Plot: Reed is an illiterate outlaw who wants to learn how to read. Mistaking Bergen for a schoolteacher, he and his gang kidnap her. What he doesn't realize is that she is the wife of a powerful rancher Hackman. Hackman is on a hunting trip with his friends. When he hears the news, he tells his friends the hunting trip has changed. They are going to hunt the gang down instead of game. They have shotguns with telescopes that can fire away from 800 yards. So, Hackman and his hunting party can fire away and be out of sight. Things get worse when Bergen falls in love with Reed.
This film has gotten bad reviews. Hackman and Bergen have turned their back on this film, only Reed stood behind this film till his death. The film was mostly criticized for it's excessive violence. While I do think the film has faults (i.e., the bedroom behavior of a character is not necessary. Hackman is an impotent sadistic guy in bed vs. Reed's potent, tender lovemaking) and the ending doesn't quite work. But as for being excessively violent, absolutely not!! Violence is not glamorized in any means and the film has moments that people in support of gun control would envy (i.e. Reed is forced to shoot his best friend, played by an excellent Mitchell Ryan, who is dying. Once he shoots him, he throws away all arms and refuses to carry any through the remainder of the film.) Keep in mind, Vietnam was still going on during this film, which was made in 1971. Hackman's hunting party is a metaphor for Vietnam. It starts off with a noble cause, which is to rescue Bergen from Reed. The hunting continues long after it becomes clear Bergen wants to be with Reed, not rescued from him. (i.e. North Vietnam/South Vietnam) By that point, the hunting is no longer heroic and noble, but a senseless bloodbath. Several scenes indicate this. There is one scene where the hunting party comes across a dying member of Reed's gang. With the exception of Hackman, all the other members immediately realize a dying human is not the same as dying game and they can't quite finish him off. There is also another scene in the film where one member of the hunting party is seen vomiting after he has massacred several of Reed's gang members. Also, the hunting party abandons Hackman when one of his party gets killed by Reed and Hackman shows complete indifference about it.
It was very hard in 1971 to make a film criticizing Vietnam. The best way was to make a metaphor of it, in this case, a western. While Hunting Party is not up there with the Sam Peckinpah or Sergio Leone Westerns, it's anti-Vietnam and anti-gun themes puts this above many other westerns. It also did not deserve it's bad critical reputation and deserves a second chance.
This film has gotten bad reviews. Hackman and Bergen have turned their back on this film, only Reed stood behind this film till his death. The film was mostly criticized for it's excessive violence. While I do think the film has faults (i.e., the bedroom behavior of a character is not necessary. Hackman is an impotent sadistic guy in bed vs. Reed's potent, tender lovemaking) and the ending doesn't quite work. But as for being excessively violent, absolutely not!! Violence is not glamorized in any means and the film has moments that people in support of gun control would envy (i.e. Reed is forced to shoot his best friend, played by an excellent Mitchell Ryan, who is dying. Once he shoots him, he throws away all arms and refuses to carry any through the remainder of the film.) Keep in mind, Vietnam was still going on during this film, which was made in 1971. Hackman's hunting party is a metaphor for Vietnam. It starts off with a noble cause, which is to rescue Bergen from Reed. The hunting continues long after it becomes clear Bergen wants to be with Reed, not rescued from him. (i.e. North Vietnam/South Vietnam) By that point, the hunting is no longer heroic and noble, but a senseless bloodbath. Several scenes indicate this. There is one scene where the hunting party comes across a dying member of Reed's gang. With the exception of Hackman, all the other members immediately realize a dying human is not the same as dying game and they can't quite finish him off. There is also another scene in the film where one member of the hunting party is seen vomiting after he has massacred several of Reed's gang members. Also, the hunting party abandons Hackman when one of his party gets killed by Reed and Hackman shows complete indifference about it.
It was very hard in 1971 to make a film criticizing Vietnam. The best way was to make a metaphor of it, in this case, a western. While Hunting Party is not up there with the Sam Peckinpah or Sergio Leone Westerns, it's anti-Vietnam and anti-gun themes puts this above many other westerns. It also did not deserve it's bad critical reputation and deserves a second chance.
Tell Your Friends