Robert E. Lee Clayton


1.) How could a 60-year old Irishman (let alone any man) in the 1880s be named "Robert R. Lee" Clayton as the famed Confederate general only made his reputation in the Civil War 20 years earlier and would have not been known at the time of the character's birth in the 1820s. That is, if the film is set in the 1880s. if it is set earlier, it is even MORE illogical. (I believe the film is set in the 1880 as the US-Canada border, a plot device in the film, was only enforced -- due to the US desire to control the movement of the native American/first nations population between British North America and the US -- after the time of Custer's last stand, that is, 1876).

2.) Why does his Irish accent disappear at the time of the shack-burning/impalement-murder of Cary?

3.) Why is Clayton wearing a Mother Hubbard and bonnet (a disguise) at night when he attacks the shack?

4.) Why does Clayton, sniffing the air (at least twice) as the shack burns and Cary tells him that Tom Logan didn't escape the holocaust, not respond to this clarly false statement (as he is not smelling burning flesh which he clearly is trying to sense).... That is, why does he relax enough to let Logan creep up on him and kill him? Why hasn't he been vigilant?

reply

Good questions. I think the answer to 1-3 is that Robert E. Lee Clayton is largely (no pun intended) a man invented by Robert E. Lee Clayton. He's putting us all on.

As for question #4, Clayton doesn't believe at all that Logan has been stubbornly engulfed by the fire. "I'd just about like anything better than bein' burned to death," says Clayton to the suggestion that Logan accepted this demise out of pride. So Clayton knows Logan is still out there. But why is Clayton so relaxed? It is because he is supremely confident. After all, he already escaped a previous point-blank encounter with Logan -- the legendary bath tub scene.

reply

Thanks for the reply. Your points are spot on!

reply

You have to remember that Robert E. Lee distinguished himself as early as the Mexican War in the late 1840s, and that he was a standout military man even before the Civil War began. Don't forget that he was offered the command of the Union Army when the Southern states began to secede!

reply

The man lives and acts like a chameleon, changing accents when needed(or when he feels like it), seems to tell nobody the truth about who he really is...lets face it he is an eccentric as well as a psychopathic personality..all which makes him a better assassin..
he shows no respect for the man he works for, even at the end when he is told to leave (is fired) he tells the rancher that "the work is mine" referring to the rest of the killings he must complete...he enjoys his trade, and is very arrogant and over confident in himself, and this leads to his demise..

reply

One of the best points about Brando's performance, is, for me, his changing of accents. It points out that you never really know who he is. The character, like the film, starts out as amiably eccentric, then darkens until it is more a thing of horror.

"You get tired of your own obsessions, the betrayals, the voyeurism, the twisted sexuality"

reply

the answer to two and three is simply: he's insane.

reply

he's insane

Brando or Robert E. Lee Clayton? Ha-ha.

reply

lol both i think.

reply

To answer question #1, it's pretty clear that "Robert E. Lee Clayton" is a pseudonym.

For #2, it's possible that he's not Irish at all, but uses it as yet another Ruse to hide his identity.

For #3, it's just part of his eccentric behavior.

#4 was a true weakness in the plot of an otherwise good movie.

reply

In answer to #4, is it possible that Lee Clayton actually believed Tom Logan had burned up in the house? Not that he naively took Cal's word for it, but in assuming Tom was there because his horse was (Tom left his horse behind when it turned up lame). Knowing Clayton's apparent fondness for horses, can't we assume that in his thinking a man and his horse are not easily parted...

And when he said something like "Granny's very tired now," I heard a finality to it that sounded like he felt the job was done. This might make Clayton's quick and easy demise less of a weak point in the movie, but at the same time this interpretation makes him out to be more of a fool than previously established--especially since he had the opportunity to see Tom with the new brown horse through his binoculars but was too busy scoping out Tom's cohorts.

reply

I believe the character of Robert E. Lee Clayton was about 40 in the film (I'm talking about the character, not the actor). If the film's date is 1887 or 88, not 1880, then the name fits perfectly. Robert E. Lee was a distinguished officer in the Mexican War of 1846-48, and it would not be unusual at all for a man to name his son after his commanding officer (Wyatt Earp's father did just that, Wyatt Berry Stapp was the senior Earp's CO in that war).

reply

u mean 1846 and not 1946, except for your dates, i would go with you pov

"Im just a bum sitting in a motor home on a film set, BRANDO said, and they come looking for ZEUS".

reply

Jon,

Within in the context of the film I think it becomes clear that Brando's character is "good" at what he does because he's so unorthodox and, as the other poster pointed out, most likely insane.

Taking the insanity notion further: a man would probably have to be insane or at least a sociopath to want to hunt down and kill others for money, again making Clayton good at what he does as evidence in the film.

So my response to Questions 1, 2, and 3 are: Clayton is insane or of a vastly differently mental state than most and therefore his effectiveness at being a killer is aided and complemented by his wayward mental state. An example of this would be the wearing of the bonnet: it may look silly, but it would be enough to distract a person long enough for Clayton to kill them. I think Clayton purposely did things that confused others so that he could use that opportunity to always have an advantage.

The answer to Question 4 is more complex and I use the quip "it takes one to know one" to justify my answer. I think the reason Tom bested Clayton was that Tom, by the end of the film, had lost everything and therefore had nothing to lose and no longer cared about life, death or love. I don't think Tom went crazy I think he just was able to calmly calculate a way to get to Clayton as he was no longer dealing consequences so whether he made it or not didn't matter and he was fortunate that he caught Clayton asleep.

Great film and I'm glad I watched it.

reply

Perhaps he was Robert Lee Clayton, and he added the "E" as a condecending joke. Or perhaps he really was Jim Furgison. Or neither. I heard at least 4 diffrent accents. The main one was the Irish brouge, but I sort of doubt he was really Irish. Redneck Furgison, which was clearly a put on but convincing. British (Fletcher Christian?) when taking to his beloved horse and "harlot" mule. And near-normal Brando when talking to Cal before killing him. So, which was the real him? I think probably the last one. But then again, if the Irish one is a put on, why revert back to it when only his animals were present? Who would he be trying to fool? The entire film constantly keeps you off balance with no easy answers. And I think that's exactly what both Clayton and Brando wanted.

reply

1.) for one thing Brando was 51 years old during filming, not 60. As far as the name goes, I don't see the problem. His name was Lee Clayton and he probably just added the "Robert E" to it. Or "Lee Clayton" could just be his alias as a regulator (assassin) and not his birth name at all. Who knows? Remember, he said to Quaid's character that he was a preacher and then switched to saying he was a horse thief so it didn't seem like he had any qualms about switching identities to suit the needs of the moment.

2.) He was a loner and eccentric loon. He probably had numerous accents or voices to entertain himself in solitude in the wilderness. As another poster pointed out, he acts like a chameleon, changing accents when needed or simply when he feels like it. He doesn't feel obligated to tell anybody the truth about who he really is.

3.) A disguise to fulfill his mission or simply more of his extremely eccentric antics.

4.) I can't decide. It's a toss-up between these two perspectives from two previous posters:

"Clayton doesn't believe at all that Logan has been stubbornly engulfed by the fire. "I'd just about like anything better than bein' burned to death," says Clayton to the suggestion that Logan accepted this demise out of pride. So Clayton knows Logan is still out there. But why is Clayton so relaxed? It is because he is supremely confident. After all, he already escaped a previous point-blank encounter with Logan -- the legendary bath tub scene."

" Not that he naively took Cal's word for it, but in assuming Tom was there because his horse was (Tom left his horse behind when it turned up lame). Knowing Clayton's apparent fondness for horses, can't we assume that in his thinking a man and his horse are not easily parted... And when he said something like "Granny's very tired now," I heard a finality to it that sounded like he felt the job was done. This might make Clayton's quick and easy demise less of a weak point in the movie, but at the same time this interpretation makes him out to be more of a fool than previously established--especially since he had the opportunity to see Tom with the new brown horse through his binoculars but was too busy scoping out Tom's cohorts."

reply