See Pitt as Jesse James
Brad as America's most notorious outlaw.
Here's a look at Brad Pitt as legendary Wild West outlaw Jesse James in the forthcoming Warner Bros. Western (with the unusually lengthy, but cool title), The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.
The movie, from Warner Bros. and Virtual Studios delves into the private life and public exploits of America's most notorious outlaw. As the charismatic and unpredictable Jesse James (Brad Pitt) plans his next great robbery, he wages war on his enemies, who are trying to collect the reward money - and the glory - riding on his capture. But the greatest threat to his life may ultimately come from those he trusts the most.
Andrew Dominik (Chopper) wrote and directed the movie which is based on the novel by Ron Hansen.
Pitt stars along with Casey Affleck, Sam Shepard, Mary-Louise Parker, Jeremy Renner, Paul Schneider and Sam Rockwell.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fffmedia.ign.com%2Ffilmforce%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F676%2F676616%2Fassassination-of-jesse-james-the-20051216104317001.jpg&hash=0208f129ed8e78b3ea4341a69a7dc91bdac449ae)
I remember the word was that Robert Duvall was also in this. I checked IMDB last week and saw he wasn't. Is this thread just confirmation?
Strange title.
I already saw this movie. It was called "American Outlaws". No, wait. I didn't see "American Outlaws".
Anyways, nice wheat.
How about an "insert your own caption" thing for what Brad might be thinking about in that picture.
a good western would be awesome. i don't know if this will be that film though, cause brad pitt's on a shit streak since the first Oceans film in my book (that was good, everything after not-so-much), but the title has balls.
Quote from: Ultrahip on December 18, 2005, 06:32:51 PM
How about an "insert your own caption" thing for what Brad might be thinking about in that picture.
You mean, besides Angelina?
Aside from Angelina, and aside from Cloon-dog's Lake Como villa.
Quote from: polkablues on December 18, 2005, 06:32:19 PM
Anyways, nice wheat.
yes, it's just the right height so i don't look suss when i stare.. :shock:
Short, awesome teaser available here (http://www.themoviebox.net/movies/2006/0-9ABC/Assassination-of-Jesse-James,The/trailer.php).
I'm really digging this whole generation of actors' lowkey siblings who are doing solid acting work like casey afflect and the culkin kids and virginia madsen.
I smell oscar. :yabbse-grin:
Warner Bros. publicity confirmed today that they're delaying Jesse James's release until early 2007. This is being done "due to Brad Pitt's shooting schedule for Oceans 13."
Something has to be wrong... either the film is not very good or there is some other issue. That film was intented for holiday season release.
'Jesse James' to be released in February
Still wondering when we'll see Brad Pitt as ? Producer Tony Scott promises it'll be worth the wait
By KEVIN WILLIAMSON -- Calgary Sun
HOLLYWOOD -- Moviegoers have been gunning to see Brad Pitt as outlaw Jesse James for more than a year.
And now director Tony Scott -- who produced The Assassination of Jesse James with his brother Ridley -- tells the Sun the dark, sprawling western, co-starring Casey Affleck as James' killer, will be released in February.
A few months ago, a minimalist trailer announced the duster, which was filmed around Calgary and Edmonton last fall, would be out in September.
Just weeks later, and rather unceremoniously, the project was bumped into the nether regions of 2007.
This sort of scheduling move usually indicates, at best, what a dark lord of the Sith might describe as a "disturbing lack of faith" on the part of the studio.
At worst, it's a portent of a deeply troubled production.
Not so, says Scott, director of such testosterone-fuelled actioners as True Romance and Man on Fire.
(Ridley's no slouch either, having helmed, among others, Alien, Gladiator and Blade Runner.)
"It's great. We have to be careful how we market it because it's like a Terrence Malick film," he says, referring to the legendary director of such visually sumptuous epics as The Thin Red Line and The New World.
"But it's really good and Brad's terrific in it -- he just gets better with age."
In addition to Pitt and Affleck, The Assassination of Jesse James also stars Sam Rockwell, Sam Shepard, Mary-Louise Parker and Zooey Deschanel.
Scott, an avid rock climber, is no stranger to Calgary, frequently coming here to shoot commercials for the overseas markets -- when he's not scaling mountains.
"I love it there."
Brad Pitt's 'Jesse James' comes under fire
Early cuts of Brad Pitt's 'Jesse James' have tested poorly, but Warner Bros. is sticking to its guns.
Source: Los Angeles Times
Every great western has a duel, and there's a showdown at the center of Brad Pitt's new movie about gunslinger Jesse James. The struggle hinged on the film's tone and length — at one point its running time was more than three hours — according to several people close to the production.
But running time wasn't the main issue. The thornier challenge was to come up with a cut of "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" that satisfied audiences and Warner Bros., the studio making and distributing the film. At one point there were competing versions — one from writer-director Andrew Dominik and another from producer and star Pitt, according to a person familiar with the making of the movie. It's unclear which version of the film will be released.
Warner Bros. only recently announced a Sept. 21 release date for "Jesse James," about two years after it was filmed. (In the time since, Pitt has had daughter Shiloh Nouvel and completed two other movies, "Ocean's 13" and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button." "Ocean's" will be in theaters more than three months before "Jesse James.")
Adapted from the novel by Ron Hansen, the film follows the last heist committed by James (Pitt), and Ford's (Casey Affleck) devoted and then vengeful relationship with the legendary outlaw.
Dominik, a New Zealand filmmaker who rose to prominence with the 2000 crime drama "Chopper" starring Eric Bana, wanted to deliver a dark, contemplative examination of fame and infamy, in the spirit of director Terrence Malick ("The New World"), according to several people familiar with the production. The studio, on the other hand, wanted less contemplation and more action, closer to Clint Eastwood's filmmaking style, sources said. (Dominik, Pitt and Affleck declined interview requests.)
Various versions of the film were assembled and tested, with Pitt, producer Ridley Scott ("Gladiator") and editor Michael Kahn ("Saving Private Ryan") either overseeing new cuts of the film or suggesting revisions, according to people familiar with the process.
Early test scores were poor, but some who have seen the film say the performances by Pitt and especially Affleck are among the best in their careers.
One otherwise favorable review of a research screening posted on the website http://www.aintitcoolnews.com said, "I see one serious problem with this film. A major studio made it. This film isn't for everyone. This isn't 'Tombstone,' it's not an action-packed Western."
In a statement last week, Warner Bros. said that the version being released this fall "is true to the source material and in keeping with the creative vision of its filmmakers. We do not comment on the internal creative process of bringing a picture to the screen, but the goal of both the studio and the filmmakers is to deliver the best film possible.... We are all very pleased with the picture we are bringing to theaters this fall."
Modestly budgeted at around $30 million, "Jesse James" is one of several Warner Bros. films facing problems in the editing room. Some half-dozen different cuts of the $50-million Bana-Drew Barrymore romantic comedy "Lucky You" have failed to wow preview audiences, and the studio is now cutting back on its marketing push for the film, which opens Friday opposite "Spider-Man 3," according to a person familiar with the production. The studio also has reshot approximately 50 pages for the Nicole Kidman movie "The Invasion," replacing original director Oliver Hirschbiegel with James McTeigue, with new screenplay pages written by Larry and Andy Wachowski ("The Matrix").
Yet as Warner Bros. knows, difficult productions do not always mean death at the box office. The studio (and some cast and crew) clashed with "Lake House" director Alejandro Agresti, but when it came out last summer, the $40-million film grossed more than $100 million worldwide.
Fuck it. I'll wait for the Director's Cut DVD in two years.
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Source: Entertainment Weekly
When writer-director Andrew Dominik first told his agent he wanted to adapt Ron Hansen's novel The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford for the screen, the rep responded, ''Jesse James — I can sell that. He's like Batman.''
Flash forward three years, 34 different cuts, and five test screenings, and Jesse James feels as close to Batman as Brad Pitt feels to Jennifer Aniston. Starring Pitt as Jesse James, the result is a contemplative art film about a rival outlaw (Casey Affleck) and his deadly fixation on one of America's most notorious bad guys. Set in the 19th-century Old West, the reported $30 million film centers on James' loose brotherhood of thieves, and Ford's obsession with entering the legendary train robber's inner circle. Sam Rockwell portrays Ford's older brother, who introduces him to James — an act that will have historic consequences.
The cast and crew, including oft-Oscar-nominated cinematographer Roger Deakins (Fargo), shot the film during the winter in Calgary and Winnipeg, where on some days the temperature plunged to -13. ''That's like throw-a-cup-of-hot-coffee-in-the-air-and-it-freezes-before-it-hits-the-ground cold,'' says Dominik, a New Zealand native who'd never before seen a frozen lake. But it was during the postproduction process that he really started to feel the chill. Warner Bros. was hoping for a good ol' gunslinger flick, and Dominik was pursuing an epic character study. Less than a month before Jesse James is set to debut at the Venice film festival (Aug. 29 to Sept. 8), the film is still not locked. ''The picture was supposed to be ready last fall and we weren't ready,'' says the director. ''So then basically you're waiting until the next fall. It's been arduous.''
But not without its good times. ''It was fun to be on a horse,'' says Affleck. ''It was great to learn how to ride better.'' Now they've just got to get this pony over the finish line.
I can't believe September the 8) th is just around the corner.
New Trailer here. (http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/2007/assassinationofjessejamesthe_026180/assassinationofjessejamesthe_trlr_02_1500_dl.mov)
i'm down.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmoviesmedia.ign.com%2Fmovies%2Fimage%2Farticle%2F815%2F815675%2Fthe-assassination-of-jesse-james-by-the-coward-robert-ford-20070824035927119.jpg&hash=c911c0f94ef2a13aea86e5d4f6fc16e0d8e5a271)
This looks amazing. I'm seeing it on Thursday. Don't let me down, awesome trailer!
it looks like willy wonka walked into the wrong poster.
Quote from: mogwai on August 26, 2007, 03:26:37 AM
it looks like willy wonka walked into the wrong poster.
and he's not happy about it.
Quote from: Hedwig on August 26, 2007, 03:33:33 AM
Quote from: mogwai on August 26, 2007, 03:26:37 AM
it looks like willy wonka walked into the wrong poster.
and he's not happy about it.
it's because he walked into a poster to a movie that didn't (hopefully) suck.
that's a really beautiful trailer. tailor-made for a spoilatar.
This movie is really good. It's also very PTA-ish, right down to the narrator who sounds a lot like Ricky Jay and the editing (by Dylan Tichenor). Also, Paul Schneider (from David Gordon Green's movies) has a pretty big part -- it's great to finally see him utilized so well.
The structure is really loose and meandering, but pleasantly so. And then it finally starts twisting towards its climax. And then it keeps going. It's really long, and very quiet and uneventful, but it really sucks you in and the time flies by.
I have a feeling that There Will Be Blood will completely eclipse this. But for the time being, I really love it.
New Trailer here. (http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1808724433/video/3915891/)
this will be an xixax favorite. it's the kind of movie (as many have said of The Fountain) that actually seems better to think about afterwards then when you're watching it. when i was watching it i was sometimes engrossed and sometimes thinking it was a little long. the cinematography and music are absolutely gorgeous. as ghostboy mentioned the narrator is definitely reminiscent of Ricky Jay (or Alec Baldwin in Tenenbaums), and the music actually reminded me a lot of Clint Mansell. this is definitely a non-western western, i think it is The Illusionist to 3:10's Prestige but this is actually better than 3:10. casey affleck so unbelievably disappears into this role, you believe it the moment he appears onscreen. he makes you completely uncomfortable and you spend the bulk of the movie thinking what a creep he is. 15 minutes from the end of the film are when you think it could end and it would have been a good film, but the final 15 minutes are what makes it a great film. SPOILERS i spent the whole movie basically hating Casey Affleck and in the last few minutes the film takes a turn where i feel so completely sorry for him and it got really really sad. i loved that. END SPOILERS so yeah, i'm netflixing Chopper soon and Dominik definitely steals the new-Malick crown from DGG who's moved onto other things.
you're sort of right. i'm happy i didn't write a review right after i saw this, cos i was ready to dismiss it as too long. i was probably going to mention how there a lot of great images and moments in this movie that are really weighed by not-totally-necessary scenes, but the bad stuff has sort of edited itself out of my brain and what lingers are those really excellent moments. pitt is good yeah, but the movie is not about him, he's as much a mystery at the end of the movie as he was in the beginning. affleck is the star here, a big bright, shining star. watching his character slowly reveal himself during the course of the movie is a pretty great thing. paul schneider is the bomb too.
so yeah i still don't know if it think its good or great (i think i was the same with the fountain - i decided it was just good). we'll see how it holds up over time but its definitely worth checking out.
Sorry, I haven't posted in sometime, but I float in and out of the site often, I really don't have much else to offer, it did feel long, but that feeling came & went, completely worthy of a theater viewing, wonderful elements across the board, I did think the script was uneven, but after a few days now, I still have may images and moments lingering in my mind.
Quote from: bigperm on September 24, 2007, 06:22:25 PM
I did think the script was uneven, but after a few days now, I still have may images and moments lingering in my mind.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdeepdiscount-content.vcommerce.com%2Fproducts%2F627%2F5785627%2Fmain-205.jpg&hash=1831e6eb61c72565b5fdea426b88f13bc729205b)
This film is phenomenal. I posted a review here (http://chetmellema.blogspot.com/2007/10/screenings-assassination-of-jesse-james.html) but it's not really the type of writing for the message board. Check it out and comment if you want.
The Malick comparisons are more than coincidental. The musical cues that Dominik uses to connect scenes and during montages I will swear is IDENTICAL to some of the cues used in Days of Heaven. Also, the Days-type-cues are present in the film during the time at the beginning when Sam Shepherd is in the film. As soon as he exits the film, so do the score cues. I found that to be a direct, and appropriate, homage to Days of Heaven. Some may see it as something else.
Regardless, please see this film.
overall, i liked it. casey affleck was the tits. he's always (clearly) been the better of the two afflecks. his performance and the fact that the story was strong/interesting enough distracted from the over-directing that was going on. guy had clearly been watching malick films and mccabe and mrs miller on a loop for a year. there were moments where the film has its own legs, moments that still stick out in my mind if i think about the film, but too often scenes were underscored by the narration and landscape shots that one couldn't help but make malick comparisons.
i never had a problem with the length of the film, but i think i was in the right mood for this one on that day.
yes, this was really good. It is VERY Malick esque. It is absolutely goregeous mostly do to an extraordinary mix of epic cinematography and perfect music.
p.s. finally saw the BLOOD trailer on the big screen. 20x better.
If I could write down my feelings, it would be most of what Ghostboy said and some of what Mod said.
I nearly missed this movie too. It's only playing at one theater, a Lefont about half an hour away, and it's out of the theaters tomorrow. But because of the timing, I had to go to the one at 6:40 -- middle of rush hour. It took me a whole hour to get there, and I was tire-peeling and flooring it to find the fucking theater, because I'm smart and don't like addresses. I had to ask someone, it was behind the shopping center. Anyway, I was running into the theater, and I hear, "WHY DON'T I OWN THIS?" Too bad, because I had to pee, and I knew the movie was looong. Missed the TWBB trailer, but I'd seen already...sigh.
Casey Affleck is INCREDIBLE in this. I don't care how good DDL is in TWBB, but Affleck's got my Xixax award (at least the nomination). He evokes such a sense of unease and nervous tension, not in the annoying Jeremy Davies way, but in the way of people you might know. Those who can't quite cope with being awkward or made fun of, but know that they are. His manner is SO compelling, it's truly incredible. The directing does a lot to make it work as well.
As for Brad Pitt's best performance? People will keep saying that and no one will give a shit. People said it with Babel. Personally, I think he peaked with Twelve Monkeys. He's never really been that immersed in his roles, always definitely just plain Brad Pitt with everything. However, I will give him that this role, this character is his best to date and that he shows more depth and brings interesting perspective to this character, more than he has in the past. Ok fuck it, it's his best performance.
And yes! Paul Schneider is really great in it, basically reviving that All the Real Girls character. Funny that Zooey is also in the film, however uselessly and briefly. I did have higher hopes for Sam Rockwell, I assumed he was always had some chops. Here, he's a bit overdone. Just a bit.
This movie makes want to run out and see Gone Baby Gone. I liked the movie, but I LOVED Affleck's performance.
The film is an incredible leap back to Western origins. It's about character and motivations, instead of gun battles or plot. The cinematography was very Malick-esque but what surprised me was how the performances were so interior. Pitt and Affleck rose to the challenge far better than I would have predicted.
I have mixed feelings about the middle section which could have been trimmed of unnecessary plot details, yet the film's length allowed for the characters and setting to resonate with me.
Probably my second favorite film of the year (so far), next to Zodiac.
I didn't think this was very good. It had some nice things (interesting story [told before], and nice long scenes - a treat these days), but overall I was disappointed (I'd been looking forward to it quite a lot). Normally I'd write a more coherent response but I'm tired so I'll just say a few things in no order.
The film claims to deconstruct western myths (a project that was already done better than this by films like MacCabe and Mrs Miller and Buffalo Bill and the Indians back in the 70s, and has been done better since), but it felt pretty much entirely inauthentic. The prettiness of the cinematography got in the way of a convincing period feel, and the mise-en-scene was so damn sparse, there just wasn't the accumulation of weight of things and meaning that would make me more convinced by the world it was showing me.
This wasn't helped by how obsessed with close-ups and medium-shots the director was - so much so that sometimes I didn't even understand the spatial relationships between characters. I didn't feel there was much intelligence behind the camera in terms of shooting style. People are comparing it to Malick, but Malick knows how to make interesting meaning with his framing and his editing. This felt a little like Control stylistically: nice to look at, but pretty empty. (and what was with the constant fuzzy vaseline effect? It got used so often, considering how cheesy pointless it was).
And the voice over... Well, I'd be interested to hear other people's views on it. Was it supposed to be ironically storytelling-y like one of the books Ford reads?: is that why it was so overly-present and stands in for images telling us things (as happens in good films)? To try to show the disparity between the myth and the truth (which the film as a whole doesn't do)? I thought so at first, because it seemed actually a bit detached from the action (he tells us James blinks all the time - he doesn't), but then there were other moments where things happened that were precisely acting out what the voiceover says. So... I don't know. All in all, I just wasn't very impressed.
EDIT: Looking back, I see that this is possibly the first time Ghostboy and I have ever significantly disagreed about a film.
As far as the narration goes, and I kinda hate comparing it, but it's a bit like Ricky Jay to me in Magnolia. And in that way, I think you hit a good point about it being narrated like one of the books Robert read. It has authority over the history, and therefore knows when irony occurs and points it out. And because of this it takes on an opinion about the whole situation, about Robert Ford. Mainly, as a tool, it works best for the ending, when it's trying to wrap up the guilt and betrayal and, really, the public opinion about Robert Ford in a timely manner. But now you've got me thinking, the more I think about it, the more Robert Ford really does become the subject, or victim, of one of these stories at the end. The narrator doesn't have any sort of empathy, if I remember right, as Ford clings to this pathetic legacy of his. And it's because the narrator sort of moves with the zeitgeist of the time and not the protagonist that I find this movie so interesting. This character that we've followed and perhaps empathized with is left completely washed up, even the narrator has turned on him. Again, I may be remembering the narration completely wrong.
I was suggesting more that the voiceover perhaps doesn't have authority over history - that it is spinning myths and legends in the same way as Robert's books, rather than telling us the truth. The irony therefore would lie in the disparity of meaning between the narration and the events: just small things, like the blinking thing (something that sets James apart, that would be used in his mythologising), which we don't really see much of.
I thought if this was the idea then that would be quite nice, and would somewhat excuse the excessive amount of v/o being used in place of showing and telling us things visually. But, as it is, I don't think that's how it was intended or the effect it had in the end, because we would often get images precisely detailing what the narration tells us. This all links in with what I think my basic problem with the film was - that, rather than debunk the myth of history and get to the messy authentic heart of the past, this film did feel like another work of mythologising itself. And maybe what I wanted from it was never the point, but I think it would have been a more worthwhile project (and I think it is what the film seems to tell us it's trying to do).
Quote from: modage on September 24, 2007, 10:18:45 AM
15 minutes from the end of the film are when you think it could end and it would have been a good film, but the final 15 minutes are what makes it a great film.
I immediately want to watch it again in the hope that the ending will have some kind of retro-active effect on the experience as whole.
I liked the choice of the frame-holds; their askew composition and staging complimented the film well.
The score was beautiful and offset the matter-of-fact dialogue nicely.
Roger Deakins is a master. On a technical level 2 shots stick out to me: the head on train approach and the first-person removal of Fords wet hands from his face.
deakins talks about shooting this and no country for old man (http://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynamic/October2007/QAWithDeakins/page1.php), including the train shot.
Thanks, Pete.
Spoilers throughout
i loved a lot about this film with two serious exceptions. one, really. the voice over needed to go, especially because it was so solid visually. I guess I did appreciate tidbits of the historical insight it provided, and if I had cut the film I would have used so little of it that I would have had to scrap the little that I did like because the remaining voice over would just end up being somewhat awkward historical interjections at odd intervals. i felt like the narrator was an astute film student explaining the film to the audience or reading the screenplay over the film.
it didn't piss me off until the very end, though.
the film slipped on a banana peel on the last motherfucking shot, or rather the lack there of. what the fuck was the director thinking? why was there only voice over? what the fuck? i was stunned. that line was so great-- it should have been shown. it killed the film for me. I would rather that the dvd had been irreparably damaged, causing the disc to freeze before the last few cuts. until that point, the film was a masterpiece, or at least very good in spite of the voice over. what made this last part so painful is that so much care went into the cinematography and mise en scene for the two hours and thirty-seven preceding minutes... the very end just felt so sloppy/lazy in comparison to the rest of the film.
Really? I really loved the way it ended, and the way it used the voice over and that final image to convey everything that wasn't shown. A masterful choice in my opinion!
HUGE FUCKING SPOILERS
Are we talking about the shot where ol' Casey is in the bar and those two guys come in, say their line, and then a closeup of him with the narrator explaining how he got shot in the neck? If that's not it, someone remind me, please.
I would assume that's it, yeah.
Spoilers
Quote from: Gamblour. on March 01, 2008, 08:10:08 AM
HUGE FUCKING SPOILERS
Are we talking about the shot where ol' Casey is in the bar and those two guys come in, say their line, and then a closeup of him with the narrator explaining how he got shot in the neck? If that's not it, someone remind me, please.
yeah, that's what i'm talking about. the wording of the narration was beautiful, but it really would have been great to see. it was as though the director didn't trust the audience to see what he saw in the story, and rather than attempting it he copped out.
SPOILERS
I dunno, I think it worked without seeing him get shot in the throat. The point was that his end had no glamour, and I think the setting of the place he was killed in conveyed that. At its worst, it's definitely not a cop out. It's a choice between showing it and not showing it, and I think not showing it works better for the story.
SPOILER
I loved the end. I love how the scene froze on the expression on Casey Affleck's face immediately before getting shot. I thought that conveyed so much about his character; it was such a revealing expression.
***SPOILERS***
sorry
yeah the end was perfect... when the last freeze-frame shot of RF came, i remember thinking; "yes, that's it! that's the last shot of the movie." i'd of been pissed/letdown if they followed with the actual death.
JESUS CHRIST THERE ARE A LOT OF UNMARKED SPOILERS.
it's a great movie. I don't think it is that mindful of other westerns, as in, following or breaking down or, as they've mentioned in so many reviews, "deconstructing" western conventions...etc. On the surface it does appear to focus on the celebrityhood of Jesse James vs. how he behaves in real life, but instead of the traditional compare and contrast, Jesse James actually becomes every bit as larger-than-life as his name suggests, just in different ways.
It seems more like a short story by Borges, or a slew of recent gunslinging short stories that I've read, where different things about the same subject spurred a different set of imaginations. I particularly enjoyed the overacting - how certain guys represented fear and how Brad Pitt played his monster. Charismatic monsters are always spectacular, and it's always good seeing Brad Pitt finding his footing in the crowd. The tension between the characters had a real presence, almost as a character on its own.
AND Brad Pitt's jacket is out of control.
SPOILERS
The major scenes of violence are all Jesse related. He pistol whips the train treasury man, beats up the kid and shoots Ed. Then we see Bob kill Jesse's cousin (as an ode to what he and Jesse have in common) and him kill Jesse.
It would have been out of place to show the violence at the end. The movie only reserved that for Jesse and Jesse' associations. It was almost as if Bob didn't earn the final act of violence to be shown.
I agree that it's almost like bob doesn't deserve a glamorous death, but I don't agree with the more metaphysical assertions such as bob killing the cousin as an ode. I don't think that's why Bob did it.
Obviously the situation called for action and he reacted on that. The only reason I refer to it as an ode is that it was the last thing separating Bob from Jesse (in Bob's head at least). Bob compared himself to Jesse in almost every facet, except he had never killed a man. Bob thought that was the final piece that made him into Jesse James and it's why, after Jesse makes fun of his comparison to himself, Bob finally decides to betray him.
It's a point of contention, sure, but that's how I read into it.
SPOILERS
Quote from: Raikus on March 25, 2008, 11:51:23 AM
SPOILERS
The major scenes of violence are all Jesse related. He pistol whips the train treasury man, beats up the kid and shoots Ed. Then we see Bob kill Jesse's cousin (as an ode to what he and Jesse have in common) and him kill Jesse.
It would have been out of place to show the violence at the end. The movie only reserved that for Jesse and Jesse' associations. It was almost as if Bob didn't earn the final act of violence to be shown.
i think that his death could have been done beautifully-- the narrator never really established himself as sympathetic to bob.
i woud have preferred to either see the same end scene sans voice over or see more, still without the voice over. it really bothered me that such a beautiful film rested on verbal narration right at the end.