Robert E. Lee Clayton was....
One of the best cinematic characters I've come across, immense kudos to Brando for improvising most of it, he was superb. Equal parts hilarious and horrifying.
shareOne of the best cinematic characters I've come across, immense kudos to Brando for improvising most of it, he was superb. Equal parts hilarious and horrifying.
shareSome people criticise him as ruining the film, but I thought his character was, as you said, hilarious and terrifying. The whole film was quite amusing. There was plenty of humour in it that seems to have been lost on some people.
shareVery true. I think Brando did a superb job, he took what could have been a run-of-the-mill western and made it into a colourful, different and thoroughly entertaining piece of film that was a cut above the rest. Jack Nicholson and Harry Dean Stanton were brilliant in their roles too, but there is no way that Brando ruined this film.
shareReally? It felt like Brando walked in from another universe, and the other characters reacted like that, too. I don't know whether to call Brando's Clayton high camp or eccentric to the point of absurd. The movie is so uneven, at times feeling like satire, at other times trying to be gritty in a 70's realistic-yet-not-authentic way.
To me, it has an uneven quality like you said, but in a strange way that imbalance fits. Because the film can really be divided into three categories of character outlooks: You have the landowner and his family, who are upright, self-righteous and pristine, you have Jack and his crew of thieves, who are amoral, jokey and very rowdy, and you have Brando, whose character seems to personify total and complete mental illness :). Its a strange messed up film, thats why I love it.
sharevery interesting, for sure.
Season's Greetings!