Well, the title doesn't lie; there certainly is a great deal of searching in this movie.
Specifically, characters we don't like search for a character we barely know who is in the hands of a villain we don't mind. This is all in the name of a cause we reject. Nevertheless, they search and search.
They go here and there and here again, based on the loose idea that "Scar might be there." Knowing that Westerns are frequently re-workings of non-cowboy pieces, one might be tempted to considered that he is watching a re-thinking of Pirandello's "Six Characters in Search of an Author." But to call the insubstantial stand-ins of "The Searchers" "characters" would be going a little far for me.
I'm in the minority here. I've heard how this is an "astonishing character study." I agree that it's an astonishing study in something, but "character"? Really?
Consider: about 37 hours into the searching, John Wayne decides to shoot his niece, because after years of living with an Indian tribe, she's "become a Comanche!" and doesn't want to leave their village. Happily, half an hour later, she inexplicably changes her mind and he inexplicably changes his, and they ride off into the sunset together. That's not depth, it's just contradiction.
Or here's one: at the beginning of the movie, John Wayne shows up at his brother's house. Much is made of the fact that no one knows where the guy's been for the last three years. At the end of the movie, we learn that--oh wait, no, no one ever brings that up again. Oops! That's not mystery, it's just omission.
As for the "author," part, well, whoever he is, he's a bit too stultifyingly dull for my tastes. Perhaps some feel that repeating the same line of dialogue a lot ("that'll be the day") is a great character detail. Frankly, I think it's pretty juvenile stuff.
Perhaps some feel that the Whimsical Characters in this movie are delightful; generally, I find that "whimsy" is where un-funny characters go to die.
The author *did* write in a lot of searching, however. And some shooting now and again, just to keep things fresh. I guess there's some "action" from time to time, but nothing I'd call an "action sequence." See, an action sequence involves tension and release, surprise and fulfillment. A and B Shooting at Each Other Until the Less Famous Actor Dies has none of that. It's less interesting than watching John Wayne sit on a porch whittling, because at least in the latter case, he'd be getting somewhere.
As for the rest? Well, some find the photography evocative, although everyone seems to admit that it's evoking the wrong thing (Utah, which doesn't look a darn thing like Texas). I find that unbelievable for a number of reasons: a) the most noticeable quality of the southwestern desert is its openness, and there's hardly a shot in "The Searchers" wide enough to evoke any real feeling of expanse; b) the nauseatingly saturated color is more evocative of Munchkinland than rocks or earth or sky; c) the too-mechanical blocking/shot composition gives a feeling of tight control rather than anarchy and/or danger; and d) a number of scenes use weirdly fake-looking sets. They're not particularly stylized (as in, for example, "Gone With the Wind" or "The Grapes of Wrath")--they're just silly-looking, public- access-channel-esquire sets.
Even the music (by the otherwise great Max Steiner) doesn't seem to help much. For instance, everyone in the movie knows one hymn, which they sing cheerfully at a funeral and somberly at a wedding. At least, I think they're supposed to be singing it. If you look closely, you'll see that their lips aren't moving, but maybe in a town this boring, everyone has had time to study ventriloquism.
I guess I don't understand what anyone likes about this endless exercise in tedium peppered with forgettable characters, thudding dialogue, and leaden acting. My guess is there's something I just don't get which speaks to many, even most. Don't pass up the movie on my account, but if you hate it, don't feel like you're the only one.
Specifically, characters we don't like search for a character we barely know who is in the hands of a villain we don't mind. This is all in the name of a cause we reject. Nevertheless, they search and search.
They go here and there and here again, based on the loose idea that "Scar might be there." Knowing that Westerns are frequently re-workings of non-cowboy pieces, one might be tempted to considered that he is watching a re-thinking of Pirandello's "Six Characters in Search of an Author." But to call the insubstantial stand-ins of "The Searchers" "characters" would be going a little far for me.
I'm in the minority here. I've heard how this is an "astonishing character study." I agree that it's an astonishing study in something, but "character"? Really?
Consider: about 37 hours into the searching, John Wayne decides to shoot his niece, because after years of living with an Indian tribe, she's "become a Comanche!" and doesn't want to leave their village. Happily, half an hour later, she inexplicably changes her mind and he inexplicably changes his, and they ride off into the sunset together. That's not depth, it's just contradiction.
Or here's one: at the beginning of the movie, John Wayne shows up at his brother's house. Much is made of the fact that no one knows where the guy's been for the last three years. At the end of the movie, we learn that--oh wait, no, no one ever brings that up again. Oops! That's not mystery, it's just omission.
As for the "author," part, well, whoever he is, he's a bit too stultifyingly dull for my tastes. Perhaps some feel that repeating the same line of dialogue a lot ("that'll be the day") is a great character detail. Frankly, I think it's pretty juvenile stuff.
Perhaps some feel that the Whimsical Characters in this movie are delightful; generally, I find that "whimsy" is where un-funny characters go to die.
The author *did* write in a lot of searching, however. And some shooting now and again, just to keep things fresh. I guess there's some "action" from time to time, but nothing I'd call an "action sequence." See, an action sequence involves tension and release, surprise and fulfillment. A and B Shooting at Each Other Until the Less Famous Actor Dies has none of that. It's less interesting than watching John Wayne sit on a porch whittling, because at least in the latter case, he'd be getting somewhere.
As for the rest? Well, some find the photography evocative, although everyone seems to admit that it's evoking the wrong thing (Utah, which doesn't look a darn thing like Texas). I find that unbelievable for a number of reasons: a) the most noticeable quality of the southwestern desert is its openness, and there's hardly a shot in "The Searchers" wide enough to evoke any real feeling of expanse; b) the nauseatingly saturated color is more evocative of Munchkinland than rocks or earth or sky; c) the too-mechanical blocking/shot composition gives a feeling of tight control rather than anarchy and/or danger; and d) a number of scenes use weirdly fake-looking sets. They're not particularly stylized (as in, for example, "Gone With the Wind" or "The Grapes of Wrath")--they're just silly-looking, public- access-channel-esquire sets.
Even the music (by the otherwise great Max Steiner) doesn't seem to help much. For instance, everyone in the movie knows one hymn, which they sing cheerfully at a funeral and somberly at a wedding. At least, I think they're supposed to be singing it. If you look closely, you'll see that their lips aren't moving, but maybe in a town this boring, everyone has had time to study ventriloquism.
I guess I don't understand what anyone likes about this endless exercise in tedium peppered with forgettable characters, thudding dialogue, and leaden acting. My guess is there's something I just don't get which speaks to many, even most. Don't pass up the movie on my account, but if you hate it, don't feel like you're the only one.