Western Retrospective – The Ox-Bow Incident Review

Hi, this is Dan Gilbazan, and you're listening

to the Geekcast Radio Network. Hello and welcome

to episode 259 of the Cinema Geeks. I'm one of

your Cinema Geeks optimists, Solo, and joining

me as usual is the Comic Concierge. Hello, Dan.

Hey, how's it going? It's going well. We are...

back into the wild west so continuing our western

retrospective today with a new block i guess

we call it we're going into the quote -unquote

revisionist westerns and like we kind of alluded

to a little bit at the end of last episode we

are traveling across time here with this block

the revisionist westerns that we've selected

span 80 years just about we're going to start

with one here in the 1940s and we're going to

have one that gets all the way into the 2020s

so it's going to be interesting yeah it's going

to be interesting to kind of look at all of these

and you know we've talked about how quite a few

of the westerns we have covered so far in the

variety of the blocks that we've kind of listed

out have done different things with like the

stereotype of what a western is or isn't and

and we've seen some stuff that kind of goes against

the norm i so so to speak but i'm going to be

interested to see like when we get into these

why these are kind of called revisionist westerns

and kind of how that differs from maybe some

of the ones that we've talked about a little

bit where um then you know obviously some of

the spaghetti westerns are different than some

of the john wayne films and you know we've had

some a variety of conversations about you know

the main protagonist and the heroes anti -heroes

and things of that nature but i'm intrigued to

get into this one especially after um watching

the first one up here so remind everyone dan

what was your experience with this whole block

in general and then the oxbow incident specifically

so some of these i have seen uh three of them

it's like half i have half i have wow half i

have and half i have not this was the first one

i have not seen this honestly before this i don't

think i actually even heard of this film before

i just found it doing research as we were trying

to put this retrospective together saw it was

kind of within the framework of a revisionist

western and figured hey it's perfect for this

block so it's interesting because i think revisionist

westerns you often think like Some of the older

films we'll talk about, like Unforgiven later

on, but considering this was during the height

or even as Westerns were gaining popularity,

intrigued to discuss how it fits into that type

of category. Absolutely. So before we can get

into too much discussion, as we usually like

to do, we're going to let Dan lay the groundwork

and give us some facts about 1942's The Oxbow

Incident. So pay attention to the facts. There's

a quiz later, and then we'll be back to share

our opinions. Oh, so like 12 angry cowboys, because

this week we continue our Western retrospective

with a look at the Oxbow incident directed by

William A. Wellham and starring Henry Ford. The

story takes place in 1885, Nevada. Two cowboys,

Gil Carter, played by Henry Ford, and his friend,

Art Croft, arrive in the town of Bridger Wells.

They discover that a local rancher, Kincaid,

has supposedly been murdered and that his cattle

have been stolen. Angry townspeople quickly form

a posse to track down the alleged killers. Gil

and Art will luckily join them, hoping to prevent

the situation from getting out of control. The

posse eventually encounters three men camped

near Oxbow. Donald Martin, a quiet family man,

Juan Martinez, a Mexican -American, and Alva

Haldwick, an older man. The men have cattle that

appear to belong to Kincaid. Although they insist

they purchase the cattle legitimately, the posse

assumes they are the murderers. The posse's leader,

Major Tetley pushes the three men to be hanged

immediately. Some members of the group, though,

do object, arguing that there's no real proof

that these men are guilty and there should be

a proper investigation. Gil and Art are among

those that recognize that something is terribly

wrong, but they're unable to stop the majority.

As the night progresses, Donald Martin reveals

that he has a wife and children. He writes a

final letter to his wife, which he gives to Gil.

before the men are executed. The next morning,

the posse returns home. They then discover that

Kincaid has not been murdered he's actually alive

the cattle that were found but the three men

were not stolen at all they were legally purchased

revelation exposes the horrific mistake the mob

had made the men were wrongfully executed based

solely on suspicion and the desire for immediate

revenge film ends with gil reading martin's final

letter which reflects on the tragedy and the

moral responsibility of those that participated

the ending emphasizes the film's central message

once a mom Mob abandons evidence, law, and individual

conscience. Innocent people will and can die.

Director William A. Wellham became fascinated

with the novelization and wanted to adapt it.

The problem was that essentially every major

studio he approached rejected the project. The

story was bleak. The content of lynching didn't

really resemble the action -oriented westerns

that were popular at the time. Wellham eventually

bought the rights himself for almost $6 ,000,

and then took the project to 20th Century Fox,

where the film was eventually made. Interesting,

Gary Cooper was initially offered the role of

Gil Carter, but turned it down, allowing Fonda

to take the part. Fonda was happy to take it,

as he called it one of his favorite roles his

entire career. A lot of the sets you see in the

Oxbow Incident are actually reusing old sets.

That's because this was made during World War

II, and there are a lot of restrictions on moviemaking.

Specifically, they can only spend... A lot of

the sets you see within the film are actually

reusing old sets. That's because this was made

during World War II and there are a number of

restrictions on filmmaking. Specifically, they

could only spend $5 ,000 on new material, so

they had to find a way around it. And it seemed

to be successful as this was well received by

critics pretty unanimously, even receiving a

Best Picture nomination, which it lost to Casablanca.

Despite its critic reception, it wasn't a big

hit at the box office. probably because it was

darker, grittier, and didn't necessarily have

the action people were used to. It only made

around $750 ,000 at the box office, which was

slightly more than its budget, but it did eventually

turn a profit because it did seem to find an

audience overseas. But what do Kevin and I think?

Back to us to discuss. All right, now everybody

has the facts. Like I said, there may or may

not be a quiz later on. uh even if it's just

in my imagination so uh dan getting into the

oxbow incident here from 1942 uh obviously a

main vehicle for henry fonda amongst others that

we'll get into but i wanted to kind of open it

up with the the following question i guess to

get things rolling this is definitely a western

where the actual action is almost secondary to

the moral question or the moral dilemma of justice

slash revenge slash mob mentality, what people

are willing to do when, and if they think they're

justified and things of that nature. So, uh,

seeing that it's really based on, I guess, this

moral push and pull or tug of war dilemma did

the overall dilemma that they're presenting us.

to us work for you and after watching this was

it pretty clear why this is considered more of

a revisionist western and kind of just to give

you a third option because you kind of mentioned

it right a little bit ago before the facts that

this is coming out in 1942 and we oftentimes

think revisionist is something that's coming

out later so is this more of a blueprint for

future revisionist westerns or kind of how do

you kind of correlate all of that yeah it's a

lot of good questions there and i think the the

main one regarding was this you know an intriguing

quandary to investigate like in the sense that

they keep my interest this idea where we're seeing

men put on trial if you even want to call it

that and just the idea of mom mentality what

it means i felt it was very engaging and It's

opera -provoking, if perhaps a bit obvious with

its messaging. But I also think within that,

you know, you could see it's going for something

very universal. And it's not necessarily, if

we go to like an earlier film we talked about

with like High Noon, where it was clearly making

a reference to, you know, the rise of McCarthyism

and the Red Scare, things like that. You could

honestly think like this was doing something

very similar, but this came out. not not even

during the cold war this was being made as world

war ii was going on so i was trying to think

was it trying to reference anything specific

at the time per se obviously you had a patriotism

was at its highest so i don't know if it was

trying to say anything in reference to that but

i think it was just going for more of a universal

truth that isn't really to a specific time just

that need desire that so many people have for

immediate justice whatever that may be to people

just the idea of kind of vindication or vengeance

really and we see vengeance a lot throughout

westerns many westerns i mean there's legitimately

like you know we could have done a block of revenge

westerns and there's there's plenty of them And

I think this is certainly showing the other side

of it. And I think it does certainly fit the

mold of revisions of Western. And it does give

future films, I think, not even within this Western

genre, but it's hard not to think of, you know,

12 Angry Men, which I'm like, did that, which

came out like a decade after this. And I don't

know if it was that. That was a play beforehand,

so I don't know, like, which one came first.

But anyway, I think it certainly was able to

do both. I think it was able to be revisionist

Western compared to so much things at the time,

but also even more so as that genre continued.

And it stands, I think, even further apart from

so many Westerns that have come later as well.

It's, you know, in its construction and how it's

executed. So I was rather impressed with it.

Even in its simplicity, and even if it is a bit

heavy -handed with its message, I felt at least

the point it was making was well done, and I

was actually quite shocked with the links it

went to by the end. But what are your thoughts?

Do you think it fits Revisionist Western, and

were you engaged with it compared to maybe something

like High Noon, which I know you weren't able

to connect with on that level? Yeah, so... it's

interesting because you know we've toyed around

with like westerns that we've covered that went

against the type i guess we've we've made slight

arguments about certain ones where we thought

you know this goes a little bit against what

you know what we think of in our head or what

the stereotype is or the trope or this type of

stuff i think this one though like really solidifies

what revisionist means i guess in my head The

other ones might have had some elements that

weren't expected or played with a little bit,

but this one really comes out and does everything

completely unexpected and different than what

you're anticipating. It's not this... Yes, it's

dealing with something that's existing in the

West. We're dealing with frontier justice, I

guess, for lack of a better term. That's basically

what this is all about. but we're not going on

some grand adventure you know there's no not

really a chase like yes they're they're tracking

somebody down but yeah there's not this big action

sequence there's not a chase there's not you

know we're not dealing with any type of um like

romantic romantic angle we're not dealing with

uh a hero that's going to march in and save the

day you know there's nothing there's none of

those types of things happening in this film

and you know a lot you know a lot of the other

stuff is removed too like you know we're not

dealing with cattle we're not dealing with native

americans really we're not dealing with uh a

lot of that stuff like you know stagecoaching

and i mean yes it's in the west so you're gonna

have like some of that stuff kind of subtly in

there but like we're really not dealing with

any of that it's it's all about a group of individuals

like 12 angry men is a great call out for sure

like it's it's really talking about that mob

mentality like even for me more than justice

or revenge like yes those are are big players

but it's more about like when you have a group

of people here like do you listen to the loudest

voice is anybody willing to stand up against

it you know if it's you know, do the, the majority

outrules the minority when it comes to, you know,

the debate and what we should do and what we

shouldn't do. Like all of those elements is like

really what we're dealing with. And it's kind

of framed in an interesting way here because

of our, I guess our, our angle into this story

is really through Gil and art. which is Henry

Fonda and Harry Morgan's characters. It's not

like what we're used to growing up where they

put the child actor in there to give the child

a way to see this. But we really see Gil and

Art coming in here. Yes, they know everybody

involved, but they're really coming in somewhat

in that outsider feel where they know everybody,

but they're kind of along for the ride. specifically

connected or invested wholly in anything. So

it's kind of interesting that we kind of come

in through their viewpoint and their perspective

as we kind of get to know the rest of the group

and hear all the different conversations and

the discussions. And then you're wondering, obviously

at what point will they be okay or not okay with

continuing to be the outsiders or will they assert

themselves? We obviously have a few characters

along the way that are trying to turn the tides

in one way or the other and kind of how that

dynamic works. So I like all of that. Those are

the types of things I like when we kind of get

down to, yes, it's not like a tiny cast, but

we basically have a small group of folks that

we're really getting to know. We're learning

about their character and we're really getting

to see the dynamics of the discussions, the debates.

So all of that stuff is pretty up my alley. I

think the only two nitpicks I might have, and

I don't even think they're nitpicks. You do mention

that it's a little heavy -handed, right? We do

get that. Even the fact that they have this letter

that is written by one of the characters that

they decide to read towards the end, which really

is not necessary, I guess. from my perspective

i mean maybe it puts a little bit more of an

emotional pull for some folks but it just kind

of really yeah it gives you some exposition that

you already have put together um it was that

it was good the guy can write a letter you know

it's yeah you gotta give him credit i mean that's

so there was a little bit of that and then there

was a little bit of i don't know i don't know

if it it's sort of easy to tell where we're going

here yeah you know what i mean not that that's

a good or a bad thing i'm not saying it takes

away from the movie but i don't really see there

like there's no really twist like you kind of

know what's happening yes you're hoping that

like some things could change or could happen

but like you kind of see where we're going which

is fine and the movie is definitely not going

to leave you feeling uplifted at the end yeah

honestly like i I did wonder if they would go

all the way with it, just thinking of, like,

the time frame and just the, you know, you had

the Hays Code at the time and limitations so

many movies are under. So I did wonder if they,

like, I was actually thinking, okay, well, something's

going to happen at the end, or, like, they're

going to get to the point where they're going

to hang them, but then they'll be saved. You

know, because going to 12 Angry Men, not to spoil

that movie for people, but that... That goes

the other way. So I had that in the back of my

mind. So I was a little bit surprised that it,

like, they ended up actually going through it

all the way. Now, once, you know, how it then

goes from there and you find out they're not

actually guilty, that I could see coming for

sure. But I just, more so just because of the

timeframe period, I just assumed it would go

for. I guess I didn't consider that. Maybe I

was so wrapped up in it that I was like, well,

this is exactly what's going to happen. These

people are going to do something, and then they're

going to find out they're wrong, and it's going

to be too late. You definitely were right there.

I've got to give the early 40s movies more credit.

I guess they will go to darker places than I

realized. But I was left with... A feeling of

despair at the end of this, like there's not

much feel good moments in the, in the final act

for multiple reasons. It's not just what happens

to like our main dilemma. There's some, some

other stuff that happens in like the fallout

from that, that also is not great. And it's like,

it's, it's one of those that you probably don't

want to have this be a date movie. not that you

would pick a western from 1943 to watch with

the first date that's what all the kids are doing

nowadays i would i would suggest against it for

the one person out there that maybe thinks it's

a good idea i wouldn't do that there's some sort

of tiktok trend going on where you know they're

going to the oxbow incident dressing up as a

cat or something yeah i don't know that's crazy

um so i was curious a little bit like as we kind

of get into the um the small group setting and

the individuals that we have i was curious kind

of if anybody stood out for you obviously we

have like we talked about we have the main two

that we're kind of following with art and gill

and then we have the trio of folks that has been

accused of this we have the posse that has come

after them which is an assortment of interesting

characters right like we have the main person

who is connected to this Larry Kincaid who's

definitely out. He's born first and foremost

out for vengeance, right? Yeah. Like he seems

the most connected and the most affected by this

and he, and he wants justice in his own way.

Then you have like the major who may be out for

vengeance or may just be really trying to harness

power that he thinks he has to like, yeah. force

everybody into what he thinks he's gonna what

needs to be happen you have his son who's an

interesting character you have the kind of the

older gentleman of the town who's trying basically

spending the whole movie trying to talk everybody

out of doing this and saying you need to you

know wait for the sheriff we have the the deputy

who is obviously not a great guy um yeah who

is leading the posse and trying to make them

feel like it's all legal even though he doesn't

have the authority to do that we have this ma

Greer, who is a character all in of itself. What

did you think of this cast of characters? Was

there anybody that you were drawn to? Did you

feel like you were impressed by anybody? Was

there anybody that you were like, I could have

done without? Or what did you think about the

group that we have here? I think you did have

a good group of colorful characters that were

able to make their impression rather quickly,

so you have a good understanding of who they

are as people. pretty quickly paced film and

so you're not getting a huge amount of background

but do you think you get just enough to understand

like like you mentioned the colonel guy who it's

almost like stolen valor before stolen valor

was a thing uh jane darwell who played maul greer

like that's talking about things that are different

than because that type of character i don't think

we've ever seen before like you know this was

like a you know she's a woman that's being traded

treated just like any other guy and it's not

even it's not even like called out in a way it

was interesting like i thought that was a intriguing

choice and then you had like monty smith who

was like the guy doing like all the facial expressions

when they when it comes to hanging he would uh

he was quite the character as well so i don't

think there's anyone that stood out that didn't

necessarily like feel like they didn't have a

place or like i was annoyed like that i thought

you know everyone fit within the framework of

the story that they were telling but did anyone

not stand out to you in a bad way i don't know

if anybody stood out in a bad way i thought they

all fit the roles fairly well um i i was jane

darwell who plays ma greer who apparently was

the third person in that role like they had wanted

to cast somebody they cast their head to recast

it to somebody else who then got hurt on the

horse and then like it ended up with this individual

i did somewhat have a feeling that i had seen

or heard her somewhere before yeah i was looking

through it like i feel like i know her but i

can't think of what from and not necessarily

in this in the way that she is in this individual

movie like i think that is very unique like i

don't remember anybody else i've seen so far

in any of these older classic films who's kind

of playing this female but like one of the guys

but like also not like the starlet that you're

supposed to you know that anybody's supposed

to be attracted to or whatever like obviously

you know that's a whole different scenario and

and i think that was unique i did see that she

had been in like five shirley temple movies and

so my guess is like my subconscious remembers

like those from when i was a kid and and maybe

like some sort of like really like old memory

somehow is conjuring up is why i thought i saw

her before but um the another one that i definitely

recognized right away and this is the third film

now i've seen her in as watching through all

these classics was did you did you recognize

the wicked witch of the of the west i did not

so in the beginning um they're in the judges

judge tyler's house and the housekeeper Who is

letting them in is Margaret Hamilton. For some

reason, she never gets credited though. She was

uncredited in this film and she was also uncredited

in one of the Cary Grant films that we saw where

she was the adoption agency or something, or

she was somewhere. I can't remember which movie

she was in, but she was in there somewhere. I've

seen her now like three times. Obviously she's

in the wizard of Oz. The other two films that

I've seen her in both times, she was uncredited,

but she has like a. unmistakable voice now yeah

that like i just can't not see the wicked witch

of the west so if you if you're if you haven't

watched the oxbow incident go ahead and watch

it and look for the wicked witch and she's in

there but um i didn't i did go ahead i would

say the other one that i couldn't i knew her

i knew him right away it was like harry morgan

who of course is in mash and dragnet and he was

in high noon as well of course so we saw him

not too long ago so that he's another one that

was like okay i know that face and i know that

that uh that interesting seeing him at a different

age though than what we're used to yeah that's

a little different yeah because he's i i just

picture him in mash and dragnet like that that

i guess i recognize him the most from dragnet

yeah yeah um also the the ma character apparently

was supposed to be or was originally supposed

to be may west But I don't remember if it was

the director or somebody. Somebody who wanted

to do this did not want it to be her. And he

had to fight against whoever owned the rights.

Like we said, you can't make it without it being

her. But somehow the director or whoever that

person was ended up buying the rights and then

was like, I'm going to do what I want to do with

it. So that was interesting. Also, Gary Cooper

apparently was the first person that was offered

the role of Gil Carter. yeah henry fonda ended

up but henry fonda i read that he did this at

scale like he didn't he didn't ask for any other

money apparently he had witnessed um a lynching

in his younger days oh wow like in real life

like saw it happen and and witnessed the whole

thing and so like something about this story

like he basically said like i'm gonna do this

and i'm gonna do it for like no extra money and

i think it was one of like his favorite films

that he ever did or the one he felt like the

the best about um which was interesting i was

curious dan are you surprised like it didn't

make a whole lot of money what did you like are

you surprised that this got made in 1943 i am

surprised it got made in 1943 because as we've

been saying and as much as this block is built

upon it is so much anti -everything westerns

were at the time right because there's is no

there's no action here it's like you know if

they made a superhero film today and it was just

about like instead of civil war being this fight

it was a court case it was a courtroom trauma

uh i mean that could i i might enjoy that but

i don't know if their general public would and

like that's kind of what this was it wasn't a

courtroom but it was you know it was certainly

taking there's barely any gunfights a little

bit of horseback the tension is all about decision

making which is not you know it's hard to sell

that in a trailer really so yeah i could i could

understand why it wasn't and i know you know

the director who made it really wanted to do

it and he had a whole lot of uh challenges getting

it made to the as you mentioned he had to buy

the rights to it just for that to happen and

so i could i could see but also make sense that

it also did better overseas who because i think

foreign audiences might have been a bit more

open to a movie like this so yeah i i am shocked

this got made because it uh it's it's i can't

think of anything at the time that that i have

seen or even in research comes close to like

this type of idea in a western especially with

stories like henry fonda who was of course like

he was you know big name at the time i'm also

surprised that like even with all of the other

like politics or civil rights or you know the

the bleakness of it aside like i'm surprised

that the money behind it was willing to i know

they didn't want to spend a whole lot but i would

have thought they would have been real worried

about people not coming out and watching this

like not spending money on it and it being like

not super well received but um i give them credit

everybody involved for like pushing it across

the finish line like i think that was impressive

for sure i did have another kind of question

about this whole journey that i was one want

to get your take on because we get this journey

that they're on as they're trying to locate these

three individuals and this posse is going after

them and at one point we come across uh a stage

coach or whatever you want to call it with this

rose who we were introduced kind of by name in

the original in the saloon where i guess we didn't

talk about all that but the whole idea that that

gil carter just like occasionally just needs

to like get his get in a fight to like wake up

and and get back on the Back on the straight

and narrow is an interesting dynamic, I guess.

But, you know, they do mention that he has some

connection to Rose and we come across her on

the road and she's, you know, been recently married,

I believe it was, or engaged or whatever it was.

Engaged, yeah. Engaged to this gentleman. And

it seems like an interesting segment of the film.

Do you feel like if you take that part out that

anything changes in the film? Or did you enjoy

that little kind of side plot? No, I don't think

much changes. If anything, I struggled a little

bit with better understanding Gil's character

in some ways. Not even just his motivations,

but they come to the bar and they mention how

they're strangers there. But it also seems like

people know them, too. The whole dynamic within

the town, I had a little bit of difficulty fully

grasping. And those scenes, I think, certainly

enhanced that. And I guess you could say that

it gives you a bit more insight into Gil's character.

I'm trying to think of maybe there's something

I'm missing regarding those scenes, what it's

supposed to be speaking towards. nothing necessarily

comes to mind i felt like like they introduced

her in that saloon sequence or whatever and then

they felt like for some reason they needed to

like tie that up with like having her be there

in real life at some point but like i i don't

know if i needed it necessarily like i guess

like it adds a little wrinkle to their journey

so it's not just like kind of boring as they

as they go across maybe like it adds a little

bit of a wrinkle but i don't know if i would

have been opposed to them just taking that part

out not that it i mean the movie's only 75 minutes

it's it's not like it made it drag on or anything

like that like it was a little detour i guess

but i was like oh that is kind of interesting

you do make a good point though with gill like

he is kind of hard to figure out especially in

the beginning because he's kind of coming in

almost like what we would get from like a shane

or what we would get from the like the spaghetti

westerns where it's like this mysterious figure

but then he has connections to the town and then

it's like he's connected but he's kind of like

on the outs yeah so it's like is it it's almost

again it reminds me of shane where it's like

the the cattle drivers and the or the you know

what i mean like the two different factions but

like because he's a what do they call him like

uh what do they call them in that movie rustlers

or whatever yeah yeah cattle rustlers and so

it's kind of weird to try to figure out because

he definitely comes in and you think that he

doesn't know people but then it's clear that

he does know and have history with some of the

people but i never quite put my finger on like

how exactly he fit in with this group and like

how long he had been there had he been there

once upon a time and then gone for a while and

then came back or like what what was the disconnect

between him and a lot of this this crew was a

little bit of a mystery but i don't know if it

necessarily affected anything about the film

or the viewing it was just something that i was

like wrestling with in my head about like how

he kind of fit into this puzzle yeah that's that's

where again like this is where not knowing i

didn't know anything about like what the story

generally was i thought it was going to be like

more about like his actions or his past or something

like that coming back and he's more of a kind

of general player in this game i don't know if

like that's part of it too is like giving you

this character that you think you're going to

exploit him tick and then he just becomes kind

of a viewer along with you so i don't know again

if that's just trying to circumvent expectations

or you know what the thought process could be

there or just To better understand. You show

him that maybe he's a bit more. Multi -dimensional

compared to some of these. Other individuals

that. Just are looking to you know. They're too

close to the incident. So maybe they don't have

perspective. Where he has lived more of a life.

And he's been able to maybe. You know he's not

as close to it. So he can kind of. Be a bit more

even keel. When it comes to decision making.

So perhaps again that's part of it as well. And

then them running into. rose maybe again perhaps

that's also just giving us showing us that there

are more people out there so they're just not

just going with the first people that they meet

to kind of lead them to the next destination

so it just could be part of like more of the

journey piece um but yeah like you said it's

not like it's it's it's not like it's overdone

it gives you a little bit more character but

it's not it's not where the strength of the movie

is by any means right another person i wanted

to ask i know you already touched a little bit

about the major and kind of the stolen valor

and some of that type of stuff but i was curious

with the dynamic between him and his son and

the role that his son plays in this and then

kind of the ultimate ending of their part of

this story what was your feeling on that segment

of the plot i think that like almost is the kind

of representing you know the the buzzword of

today like toxic masculinity before that was

even thing but i think kind of showcasing it

there like he hates his son because he's not

strong enough but i think it's the idea of what

is real strength and i think what you're seeing

there is bravado or you know false bravado and

i think his character represents every you know

all of that which again makes me wonder like

it makes it feel like this movie was designed

as a response to something like mccarthyism but

clearly it wasn't so it but i i thought I disliked

his character because I obviously was supposed

to, so that was certainly the case. What about

with his son and the part that he played? I think

his son... I thought it was a good way of just

showing that you don't have to be your father's

son. I think that's one thing I think this movie

does well. It gives you these little pieces to

the fact that this is like a moving, ongoing

world. There's a lot going on here. You don't

get all the story, but there's so many things

it hints to. Clearly they have a very challenging

relationship for whatever reason. We don't know

the whole story there, but something clearly

isn't clicking. They don't like each other. He's

a disappointment. And it just seems like his

son may be a bit more thoughtful and empathetic.

and if anything maybe you know that's what his

dad is too but he's too scared to embrace it

so this is he creates this character rather than

being who he is and his son is just a reflection

of the fact that that he doesn't like yeah he

doesn't like to see that part of himself yeah

exactly yeah i thought that was if you if you

had a different take or like what your thought

process on it was no i thought it was a good

um a good way to show it it's almost like um

a micro version of what's going on in the macro

i guess like we have we have the main story which

is being dealt with by people that are all kind

of representative of that major right like yes

he's kind of like leading the fuel but the deputy

is very much like that right like donald martin

is is like so blind by like his hate that or

his anger that like he's kind of like that so

it's like this whole mob mentality on a whole

is then also represented kind of just within

those two individuals kind of on a micro level

with their relationship in a way so it's kind

of interesting how like the two are somewhat

juxtaposing each other but like living alongside

each other as you kind of watch the story obviously

it leads to another depressing end as well you

know it's not enough that we just lynched three

individuals unjustly but you know we have to

involve suicide after that as well so it adds

to kind of some of that which is unfortunate

like but I guess I give the credit to the film

and the filmmakers for not shying away from it

as far as that goes I did find it interesting

too I like the fact that at one point they're

kind of in the camp and they're putting it up

for a vote it seems like like they're trying

to be democratic i guess for a split second of

like you know if you don't agree go walk over

on that line or whatever they said and or go

walk on that side if you don't support this and

then you know we'll let the majority rule which

they knew they never had to worry about because

there was a lot of people that were kind of just

gonna follow the leader or whatever the case

may be but i did like the fact that they did

add a few folks besides Like, obviously we get

the, I keep forgetting his name, but like the,

the older gentleman who's kind of Dave Davies

or something like that. He was kind of author

Davies. Yeah. He was the whole time trying to

go against this. Right. Like, so we knew he was

going to be over there. We have the, the chat,

the he's not, I don't know if he's an actual

preacher, but we have like the religious figure

in this who is also obviously going to be on,

on that side. We have Gil, we have art. And we

have the son of the major. They added a couple

other folks as well. Not very many, but two or

three. I think they ended up with seven or nine

or whatever it was. I like that they added a

few folks that weren't really obvious in that

respect because it would have been easy for them

to just put Gil, Art, the son, the preacher,

and the older guy. Those were the ones that were

vocal. It was nice to see that they had at least

got to a couple folks and convince them that

it maybe wasn't the right thing to do. I mean,

obviously it wasn't going to be good enough to

like change the outcome, but it was nice to see

that they've got to a few folks, but we still

kind of come across with this thing where even

Gil doesn't ultimately stop this, right? Like

you're, you're somewhat holding out hope that

he and art can like buck the trend and, and stop

this, but you know, they're greatly outnumbered

and things of that nature. So I do think it does.

decent job with carrying on that tension throughout

regardless of if you think you know what's happening

or not like there's still the tension going on

of what's going to happen anytime somebody speaks

out against this group and how are they going

to act and what the consequences are going to

be and things of that nature like we have the

one individual the the mexican uh as it says

in the the credits i guess um who who tries to

run at one point and get shot like so i do think

that the story does a good job of holding the

tension throughout yeah and i actually really

like that scene where they do you know bring

it to a vote and there's not a lot said it's

just like it's very quiet and you get a lot of

like slow camera pans and one thing we didn't

talk about like this is all obviously on on a

set like this is on location we've had in movies

like shane which were clearly on location where

this is you know especially because of when it's

being made during world war ii it's all on this

very limited set and it's a set that feels like

a set but i think it still works and they they

use the best they use the space as best as they

can and i think that scene is one of the best

examples of it as we like slowly pan through

all these individuals you see just the faces

and the almost like no one's very sure about

the decision that they're making. But the fact

that, again, it's showing that this was not,

you know, this was a decision that took its time.

Like there, you know, it's taking its time to

show people coming through their conclusions.

And I thought that was very, one of the best

scenes in the film. So, yeah, absolutely. Dan,

any final thoughts about the Oxbow incident and

our first foray into the revisionist Westerns?

No, I think it definitely shows that I would

qualify this as a revision. Wow. Revision is

Western for sure. And I think it's also like

a Western. You could show someone who's not typically

a Western fan that might actually enjoy it since

it is kind of outside the norm. Just not on a

date. Yeah, just not on a date. No, just give

them a heads up. If they're not in a good mood

and they want to pick me up, not the movie to

choose for that. I guess wait till they're in

a good mood and ruin it? I don't know. I guess.

Got to be in the right mindset for sure. So,

Dan, we're going to jump 26 years into the future.

What is your experience with Butch Cassidy and

the Sundance Kid? So, yeah. Butch Cassidy and

Sundance Kid is one of the first Westerns I've

ever seen. And for those longtime listeners,

back when we did our top 100s, it was... you

know it's in my it was in my top 10 favorite

films of all time or within within that range

so it's a movie i love just spoiler alert give

my thoughts but it's also been a i've never talked

about it before and i'm really curious to see

what you think of it too so especially now that

i've seen so many different westerns if like

my opinions change with that that knowledge compared

to you know seeing it more with very fresh eyes

to the genre so what what do you have what how

about you have you seen this is this a was this

a brand new watch for you yeah this is on my

list of shame and it's been there forever obviously

but it's this whole block until we get to Unforgiven

is first time watches for me so I'm and this

one out of maybe most like there were certain

ones when we were talking about doing this retrospective

that I just was like I'll finally have a chance

to watch this one and that one right like yes

we're gonna we do the research and we come up

with all these other titles that we're gonna

cover ones we've never heard of ones we're like

somewhat vaguely familiar but there's like those

ones that you're just like yep this is uh gonna

help me cross off some list of shame movies and

i feel like butch cassie and the sundance kid

was probably at least one of the three to five

films that i was like most looking forward to

like watching when the good the bad and the ugly

was up there butch cassie and the sundance kid

was for sure up there so I am definitely looking

forward to this first time watching to see, like

you said, watching all these other ones and now

kind of after Oxbow is in an incident and seeing

like what a revisionist Western looked like,

you know, almost three decades later is going

to be interesting. I will say it should hopefully.

be a bit more uplifting, not to spoil it in some

ways, but it's, you know, it's hard not to be.

So there you go. I can't get much dour, more

dour than the Oxbow incident. That's for sure.

So I'm curious what your guys' thoughts of the

Oxbow incident are or any of the other films

that we have covered. Dan, how can people reach

out to us on the internet or different things?

You can find me on Comic Con tiers on most super

superhero, geez, social media platforms. I've

actually started doing TikTok videos again. It's

been a while. Uh, and, and they're also on Facebook

and Instagram. Also the, uh, channel for cinema

geeks podcast is on Facebook as well and Instagram.

So hopefully I'll be getting more stuff up there

too. So check it out there. And of course, uh,

key cast radio or GCRN .com. We can find the

episodes post there too. And Dan, I didn't know,

but we're also on YouTube. Yeah. They are also,

and I think we get. we got a few comments there

so yeah if you're doing that sorry if we missed

it uh but hopefully if you're enjoying our dulcet

tones on youtube you know maybe maybe that means

we need to step up the video game and the video

yeah geez superheroes and video games i like

it i like where we're going here dan the the

video podcast one day maybe one day who knows

yeah yeah i apologize for those that are tuning

in a youtube that get no visuals but you can

still listen and and you can definitely comment

and we'll we'll try to reply to those just like

we would anything else that you guys leave for

us in any of the other methods so you can also

reach out to me at optimus solo on most of the

social media outlets as well so that does it

for this episode tune in next time for another

chance to listen to more of the cinema geeks