There's a conflict at the heart of Cool Hand Luke that I couldn't come to terms with. It's both idealized and severe. Luke is a prisoner of legend: the man all prisoners wish they could be. He proves himself through his refusal to stay down after he's hit. He's clever and crafty. He accepts any dare and wins (So. Many. Eggs). In the same way that Andy Duphrane is talked about in The Shawshank Redemption, Luke is depicted more like a collection of memories than as a living, breathing man. And the prison camp is more camp than prison. It's very Hollywood. At the same time, the movie does get off on the sadism. When the prisoners are working or put in the box, it feels oppressive. I was hot just watching the movie.
The film itself is
shot pretty straightforward. Like, I believe what is happening is an honest
account of the events. If this movie was ever remade though, I'd expect
everything to have a haze around it. (Are we watching folklore or the truth?) I
could even see it getting the Citizen Kane or Great Gatsby treatment, where Luke is the subject of the film more so than the driving force.
I haven't seen enough Paul Newman movies to say that I get why this is his iconic role. I can say that he's a god damn movie star in this and the movie wouldn't work with anyone else. I read that Jack Lemmon and Telly Savalas were considered for the role. That's hilarious to think about now.
I like the movie because I can tell how many more recent movies owe a lot to it. But the movie itself is just fine. It's not quite "New Hollywood". It's not quite classic studio Hollywood. People love dissecting the Christian imagery. I appreciate its place in film history, even though I didn't fall hard for it.
Verdict (?): Slightly Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment