High Plains Drifter
Directed by Clint Eastwood
Is it too much to ask to have a movie that doesn't involve some sort of horrific rape scene? Apparently so in the seventies.
A stranger rides into town, kills some people, and rapes a woman. Evidently impressed, the townsfolk ask the stranger to protect them against gunmen that they believe are going to attack the town for revenge. The stranger agrees, as long as he can have access to all the goods and services the town has to offer for free and can make absurd decorating choices for absolutely no reason whatsoever (see above picture).
I have absolutely no idea what the point of this film was. On the one hand, we are obviously supposed to think he is heroic. He saves a town and gives to Native American children. On the other hand, he is a goddamn rapist. I think the only reason the rape was put in the film was to show that he was flawed. I am sorry, but that is completely absurd.
Seriously, wake me up when the seventies end.
Eastwood wrote to John Wayne, asking him to make a western together. Wayne wrote back an angry reply, denouncing this film for its violence. Do I actually agree with John Wayne on something?