I was very surprised when I saw that "Wild Rovers" was written and directed by Blake Edwards. Edwards is more known for his comedies and occasional dramas...not westerns. Was he up to the task? Well, considering what sort of film it is, having a non-western writer/director is actually a very good thing!
Why would I say this? Because "Wild Rovers" is a totally deconstructed view of cowboys. Instead of the usual macho theatrics you see in a western, this one is much more like the lives of REAL cowboys....their dull and somewhat pointless lives. In the film, the guys work hard, get paid little, visit prostitutes, fight because they are bored, puke, and die young...like a real cowboy of the era. There's nothing romanticized about the men in this film and, if anything, they are a bit sad and pitiful.
In the story, two of these drifting cow punchers, Ross and Frank (William Holden and Ryan O'Neal) begin to question their lives and their futures. To escape this, they consider robbing a bank. After all, better to die this way than to die on the job. But if they follow through with their plan, it's pretty certain that it won't be easy and some folks will come gunning for them.
In order to maintain the realistic style of the film, Edwards does not rush the film at all. Instead, it's slow and deliberate. Additionally, the cinematography often helps to convey a sense of loneliness--with wide screen shots of the lonely prairie. It's lovely...but stark. This could make for a dull film (like "Heaven's Gate") but the writer/director seemed to maintain the proper balance of dullness, scope and the story itself.
So is it any good? Well, it's difficult to judge based on the IMDB reviews. They run the gamut...from those hating it, the indifferent as well as those who think it's a masterpiece. As for me, I really appreciated "Wild Rovers" because I used to be an American History teacher...and know Edwards' view of the west is far more realistic than 99% of the movies in this genre. Thoroughly exciting? No...but neither was life in the old west. Overall, very well made and well worth seeing provided you have an open mind and don't demand the usual western cliches and plot twists.
Why would I say this? Because "Wild Rovers" is a totally deconstructed view of cowboys. Instead of the usual macho theatrics you see in a western, this one is much more like the lives of REAL cowboys....their dull and somewhat pointless lives. In the film, the guys work hard, get paid little, visit prostitutes, fight because they are bored, puke, and die young...like a real cowboy of the era. There's nothing romanticized about the men in this film and, if anything, they are a bit sad and pitiful.
In the story, two of these drifting cow punchers, Ross and Frank (William Holden and Ryan O'Neal) begin to question their lives and their futures. To escape this, they consider robbing a bank. After all, better to die this way than to die on the job. But if they follow through with their plan, it's pretty certain that it won't be easy and some folks will come gunning for them.
In order to maintain the realistic style of the film, Edwards does not rush the film at all. Instead, it's slow and deliberate. Additionally, the cinematography often helps to convey a sense of loneliness--with wide screen shots of the lonely prairie. It's lovely...but stark. This could make for a dull film (like "Heaven's Gate") but the writer/director seemed to maintain the proper balance of dullness, scope and the story itself.
So is it any good? Well, it's difficult to judge based on the IMDB reviews. They run the gamut...from those hating it, the indifferent as well as those who think it's a masterpiece. As for me, I really appreciated "Wild Rovers" because I used to be an American History teacher...and know Edwards' view of the west is far more realistic than 99% of the movies in this genre. Thoroughly exciting? No...but neither was life in the old west. Overall, very well made and well worth seeing provided you have an open mind and don't demand the usual western cliches and plot twists.