dan's death in the new film does not occur in the first film, giving the audience the shock of violence in the West. Although the action in the new film can be seen as taking away from the old Western mold, the direction and use of town scenery rather than the picturesque scenery of nature allows the conflicts to show the grit of the West in a way that the older films did not. It is arguable that more violence in the new film is more realistic, but the plot structure of the older film appears to be stronger.

In the last scene, with Dan dying and his son by his side, the audience sees in this moment as well as other moments throughout the films the humanity of the alpha male cowboy. The older films make audiences think that the alpha males are a step above the rest, almost superhuman. They do not have superpowers, but their codes, their excellent marksmanship, and their ability to endure and evoke strength in others makes them stand out in their towns. The respect seen between Dan and Wade shows friendship, brotherhood, and emotion; these ideas are not necessarily new but through revisionism they are brought out and emphasized.

The main differences between the alpha male characters between both films is the bond shared between them. The first films shows Dan and Wade as working together at times, but the impression of a bond is never delivered. The newer films portrays the bond they share as guardian and protected shows a developing relationship throughout the course of the film. Dan and Wade could never be considered equals in the first film, but the second film's action allows the audience to see the connection the characters share and their reactions to different hazardous situations. Dan's death brings the full meaning of this relationship to fruition, but the fact that Dan survives in the first film does not allow Wade's colors to show as in the second film, when he actually fires on his own gang. Revisionism, though producing more often than not darker films, produces reality, and the friendship shared by these characters in the second film exemplifies this.