Hombre

Rating:
Summary: A genuflection to life!!
Review: This movie is a painful but beautiful slice of life.The phrase 'noblesse oblige' fits perfectly with the story.The noble permise of 'those with special gifts'should use them' fits perfectlly with John's character.His character seeks only confirmation that,in the context of this situation, another person is willing to give generously ie.possibly their life.In the end,as Malcolm pronounced on MacBeth's life 'nothing became him like the leaving of it'.

Rating:
Summary: One of the Great Westerns of the Modern Cinema
Review: This movies has most elements of a good Western. It has cowboys and Indians, a stagecoach robbery, a shootout, the man (and woman) against nature theme, and much much more. Most of all, it has a great script, strong directing, and outstanding acting. Just about all of the characters are memorable for their performances but the soul of this movie is Paul Newman. His character is that of the quiet yet strong man who shares his thoughts with no one and takes no guff from anyone. The bad guy in this movie is nearly as memorable in the person of Richard Boone. He is about as evil a character as you will find in a G rated movie.

Then story is that of a man (Mr. Randall) who was raised on an Apache reservation in the Arizona Territory. He inherits some money and property and sets off to check out a different life style. On the way, he meets up with a diverse group of people on a stagecoach leaving town. Bad things happen but the only man who seemed equipped to handle things is Mr. Randall, played by Paul Newman. The movie explores the nature of good and evil which recalls the old Woody Guthrie line, "Some will rob you with a six-gun and some with a fountain pen". The movie also contrasts the values of the "savage" with that of civilization and you can probably guess who comes out ahead. This movie does not have a happy ending which is not unusual for a modern Western. Yet there is a true feeling that Good has prevailed.

This movie mixes plenty of action and thought-provoking situations and is a good movie for the whole family to enjoy.

Rating:
Summary: One of the Great Westerns of the Modern Cinema
Review: This movies has most elements of a good Western. It has cowboys and Indians, a stagecoach robbery, a shootout, the man (and woman) against nature theme, and much much more. Most of all, it has a great script, strong directing, and outstanding acting. Just about all of the characters are memorable for their performances but the soul of this movie is Paul Newman. His character is that of the quiet yet strong man who shares his thoughts with no one and takes no guff from anyone. The bad guy in this movie is nearly as memorable in the person of Richard Boone. He is about as evil a character as you will find in a G rated movie.

Then story is that of a man (Mr. Randall) who was raised on an Apache reservation in the Arizona Territory. He inherits some money and property and sets off to check out a different life style. On the way, he meets up with a diverse group of people on a stagecoach leaving town. Bad things happen but the only man who seemed equipped to handle things is Mr. Randall, played by Paul Newman. The movie explores the nature of good and evil which recalls the old Woody Guthrie line, "Some will rob you with a six-gun and some with a fountain pen". The movie also contrasts the values of the "savage" with that of civilization and you can probably guess who comes out ahead. This movie does not have a happy ending which is not unusual for a modern Western. Yet there is a true feeling that Good has prevailed.

This movie mixes plenty of action and thought-provoking situations and is a good movie for the whole family to enjoy.

Rating:
Summary: One of the Best Westerns Ever
Review: Western films are not often thought to be intellectually edifying on matters of political philosophy. Western fiction--popular or not--has not even been designated as literature, never mind philosophically edifying. Hombre, however, deserves a serious look at its pedagogical possibilities. I am not interested in arguing on behalf of a literary or cinematic reassessment of the Western genre as such; rather, my intent is to simply adumbrate some of the philosophically political themes one can find in Hombre. First, there is man in the state of nature (human nature) and the instinct for self-preservation versus social responsibility (contract theories of political organization); secondly, we have imperial domination and cultural conflict versus unmitigated toleration. Contemporary cosmopolitan orthodoxy grounds itself on liberal contract theories founded by Hobbes, which postulate and mythologize pre-political "rights." These "rights" are mythologized by cosmopolitanism inasmuch as their metaphysical existence is dubious at best and more likely simply derivative of historically relative cultural norms, and therefore not cosmological or universal. This is not to say that universally valid norms simply do not exist; rather, it means that the normative dispensation in which we currently live, which was brought forth by Enlightenment philosophical anthropology, has not correctly understood natural right.

Hombre should not be interpreted along Hobbesian lines wherein the state of nature for man is the status belli, nor on Kantian terms that stress toleration based on cosmopolitan law [Weltburgerrect] emanating from multicultural understanding whereby "the peace of the political order stands in sharp contrast with the violence of the state of nature." This multicultural cosmopolitanism, as noted above, is obviously based on the Hobbesian theory of the necessity of negating the state of nature as the status belli, simply amplified and applied on a cultural and global rather than an individual level. Even less, then, should Hombre be understood in revisionist or postmodernist terms, which are merely cheap and incoherent versions of the Kantianism described herein that lack self-knowledge regarding their own historical genesis. In contrast to these modern, liberally humanistic contract theories of equality (whether it be equality of persons [Hobbes] or equality of cultures [as in current neo-Kantian cosmopolitan orthodoxy]), Hombre is best understood in Platonic political terms that affirm a hierarchy--not only of the political order but within humanity as such--in the practice of "moralities of command and obedience" as the natural disposition of humans as social and, eventually, if properly cultivated, political animals. There is a hierarchy of men within a Platonic dialogue that is rooted not in the contingencies of birth but in the natures of diverse human souls. As the narrator of Hombre tells us in Elmore Leonard's excellent novel _Hombre_, on which the film is based (the film seeks to mask the violent and rapacious nature of the Apaches, whereas the novel does not), "I guess we had to follow somebody" (90). And follow they did.

Rating:
Summary: The Best Western Film Ever
Review: Western films are not often thought to be intellectually edifying on matters of political philosophy. With the possible exception of Cormac McCarthy's Western novels, Western fiction--popular or not--has not even been designated as literature, never mind philosophically instructive. Hombre, however, deserves a serious look at its edifying possibilities. I am not interested in arguing on behalf of a literary or cinematic reassessment of the Western genre as such; rather, my intent is to simply adumbrate some of the philosophically political themes one can find in Hombre. First, there is man in the state of nature (human nature) and the instinct for self-preservation versus social responsibility (contract theories of political organization); secondly, we have imperial domination and cultural conflict versus unmitigated toleration (contemporary cosmopolitan orthodoxy grounds itself on liberal contract theories founded by Hobbes, which postulate and mythologize pre-political "rights").

Hombre should not be interpreted along Hobbesian lines wherein the state of nature for man is the status belli, nor on Kantian terms that stress toleration based on cosmopolitan law [Weltburgerrect] emanating from multicultural understanding whereby "the peace of the political order stands in sharp contrast with the violence of the state of nature." This multicultural cosmopolitanism, as noted above, is obviously based on the Hobbesian theory of the necessity of negating the state of nature as the status belli, simply amplified and applied on a cultural and global rather than an individual level. Even less, then, should Hombre be understood in revisionist or postmodernist terms, which are merely cheap and incoherent versions of the Kantianism described herein that lack self-knowledge regarding their own historical genesis. In contrast to these modern, liberally humanistic contract theories of equality (whether it be equality of persons [Hobbes] or equality of cultures [as in current neo-Kantian cosmopolitan orthodoxy]), Hombre is best understood in Platonic political terms that affirm a hierarchy--not only of the political order but within humanity as such--in the practice of "moralities of command and obedience" as the natural disposition of humans as social and, eventually, if properly cultivated, political animals. There is a hierarchy of men within a Platonic dialogue that is rooted not in the contingencies of birth but in the natures of diverse human souls. "Knowledge of political things brings with it the awareness that in order for the sacred to become sacred terrible deeds must be done. Because God does not evidently rule, the founder of justice cannot himself be just." As the narrator of Hombre tells us in Elmore Leonard's excellent novel _Hombre_, on which the film is based (with some not so slight changes, especially concerning the rapaciousness of the Apaches), "I guess we had to follow somebody" (90).

Rating:
Summary: Newman and Ritt make Western magic again
Review: Whenever Paul Newman and Director Martin Ritt("Hud", "The Outrage") team up for a western it's pure magic. "Hombre" is a shining example of that.Western lovers will love this film. And if you already know you love it, you'll be thrilled with the DVD.
As the story opens we see an Apache Indian, quiet, crouching behind a rock,eyeing the horses that will soon be his. This Apache though is different from the rest. He is a blue eyed Indian. A white man raised by the Apache, outcast from the world he was born to. He is HOMBRE! He is his own man.
After word comes to him that he has inherited a boarding house from the man who once tried to raise him and gave him his name, John Russell, he sells it. cuts his hair and embarks on a stagecoach trip. Some of the other passengers are outraged when they learn of his upbringing, and don't even want him inside the coach with them. But the stagecoach runs into trouble,overtaken by outlaws.
They are left in the desert to fend for themselves against the outlaws and the elements. He may be their only salvation. Will he help the people that outcast him, and if he does at what cost to him?
The cinematography gives that pure western feeling.The music score by David Rose is moving.The story based on a novel by Elmore Leonard is gripping.Paul Newman IS HOMBRE! Richard Boone is the baddest of the bad guys as only he can portray it. The cast also includes, the great Fredric March as the theiving Indian Agent, Barbara Rush as his biggoted wife,and Martin Balsam as Russell's only allie, and the driver.
The DVD is a real treat.Beautiful widescreen, sharp clear pictures of the rugged terrain.Vivid colors. The sound is surprisingly crisp(I love the sound of horses hooves) in the Dolby Surround 2.0 stereo. The muscial score terrific. Dialouge was clear although a little low at times.The special features include a Still Gallery of photos taken during the shoot, some theatrical trailers for other Newman movies, and there are subtitles in English or Spanish if needed. There is also a French version.
For a great western, great drama,and well just plain great Newman,check this one out!.........Laurie

Rating:
Summary: Ayn Rand Western
Review: You alrtuistic idiots desperately want to see what you want out of this film. It is a great Western, to be sure, but not because of its promotion of altruism, but rather, because of its promotion of good old-fashioned American rugged individalism. Make no mistake. This is a Libertarian, Objectivist, Ayn Rand-oriented Western. The hero dies when he commits an act of self-sacrifice.