BLUE MAG

Narrative film began with the Western. It’s a troubling genre sometimes full of explicit racism and visual poetry within the same frame. Perhaps that is why it is so quintessentially American because it is a genre full of the best and worst angels of our nature. Essentially the Western is a morality play telling modern myths of how to be civilized and behave in white and black hats. It seems fitting that the latest released forays into the genre should cut to the binary quick: two men, one good, one bad or are they?

Director James Mangold’s remake of “3:10 to Yuma” is about as classic a western I’ve seen in about a decade. It does exactly what a Western with a capital “W” should. The story, based originally a short story by Elmore Leonard (and really who can tell a story better than Leonard?) is deceptively simple: A good man named Dan Evans (Christian Bale) who lost a leg in the Civil War and is struggling to keep his Arizona ranch afloat finds himself part of a posse sworn to escort a notorious outlaw named Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) to catch the 3:10 train to the prison in Yuma and a hangman’s noose.

It is the dialectic between these two characters that makes the film. It’s been said the original 1957 film has long been a favorite of Michael Mann and one can see why. The good guy and bad guy start out as almost pure archetypes but gradually through the course of the narrative they collapse into each other. Dan Evans is a flawed hero who appears almost cowardly at times throughout the film. On the other hand, Ben Wade is more than just charismatic and charming killer (although he is that too) but someone with a deep moral code. The movie complicates itself with these two characters by making them human. Now, the original did this as well but I think Mangold’s does it better because the actors he is working with are just amazing. Especially outstanding in a supporting role is Ben Foster as Wade’s second in command. His characterization is so complete I didn’t recognize him until the credits.

The movie is also full of some great writing by co-screenwriters Halsted Welles, Michael Brandt and Derek Hass. In particular, when Wade and Evans are holed up in a hotel room the dialog between the two men is about as good as it gets and an outstanding monologue (or two) makes an appearance in this western. There’s also plenty of breakneck action that builds to an outstanding shootout at the film’s climax.

James Mangold is proving himself an interesting if not altogether consistent filmmaker in the Michael Curtiz tradition. This film is similar thematically to “Copland” but is about as far away from “Girl Interrupted” and “Identity” as possible. I’m not sure what to make of him. Some of his films I love (like his debut “Heavy”) and others leave me completely cold.

At the end of the day the film is very conventional entry into the Western genre (the ticking clock even recalls “High Noon”) but the filmmakers infuse it with just enough subtlety to make it seem fresh and new again even though it’s a remake of a story over 50 years old.

That same conventiality and adherence to genre formulaic cannot be found in “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.” Even the title announces something unheard of. Have you ever heard of a western with a title that long? Well, yes only the genre-busting 70s have produced something so audacious with Robert Altman’s “Buffalo Bill and the Indians or Sitting Bull’s History Lesson.”

Again the dialectic of two men is the crux of the director Andrew Dominik’s primace. (Now that I think about it, maybe I should have found a way to include the new version of “Sleuth” into this article – couldn’t do everything folks.) The famous outlaw Jesse James (Brad Pitt) and Robert Ford (Casey Affleck) the man who idolized him, road with him and eventually became famous for killing him. Here everyone wears a black hat and the subject is not so much the myth of the western (although it is that) as it is exploring the myth and nature of the famous and infamous. It’s also the most beautiful film I’ve seen this year.

Unlike “3:10 to Yuma” Dominik’s film is not content to merely play within genre conventions (which “Yuma” does excellently) and instead creates something more measured and poetic: a genuine work of art. This is a film that will polarize viewers, not everyone is going to enjoy a 160-minute movie with Ken Burns-like narration about a killer. Perhaps that is what recalls the 1970s films the most: a time when truly original, risky work was being funded by studios with major stars attached to them. Of course that dream era ended with “Heaven’s Gate” a film surprisingly similar to “Jesse James.”

The casting of this film is particularly inspired. After seeing Brad Pitt as Jesse James it’s hard to imagine anyone else in the role, particularly because here is one of the most famous people in the world playing someone who was the most famous person in his day. Pitt deservedly won the best acting award at Venice this year but as good as he is I think Casey Affleck is even better. Again the casting of the less famous of the Affleck brothers is inspired, especially as he is chiefly known as one of Clooney and Pitt’s wacky cronies from the “Ocean’s 11,12,13” films. Affleck performance is completely original in this movie and I couldn’t take my eyes off of him from the first scene (in which he awkwardly tries to ingratiate himself with elder James brother Sam Shepard) on.

The film presents Ford almost as a movie star’s stalker or an ancient version of Mark David Chapman. Despite that he is a character who gains more sympathy that Jesse who remains a riddle: violent and petty one moment, magnanimous and poetic the next. The film tells the story of these two curious figures with incredible intimacy despite the vast Canadian surroundings and the third person voice over appears as a counterpoint helping to emphasize the history of the events dramatized.

The cinematography by longtime Coen brothers collaborator Roger Deakins just takes your breath away. Making use of selective focus lenses and apparently just the right time of day the images put the viewer in a dreamlike state as if watching someone’s long ago memories of an event. The music by Nick Cave and Warren Ellis is also both evocative of the time period and instrumental in maintaining this otherworldly mood that envelops the movie. It’s interesting to note that Cave wrote (and did the more experimental music for) last year’s Australian western “The Proposition” and Deakins next collaborates on the modern western “No Country for Old Men.”

This is writer/director Dominik’s second film. His first “Chopper” was made six years ago and told a similar tale of one of Australia’s most famous criminals. In contrast to the landscapes of his new film “Chopper” took place almost entirely indoors in a prison. The two films really compliment each other and I highly suggest watching both in succession. Many have compared Dominik to Terrence Malick as the two filmmakers share a similar sensibility visually (magic hour landscapes) and aurally (poetic voice over) but I hope unlike Malick it doesn’t take another six years for him to make his next film. He is a talented and original artist and we need more work by him.