Skip to main content

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson
(1972)

(SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patronising one).

Bear Claw: You sure are cocky, for a starvin’ pilgrim.

The picture was originally envisaged for Sam Peckinpah and Clint Eastwood but fell apart when they didn’t get on (I’m unsurprised Clint didn’t want to work with a temperamental old soak, however talented). Redford, whose biggest hit by far up to that point was a western – and represented his real breakout as a bona fide star, despite a decade of prior work – was doubtless on the lookout for more of the same and signed on (I think he’s actually a more interesting choice than Clint, where it would have been him playing that loner character again). He brought Pollack aboard, who was also in need of a hit (They Shoot Horses, Don’t They being his most successful thus far, and definitely on the eclectic side). Unsurprisingly, they didn’t get on with Milius, then at his fable-spinning zenith, and he was fired. Edward Anhalt was brought in (who earned a co-credit), and then David Rayfiel (who didn’t). And then Milius was rehired.

A sanitised account of the life of trapper John Johnston, Jeremiah Johnson is not, you’ll be pleased to learn, a cannibal (which doubtless distinguishes him from the predominance of the Hollywood elite). The real Johnston was not nearly as reluctant as Jeremiah to kill Crow Indians, and much less peaceable in disposition towards them; he’d cut out and eat their livers (yeah, they killed his wife, but I’m not sure a proportionate response to said action is eating the murderers). There are various other inventions that come with the Redford-ising of the character – Johnson’s reluctant transgressing of the Crow burial grounds, and the actual man being less of a loner since he actively recruited other mountain men to his cause – but the part about assassins being sent after him appears to be true. Jeremiah Johnson isn’t a revisionist western exactly, then, but it’s definitely a post-Wayne one.

Perhaps where the picture scores most highly is in early scenes of Johnson surviving it alone and making all manner of novice errors (amusingly lighting a fire beneath a snow-laden tree). It’s a quirky testament to just how difficult the romantic vision of getting back to nature, off the grid, would be in practice; the various waifs and strays and loonies encountered along his way evidence that such a lifestyle – particularly solo – is for the dedicated few, unless they’re willing to carry others’ weight. Johnson’s distinctive survival skills eventually make him somewhat legendary, helped by a case of mistaken scalping identity (this is important, because in fairness to the movie’s critics, Redford doesn’t exude mythmaking; essentially, he wants to be liked too much). In that sense, voices suggesting Dances with Wolves would have been perfect for Redford are probably right, and conversely too that Costner (who is nevertheless fine in Dances, if over sincere at times) would have been a better fit for the loner Johnson, since Costner’s happy not to be.

Dances with Wolves is painstakingly conscientious towards portraying the Native Americans positively. Jeremiah Jonson not so much. Pollack offers our hero initial affability, complete with wife Swan (Delle Bolton), given to him by the Crows who eventually become his enemy. Things take a turn when he leads a rescue party through their burial ground – and then, in his hurry to get home, returns through it solo – and he discovers that, in revenge for his sacrilege, his wife and “adopted” son have been slaughtered. He attacks and kills a Crow hunting party – barring one who spreads the word – and must then deal with assassins, whom he repeatedly bests.

Del Gue: Lucky they were Crow. Apaches would have sent fifty at once.

Some reviews have made out – notably Pauline Kael’s – that this is an overt mission on Johnson’s part, but the film doesn’t really present it that way. True, he’s not in any hurry to make himself scarce, but following that initial revenge attack, he doesn’t expressly appear to be looking for trouble. This contrasts with Kael’s characterisation of his “going on a revenge rampage, killing Crows for the rest of the movie”. I wouldn’t argue with her appraisal of the general thrust of such romantic loner fare, however, whereby “In the guise of gritty realism, action films have become far more primitive, celebrating tooth-and-claw revenge in a manner that would have been unthinkable in early westerns, or even ten years ago”. I mean, that is what Milius is all about. Nevertheless, it’s notable that the trials by combat following the first – very messy and “uncool” – encounter, are presented as a montage sequence, one that seems to me to be directly challenging Kael’s position. This sequence should be the movie, according her charge, but Pollack shuns any such embrace.

Of course, Kael notably entirely misconstrued the final scene on first viewing – apparently because she hadn’t worn her glasses to the screening, although she doesn’t admit as much in the postscript to her published Reeling collection – as having Johnson give Paints-His-Shirt-Red (Joaquin Martinez) the finger in response to the latter’s peace gesture (Johnson actually returns Paints-His-Shirt-Red’s gesture). Kael’s also not completely fair to Redford’s performance (“The cool silence of the Coop [Gary Cooper] archetype implied depths. There are no depths in Redford that he’s willing to reveal; his cool is just modern existential chic…”)

Donnell Stoneman’s contemporary review of Dances with Wolves compared Costner’s performance with Redford’s here, and I think he’s closer to the problem that arises with Jeremiah Johnson, that “Redford, with his movie star good looks, has difficulty fitting into the natural environment”. For the most part, I don’t think that’s the issue; in fact, I think the negative star aura Donnell refers to works well in tandem with Bob’s massive beard. No, it’s when the Hollywood elements intrude – perhaps a consequence of the glib, tragi-comic previous Redford western, where it was germane as a commentary on those old Hollywood westerns – that Jeremiah Johnson feels like it’s drifting off course. The soundtrack from Tim McIntire and John Rubinstein is often just too jaunty for proceedings that should be more sombre or meditative (likewise, while Pollack may have called it his silent movie, such terms are relative, since he rarely simply allows the man in the environment to breathe long enough to inhabit that space; we’re quickly on to the next encounter or incident).

Most glaring in this regard is the signature star moment. On the pretext of Swan getting beard rash, sensitive Jeremiah proceeds to shave off the face fungus, so allowing a vision of the full unvarnished heartthrob audiences flocked to see (it’s akin to Brad flaunting his rooftop abs). It’s a shameless moment, and it’s one that comes in tandem with an often-schematic structure. It has been noted that Jeremiah Johnson goes down the mountain only to come up again, but that could be thematically resonant (I don’t think it is particularly, but it could be). Instead, what we get are a succession of grizzly-but-cosy companions for his journey, from old-hand eccentric Bear Claw (Will Geer), to temperamental Del Gue (Stefan Gierasch), to our loner reluctantly gathering a surrogate family in his wake (effectively-orphaned Caleb, played by Josh Albee, and Swan). The latter element comes on like a template for The Outlaw Josey Wales, so it’s a relief – in classical narrative terms – when they are dispensed with.

Del Gue: Keep your nose in the wind, and your eye along the skyline.

Many of Jeremiah Johnson’s scenes were apparently shot on Redford’s own Utah property (nice, if you can get it). He won’t enjoy being relocated to a megacity. The movie was a bit hit for the star, and it’s easy to see why. It straddles the territory of classic Hollywood storytelling but with a trendily, rougher-hewn, less overly romantic streak – despite also being overly romantic in its own way – common to the New Hollywood. As a consequence, Jeremiah Johnson hasn’t remained evergreen in the manner of many of its era, but it’s still an appealing picture. Mainstream but not too mainstream. I’d like to have seen the undiluted Milius version, though.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It’ll be like living in the top drawer of a glass box.

Someone’s Watching Me! (1978) (SPOILERS) The first of a pair of TV movies John Carpenter directed in the 1970s, but Someone’s Watching Me! is more affiliated, in genre terms, to his breakout hit ( Halloween ) and reasonably successful writing job ( The Eyes of Laura Mars ) of the same year than the also-small-screen Elvis . Carpenter wrote a slew of gun-for-hire scripts during this period – some of which went on to see the twilight of day during the 1990s – so directing Someone’s Watching Me! was not a given. It’s well-enough made and has its moments of suspense, but you sorely miss a signature Carpenter theme – it was by Harry Sukman, his penultimate work, the final being Salem’s Lot – and it really does feel very TV movie-ish.

As in the hokey kids’ show guy?

A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t think Mr Rogers could have been any creepier had Kevin Spacey played him. It isn’t just the baggage Tom Hanks brings, and whether or not he’s the adrenochrome lord to the stars and/or in Guantanamo and/or dead and/or going to make a perfectly dreadful Colonel Tom Parker and an equally awful Geppetto; it’s that his performance is so constipated and mannered an imitation of Mr Rogers’ genuineness that this “biopic” takes on a fundamentally sinister turn. His every scene with a youngster isn’t so much exuding benevolent empathy as suggestive of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang ’s Child Catcher let loose in a TV studio (and again, this bodes well for Geppetto). Extend that to A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood ’s conceit, that Mr Rogers’ life is one of a sociopathic shrink milking angst from his victims/patients in order to get some kind of satiating high – a bit like a rejuvenating drug, on that score – and you have a deeply unsettli

Who’s got the Figgy Port?

Loki (2021) (SPOILERS) Can something be of redeemable value and shot through with woke (the answer is: Mad Max: Fury Road )? The two attributes certainly sound essentially irreconcilable, and Loki ’s tendencies – obviously, with new improved super-progressive Kevin Feige touting Disney’s uber-agenda – undeniably get in the way of what might have been a top-tier MCU entry from realising its full potential. But there are nevertheless solid bursts of highly engaging storytelling in the mix here, for all its less cherishable motivations. It also boasts an effortlessly commanding lead performance from Tom Hiddleston; that alone puts Loki head and shoulders above the other limited series thus far.

I'm offering you a half-share in the universe.

Doctor Who Season 8 – Worst to Best I’m not sure I’d watched Season Eight chronologically before. While I have no hesitation in placing it as the second-best Pertwee season, based on its stories, I’m not sure it pays the same dividends watched as a unit. Simply, there’s too much Master, even as Roger Delgado never gets boring to watch and the stories themselves offer sufficient variety. His presence, turning up like clockwork, is inevitably repetitive. There were no particular revelatory reassessments resulting from this visit, then, except that, taken together – and as The Directing Route extra on the Blu-ray set highlights – it’s often much more visually inventive than what would follow. And that Michael Ferguson should probably have been on permanent attachment throughout this era.

What's a movie star need a rocket for anyway?

The Rocketeer (1991) (SPOILERS) The Rocketeer has a fantastic poster. One of the best of the last thirty years (and while that may seem like faint praise, what with poster design being a dying art – I’m looking at you Marvel, or Amazon and the recent The Tomorrow War – it isn’t meant to be). The movie itself, however, tends towards stodge. Unremarkable pictures with a wide/cult fanbase, conditioned by childhood nostalgia, are ten-a-penny – Willow for example – and in this case, there was also a reasonably warm critical reception. But such an embrace can’t alter that Joe Johnston makes an inveterately bland, tepid movie director. His “feel” for period here got him The First Avenger: Captain America gig, a bland, tepid movie tending towards stodge. So at least he’s consistent.

By whom will this be rectified? Your ridiculously ineffectual assassins?

The X-Files 3.2: Paperclip Paperclip recovers ground after The Blessing Way stumbled slightly in its detour, and does so with some of the series’ most compelling dramatics so far. As well as more of Albert performing prayer rituals for the sick (perhaps we could spend some time with the poor guy over breakfast, or going to the movies? No, all he’s allowed is stock Native American mysticism).

Here’s Bloody Justice for you.

Laughter in Paradise (1951) (SPOILERS) The beginning of a comedic run for director-producer Mario Zampa that spanned much of the 1950s, invariably aided by writers Michael Pertwee and Jack Davies (the latter went on to pen a spate of Norman Wisdom pictures including The Early Bird , and also comedy rally classic Monte Carlo or Bust! ) As usual with these Pertwee jaunts, Laughter in Paradise boasts a sparky premise – renowned practical joker bequeaths a fortune to four relatives, on condition they complete selected tasks that tickle him – and more than enough resultant situational humour.

That’s what it’s all about. Interrupting someone’s life.

Following (1998) (SPOILERS) The Nolanverse begins here. And for someone now delivering the highest-powered movie juggernauts globally – that are not superhero or James Cameron movies – and ones intrinsically linked with the “art” of predictive programming, it’s interesting to note familiar themes of identity and limited perception of reality in this low-key, low-budget and low-running time (we won’t see much of the latter again) debut. And, naturally, non-linear storytelling. Oh, and that cool, impersonal – some might say clinical – approach to character, subject and story is also present and correct.

Damn prairie dog burrow!

Tremors (1990) (SPOILERS) I suspect the reason the horror comedy – or the sci-fi comedy, come to that – doesn’t tend to be the slam-dunk goldmine many assume it must be, is because it takes a certain sensibility to do it right. Everyone isn’t a Joe Dante or Sam Raimi, or a John Landis, John Carpenter, Edgar Wright, Christopher Landon or even a Peter Jackson or Tim Burton, and the genre is littered with financial failures, some of them very good failures (and a good number of them from the names mentioned). Tremors was one, only proving a hit on video (hence six sequels at last count). It also failed to make Ron Underwood a directing legend.

When I barked, I was enormous.

Dean Spanley (2008) (SPOILERS) There is such a profusion of average, respectable – but immaculately made – British period drama held up for instant adulation, it’s hardly surprising that, when something truly worthy of acclaim comes along, it should be singularly ignored. To be fair, Dean Spanley was well liked by critics upon its release, but its subsequent impact has proved disappointingly slight. Based on Lord Dunsany’s 1939 novella, My Talks with Dean Spanley , our narrator relates how the titular Dean’s imbibification of a moderate quantity of Imperial Tokay (“ too syrupy ”, is the conclusion reached by both members of the Fisk family regarding this Hungarian wine) precludes his recollection of a past life as a dog.  Inevitably, reviews pounced on the chance to reference Dean Spanley as a literal shaggy dog story, so I shall get that out of the way now. While the phrase is more than fitting, it serves to underrepresent how affecting the picture is when it has c