Directed by: Delmer Daves.
Written by: Russell S. Hughes & Delmer Daves based on the novel by Paul Wellman.
Starring: Glenn Ford (Jubal Troop), Ernest Borgnine (Shep Horgan), Rod Steiger ('Pinky' Pinkum), Valerie French (Mae Horgan), Felicia Farr (Naomi Hoktor), Basil Ruysdael (Shem Hoktor), Noah Beery Jr. (Sam, Horgan Rider), Charles Bronson (Reb Haislipp), John Dierkes (Carson, Horgan Rider), Jack Elam (McCoy, Bar 8 Rider), Robert Burton (Doctor Grant).
Not
long ago I reviewed the 1954 Western Broken Lance as part of this series, and
said it owed a great deal to Shakespeare’s King Lear. Now, I come to Delmer
Daves’ 1956 film Jubal – which owes a lot to Shakespeare’s Othello. Themes of
sexual jealousy are nothing new, but it certainly was for the Western genre
back in the 1950s. This is usually the genre of good guys, and bad guys, savage
Indians, and the men who won the West. Jubal is more intimate Western than that
– basically a four character drama, with some background characters thrown in
for good measure. It is a fascinating Western, if not quite a great one. My
biggest wish is that they put the Othello character at the center of the movie,
and made him more complex. Instead, the title character of Jubal isn’t the
Othello character at all – he’s Cassio.
Jubal
Troop (Glenn Ford) is crossing the mountain, and nearly freezes to death when
he is discovered by Shep Horgan (Ernest Borgnine) – a local cattle baron. He
takes Jubal in, feeds him, clothes him and offers him a chance at a job. When
Jubal proves himself better than anyone else Shep has, he even makes Jubal the
foreman. This doesn’t sit well with Pinky (Rod Steiger), who is used to being
top dog. What sits even worse with Pinky is that the bosses’ wife Mae (Valerie
French) is making eyes at Jubal – eyes she used to make at him. The good
hearted, naïve Shep doesn’t know what type of woman he is married to – but
Pinky is there to start planting the seed of doubt in his mind about his wife
and Jubal – even though Jubal has rejected all of her advances, and when they
were offered to him, Pinky did not.
The
performances are the real reason to see the movie – they help to add complexity
to roles that could have been rather one note. I’ve always found Glenn Ford to
be a rather underrated actor – perhaps because he is always so understated in
his performances. As Jubal, he plays a simple man, who wants to be left alone
and go about his job. He likes Shep – and feels loyal to him, too loyal to
simply get up and leave which is probably the smartest thing he could have
done. Ernest Borgnine is the most sympathetic character – a big, naïve, lovable
lunkhead, who cannot see what is plain to everyone else around him. I do wish
he was given slightly more complexity – and that he didn’t go from trusting to
murderously angry quite so quickly – but this is the type of role Borgnine was
born to play, and he does so well. Rod Steiger makes a good Iago – his is
easily the best performance in the movie (it is, after all the best role), as
he spews his poison at anyone who will listen. The movie even finds some
sympathy for Valerie French and her performance as Mae – who unlike Desdamona –
really has betrayed her husband, and wants to continue to betray him. But she
was a small town Canadian girl, who didn’t quite know what she was getting
herself into – no matter what you think of her, she deserves a better fate than
she gets here. A strange subplot involving religious group really isn’t
necessary – although it does give Charles Bronson a fine, early role.
Personally,
I would have like to see a little more complexity in the movie. The late, great
Roger Ebert referred to Martin Scorsese’s Raging Bull as a modern version of
Othello – and he has right. That film addressed the same issues of jealously,
violence, sexuality and rage as Shakespeare’s play, and although the language
is course and vulgar, it has a poetry to it. In Jubal, everything is a little
too straight forward. Not wanting, I guess, to have a conflicted character at
its core, it makes the Othello character a supporting player – and puts the
undeniably virtuous Jubal at its core.
This
isn’t to say that Jubal is a bad movie – far from it. Issues like the sexuality
on display in Jubal weren’t really addressed that often in 1950s movie –
certainly not in a genre like the Western. It’s also somewhat unfair to expect
the film to be as good as Shakespeare’s play – or as good as Scorsese’s movie
for that matter.
Jubal
has largely been forgotten, so it’s good that the Criertion Collection recently
brought out a DVD edition of the film. While it’s not as complex as I would
like, it’s certainly more complex than most Westerns of its time.
No comments:
Post a Comment