Jane Russell nurses Jack Buetel back to health - but, that's not all.
I've watched the film three times. The first time, I resisted. I watched with amazement this movie has an incredible "look". I suppose it's a film made in the '40s, seen mostly in the '50s, looking very much like an early '30s "talkie" - but, ACTED IN SLOW MOTION! I wanted to dislike the film, but I really could not. I loved the saloon - reading the visible graffiti on the walls, never knowing who was going to shoot who, when, why...
When Mr. Buetel and Ms. Russell tumble in the hay, I recognized the scene from a dozen subsequent westerns; yet, it seemed suspenseful the way Mr. Hughes shot it here. I could not really state there is a rape (others may); and, I think, later scenes imply there was no rape. I believe the scene simply ended with her shirt torn.
There certainly is a lot of ambiguity! I agree there are some lines between the male actors which could be taken sexually. I caught those upon viewing the film during a second sitting. Early on, Mr. Huston wonders if Mr. Buetel might want to bunk with him if he doesn't "have a girl". BUT, Huston has Russell already lined up. There is also the age old question of whether the western hero needs his horse, or his girl, more. Of course, the western hero picks his horse! I believe these ambiguities add to the enjoyment of the film. They are additional things to think about during repeated viewing. During my second viewing, I just enjoyed the movie more it's just so unusually interesting. With all "classic" films, I think about different meanings, and things going on this movie has the ability to grow stronger thematically with repeated viewings. That's something I look for when rating a movie highly. A movie can take on a life of its own.
I love the performances Mr. Mitchell and Huston are older, more experienced actors while Buetel and Russell are younger. They all work well together. I especially enjoy "Billy" and "Rio" as she nurses him to health. The most recent viewing (today) had me wondering about how the peculiar "look" of this film was achieved. It's very claustrophobic, but has some "location" stuff. I watched those scenes more carefully. I watched Mr. Buetel's guns during his "exchange" near the end. I noticed Ms. Russell's attire became more alluring with each scene.
I noticed the tombstone closing: "HERE LIES " The tombstone is a "LIE". Could this play on words have been intended? This is a film I would call "chance art." I have no idea what effect the filmmakers were looking for - was it just intended as a showcase for Jane Russell's attributes? That was achieved. All the rest is icing. I submit that "The Outlaw" creates a unique and entertaining "world" of its own. The four main performers are riveting. I think "The Outlaw" is a world worth repeated revisiting.
Next, I need to keep my eyes on Billy the Kid's ears, and see when the blood drops appear on his shirt.
********** The Outlaw (2/5/43) Howard Hughes ~ Jack Buetel, Jane Russell, Walter Huston, Thomas Mitchell
I've watched the film three times. The first time, I resisted. I watched with amazement this movie has an incredible "look". I suppose it's a film made in the '40s, seen mostly in the '50s, looking very much like an early '30s "talkie" - but, ACTED IN SLOW MOTION! I wanted to dislike the film, but I really could not. I loved the saloon - reading the visible graffiti on the walls, never knowing who was going to shoot who, when, why...
When Mr. Buetel and Ms. Russell tumble in the hay, I recognized the scene from a dozen subsequent westerns; yet, it seemed suspenseful the way Mr. Hughes shot it here. I could not really state there is a rape (others may); and, I think, later scenes imply there was no rape. I believe the scene simply ended with her shirt torn.
There certainly is a lot of ambiguity! I agree there are some lines between the male actors which could be taken sexually. I caught those upon viewing the film during a second sitting. Early on, Mr. Huston wonders if Mr. Buetel might want to bunk with him if he doesn't "have a girl". BUT, Huston has Russell already lined up. There is also the age old question of whether the western hero needs his horse, or his girl, more. Of course, the western hero picks his horse! I believe these ambiguities add to the enjoyment of the film. They are additional things to think about during repeated viewing. During my second viewing, I just enjoyed the movie more it's just so unusually interesting. With all "classic" films, I think about different meanings, and things going on this movie has the ability to grow stronger thematically with repeated viewings. That's something I look for when rating a movie highly. A movie can take on a life of its own.
I love the performances Mr. Mitchell and Huston are older, more experienced actors while Buetel and Russell are younger. They all work well together. I especially enjoy "Billy" and "Rio" as she nurses him to health. The most recent viewing (today) had me wondering about how the peculiar "look" of this film was achieved. It's very claustrophobic, but has some "location" stuff. I watched those scenes more carefully. I watched Mr. Buetel's guns during his "exchange" near the end. I noticed Ms. Russell's attire became more alluring with each scene.
I noticed the tombstone closing: "HERE LIES " The tombstone is a "LIE". Could this play on words have been intended? This is a film I would call "chance art." I have no idea what effect the filmmakers were looking for - was it just intended as a showcase for Jane Russell's attributes? That was achieved. All the rest is icing. I submit that "The Outlaw" creates a unique and entertaining "world" of its own. The four main performers are riveting. I think "The Outlaw" is a world worth repeated revisiting.
Next, I need to keep my eyes on Billy the Kid's ears, and see when the blood drops appear on his shirt.
********** The Outlaw (2/5/43) Howard Hughes ~ Jack Buetel, Jane Russell, Walter Huston, Thomas Mitchell