[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

Well I'd say it offers profound insight into the character of a man faced with having to decide between doing what he feels is right, for him, and what he believes is right, for society. It's unusual for a Western in that its notion of heroism is tied to one of personal compromise, although it's a theme that to a greater or lesser degree runs through all of Ford's Westerns. Peckinpah seems more clear-cut and dare I say conventional in comparison.

aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh...

that makes a lot of sense

thanks!

and yes, in the sense that ford's characters are better constructed-- he's more "theatrical", but in a good sense, that theatre is about characters and so are his movies.

in peckinpah-- well at least in the wild bunch-- the characters are more like-- cipers at the service of a great idea. "here's this horrible world, here are the people in it" they're more like, devices to advance a world view. the drama is outside, not so much at a personal level. it's more like, force a collides with force b is detoured on force c, etc. impersonal in a way.

yes.

whereas ford's characters are more, well, "human."

it's a bit of the old kubrick discussion we've been having, isn't it? i mean, similar...

i'll have to mull it over a bit longer... but i think i see what you're saying and you're right about that. ford's characters have more depth in themselves. it's more drama. whereas peckinpah is more old epic-- a bit like the illiad.