Orson Welles was barely recognizable, he was very different from his old alternative from Citizen Cane. He was loathsome and disgusting, no wonder I had the feeling he was going to be the bad guy. Well, he was not the only one. Welles’ performance was really believable, I think he created a stereotype of fat, nasty police officers, going after their intuitions, which is very ugly, but eventually proves to be right.
Charlton Heston looked nothing like a Mexican except he had a moustache and spoke some Spanish. He was expected to be the good guy, the defender of justice and American hypocrisy, but eventually he turned out not to be. You were right, Ted, nobody was the good guy.
I think the characters are not the point in the film, or can become complete only in the environment they are portrayed: the dark borders of the US and Mexico, which I think refers to both political and underground machinations of people on the two sides of the border. This atmosphere covers every place and person. It might be because of the post-war disillusionment, but everyone lives for selfish purposes and honesty does not really count –of course except for the lovers, but I think that’s only because Hollywood wanted to make some profit out o the film.
I liked the scene when the Welles visited the gipsy woman. It made the viewer wonder what kind of people he used to be and what could have made him the person he was. He must have been on good terms with the woman, and in the final scene when he is shot by Vargas, the only person feeling sorry for him is the gipsy woman, and not because the person who died, but because the person who he used to be.
You're right about Welles, though I think there must have been fat, sleazy, corrupt cops before him :)
VálaszTörlésI'm not so sure the lovers are there because of Hollywood profit concerns, though it definitely fits what they want to achieve. Welles had a number of complaints about how they interfered in the film, and the whole thing is otherwise really his project.