Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid

Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid is a unique western. Parts of it are just brilliant, other moments are bungled, but it is composed and structured like no other movie from the genre.

Everyone knows the western legend about these two central characters, who went from being friends to sworn adversaries. The leading performances of James Coburn (Garrett) and Kris Kristofferson (Billy) are rather colourless, but the subsidiary characters are beautifully delineated. There are some pretentious moments. For example, near the start Billy is arrested and as he makes his way towards the lawmen who have come to take him, he adopts a Christ-like pose which is presumably meant to signify that he was some kind of martyr among Wild West outlaws (when, in reality, he was probably just a psychopath).

However, there are stunning moments in the film too. In fact, the scene in which Slim Pickens stumbles, wounded and mortally bleeding, to a riverside so that he can die peacefully is arguably the most moving scene ever in a motion picture. The acting, the music and the photography fit together harmoniously to make this a truly magical cinematic moment.

One word of warning: beware of the incoherent, chopped-up 106 minute version of the film. If you're planning to watch it, go for the full 122 minute director's cut, which is immeasurably superior.

I have seen this film twice with a 20 year gap in between. Seeing the movie a second time, you begin to wonder not about the main characters but about the tertiary ones. For instance, where is Mrs Garrett? Pat Garrett tells someone to inform her that he is coming home. Is this one of the characters chopped off by the studios?

The Katy Jurado character of a rifle shooting sheriff's wife seems only half developed, though the actress gets important billing in the credits.

The Harry Dean Stanton role is again a short but interesting one getting out of bed to provide room for Billy's sexual needs.

The Alias character played by Bob Dylan is mysterious. He watches and is smart and reflects the young generation. Why does Billy ask him to read the list on the wall? What was Pekinpah doing with these characters? He was not a fool--he wanted to develop the characters that were probably chopped off.

Would Pekinpah have chosen another actress to play Billy's love interest if Rita Coolidge was not married to Kristofferson at the time the film was made? The kids in the film provide the antidote to the lethal violence--in their angelic responses, visual and aural.

I commend the work of Canadian Roger Spottiswoode (editor turned director) in trying to put the film together the way Pekinpah would have preferred it. The version I saw recently has additional scenes but not the one with the death of the Katy Jurado character, which apparently Spottiswoode restored. Now the film's major achievements are photography, screenplay (the growing moustache of Garrett is an example of detail), and somewhat brilliant direction.

Evidently cinematographer John Coquillon liked to work for Pekinpah (Straw Dogs). Coquillon's work is superb here but strangely his later works do not show the same spirit behind the camera. Could he only deliver with Pekinpah and not with others?

I found this film a fine work, philosophical and aethetically satisfying. From what has been seen, I suspect Pekinpah had a better film in mind that never left the studios. Coburn and Kristofferson did justice to their roles, developing them as an actor could. The film in my view is one of the most interesting westerns I have seen giving importance to the legion of subsidiary characters. I only wish they were fleshed out even more. This film is not mindless--it makes you think. Now that's entertainment.

I enjoyed the film very much, in part because Peckinpah continues his theme, as he did in "Ballad of Cable Hogue" and "The Wild Bunch", of the illusion of who is "good" and who is "evil." Also, Peckinpah mourns the passing of people such as Garrett and Billy; at one point Garrett says to Poe, "This country's getting old, and I'm to get old with it." Garrett knows that he and Billy, among others, are to disappear from the West as big business and civilization advance, and Garrett tries to avoid this by selling out to Chisum (Barry Sullivan) and the Santa Fe Ring. But Garrett is a torn man; he is trying to avoid the tide of history by avoiding the eventual meeting with Billy, while also trying to avoid the financial forces (e.g., Chisum) that are making individuals such as himself disappear, so that big business will take over. The entire film is really a depiction of Garrett and Billy avoiding each other in order to resist historical forces that they would have a better chance of surviving if both of them left New Mexico or if both of them were on the same side. However, Garrett feels that aligning himself with the ranchers is better for survival, but in the end the hand that fed him, so to speak, is the same hand that destroys him. A truly poetic, and quite elegiac film, one that I feel is underrated among Peckinpah's films.

Opening with the gunning down of Pat Garrett in 1909, we flash back to 1881 where Garrett has been hired to bring his ex-partner in crime Billy the Kid to justice. The story unfolds against a backdrop of a west that is moving forward, driven by businessmen (represented by Chisum) leaving behind the 'old ways'.

Of modern (ie after 50's and 60's) westerns Once Upon a Time in the West stands out as the best. However I feel that this film covers similar themes, of the death of the cowboy way and passing of times. The story is not really a duel between Pat and Billy but more a look at times changing around them – with Garrett changing with them and Billy trying to remain still. The story is well told with plenty of good characters, great setups and interesting dialogue. The relationships and the look at the old west 'code' easily hold the interest.

Peckinpah does plenty of good work here – for example intercutting the killing of Garrett with the killing of chickens etc, making it visually clever too. However his best move is the use of Bob Dylan's score – it could have been intrusive and made the film feel tacky and like it tries too hard to be hip. Instead the score works well and gives the film a soulful feel.

The cast is not only superb but deep with talent. Coburn is as good as ever as Garrett, struggling to move with times he doesn't approve of. Kristofferson is good, but his character of Billy is not well developed, but he still has a strong role to play. The support cast is full of famous faces from Westerns and a few actors just starting out – slim Pickens, Chill Wills, Jack Elam, Luke Ashew, Charles Martin Smith, Harry Dean Stanton and a good part for Bob Dylan.

If you're watching it – make sure you've got the restored version that adds 15 minutes and uses the score better. The director's version makes more of the role of Boss Chisum and fills the story out with playful brothel scenes and delivers a few more cameos. It makes a big difference to the film and lifts the story above being Garrett versus Billy the Kid.

Overall an excellent western from one of the greats at this type of thing.

This movie begins with a very cruel opening scene. For kicks, Billy the Kid, his friends and Pat Garrett are shooting the heads off chickens. Unfortunately, it appears as if the scene is 100% real. Now the blood and headless chickens didn't sicken me, but killing any animal for entertainment's sake seems sick--and is one of the few cases where I'd agree with the PETA folks. At least in other Sam Peckinhaph films where you see killing, it's all fake and it involves people who have a choice in the matter.

"Pat Garrett & Billy the Kid" is a revisionist film. Instead of all the old clichés of westerns, it keeps a few and introduces some new ones. In some ways it appears more realistic than earlier westerns, but to a retired history teacher like me, it's still a real mess. First for the good. Most of the folks in this film DON'T wear cowboy hats, they are often pretty filthy and some of the killing is far from glorious--such as shooting your enemy in the back. You certainly didn't see this in Roy Rogers' films and it's nice to see SOME attempt at realism. Now for the bad. Although the film looks more like the real West, it promotes a stupid stereotype of the bandit as a hero. The real-life Billy the Kid was a pretty ugly guy (based on the one surviving picture of him) and a murderer. He was NOT a hero of the people who fought against the evil cattle barons--he was just a cheap hood. But, here in "Pat Garrett...", he's handsome Kris Kristofferson and he is a force of good in a West filled with evil. He murders, but the men are enemies of the people and rapists. Instead, the lawman Pat Garrett is the nasty bully--the creep given a gun and told to kill for corporate America. If you think about it, this is a western for the Occupy Wall Street folks...but not history teachers!

Apart from all the inaccuracy, is it a good film? Maybe. It all depends on what you are looking for in a film. If you want the usual Peckinpah slow-motion violence with lots of unrealistic blood, swearing and occasional nudity, then you'll probably like the film very much. If this sort of stuff turns you off, then the film may be tough going--even with some nice performances. As for me, I found it all to be slow...very slow. And, since I'm not particularly a Peckinpah fan, I felt like it was a decent time-passer and nothing more.