On My Shelf: Jeremiah Johnson (1972)
There are a handful of movies that I like to watch in that period of the year after Christmas, when it’s still winter — and this is one of them.
Plot: Jeremiah Johnson, a man who we know little to nothing about, goes up into the mountains in the 1800’s to become a “mountain man” (i.e. to trap fur, and live off the land). He’s not very good at it initially, but learns lessons from other mountain men and picks up some friends and family. Then he runs afoul of an Indian tribe, and THAT’S WHEN THINGS BEGIN TO SERIOUSLY GO WRONG.
This was not the first time I’ve watched the film Jeremiah Johnson. In fact, I’ve seen the film numerous times… but I want to say that the last time I watched it, I was a pre-teen, so we’re talking somewhere in the region of twenty to thirty years since the last time I saw it. THUS, I’d say it’s fair to say that I was seeing this film with new eyes. As a kid, I found the movie rather depressing — and, it must be said, largely missed the point and all the subtext. So, although we picked up a copy of it a couple years back, I’ve been avoiding watching it, because I generally don’t like to be depressed. But, I only have a small group of proper “winter but not Christmas” movies, so it seemed like a good time to revisit this film and see if my childhood assessment of it still stood.
So, let’s just get it right out there — in spite of the fact that it has content I would normally consider “too depressing to enjoy”, this movie is exceptionally good.
Story and Tone
What’s the movie about? Well, it’s about Jeremiah Johnson, the historical figure (obviously) — but in a large sense, it’s a story about survival. A man pushed to the utter limits, physically and emotionally, and living on, regardless. It’s so sad, so terrible, so tragic, so painful — and yet, ultimately, kind of uplifting in a “triumph of human stubbornness”, “determination to survive” kind of way. Jeremiah Johnson (in the film) was pushed to the edge — and yet, he lived.
Mr. Hall says I should talk about the “violence” in the movie. Yes, there is a lot of violence in the film, but it’s not gratuitous “violence for the sake of violence”; in a way, it’s often very understated, which makes it all the more shocking and horrifying. The tone of the film is expertly crafted.
Performance
Robert Redford is so good. He’s convincing as the young, inept version of Jeremiah Johnson who first arrives in the snowy woods in the mountains — and he’s convincing as the older, beaten-down Jeremiah Johnson, pushed to the limits of his endurance — and yet, still alive, never giving up. He gives a great performance, as well as a stunningly detailed performance — Robert Redford is riding horses, he’s messing with (real) dead animals, and all in the snow (REAL SNOW; no coconut flakes for him. The film looks like it was utterly grueling to film).
Of course, all the other actors in this movie (of which there are only a handful; basically, is a tour-de-force of Robert Redford) give great performances, too. I can’t point at a single actor in this movie who seemed mis-cast or didn’t seem to be giving it their all.
Music
The music is… um. Well, let’s just say that it’s the one part of the movie that feels like it’s from the era that the movie came from. Oh, it’s not terrible — it’s fine — and it doesn’t hurt the film. After the initial song, I didn’t even notice it. But as soon as I heard the opening song, I was like, "Oh, so this movie is from the 70's, eh?"
"The Ballad of Jeremiah Johnson"
Not that there is a lot of music in this movie — and other than the handful of songs, the soundtrack is nature and silence. The silence is appropriate, as this movie is about raw, painful reality; the reality of being out in the snow, in the cold, trying desperately to start a fire so that you don’t DIE. Because if you fail to start a fire, you will die. But you might die anyway because you failed to catch a fish to eat. And then you will probably die anyway because snow just fell on your fire and put it out. Did I mention you are going to die?
SPOILERS and Historical Context
Some hideously horrifying stuff happens in this movie, but — for the history buffs amongst you — I will spoil one thing: the actual historical Jeremiah Johnson was known as “Liver-Eating” Johnson due to his (reported) penchant for eating his enemies’ livers, and this does not happen in the movie. (His enemies [Native Americans of the “Crow” persuasion] believed that they needed their livers intact in order to successfully achieve the after-life, so there was a “method to his madness”, as they say. FYI, he wasn’t just eating Crow livers to be a jerk, and it wasn’t that he disliked Native Americans as a whole (quite the opposite); there was a matter of the Crow tribe murdering his family over some perceived slight that launched the whole debacle. Now, the family murdering does happen in the movie — as does the war between Jeremiah Johnson and the entire Crow tribe — but no liver-eating.
The historical man. Somehow... the name suits him.So, I suppose I could complain that the movie, therefore, is historically inaccurate. But I’m not going to complain. I do realize that movies have to abbreviate material (especially when their material is a person’s entire life) in order to tell a story within the length of a normal film. And as far as leaving out the “liver-eating” detail… I would suggest this was probably a good call on their part; Jeremiah Johnson comes off as more heroic and determined, and less insane and disgusting, as a result.
Ultimately
Well, my summing-up here shouldn’t come as any surprise based on the rest of the review… I think this movie is well-acted, looks great, feels great, and (despite featuring a rather 70’s-sounding theme song and not going as gruesome as the movie could have gone)… feels more realistic than many “realistic” movies that I’ve seen. It’s also disturbing — and, whether you like it or not, it will stick with you, and you’ll might just have a bit more respect for the determination of the people who settled the West.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
Plot: Jeremiah Johnson, a man who we know little to nothing about, goes up into the mountains in the 1800’s to become a “mountain man” (i.e. to trap fur, and live off the land). He’s not very good at it initially, but learns lessons from other mountain men and picks up some friends and family. Then he runs afoul of an Indian tribe, and THAT’S WHEN THINGS BEGIN TO SERIOUSLY GO WRONG.
This was not the first time I’ve watched the film Jeremiah Johnson. In fact, I’ve seen the film numerous times… but I want to say that the last time I watched it, I was a pre-teen, so we’re talking somewhere in the region of twenty to thirty years since the last time I saw it. THUS, I’d say it’s fair to say that I was seeing this film with new eyes. As a kid, I found the movie rather depressing — and, it must be said, largely missed the point and all the subtext. So, although we picked up a copy of it a couple years back, I’ve been avoiding watching it, because I generally don’t like to be depressed. But, I only have a small group of proper “winter but not Christmas” movies, so it seemed like a good time to revisit this film and see if my childhood assessment of it still stood.
So, let’s just get it right out there — in spite of the fact that it has content I would normally consider “too depressing to enjoy”, this movie is exceptionally good.
Story and Tone
What’s the movie about? Well, it’s about Jeremiah Johnson, the historical figure (obviously) — but in a large sense, it’s a story about survival. A man pushed to the utter limits, physically and emotionally, and living on, regardless. It’s so sad, so terrible, so tragic, so painful — and yet, ultimately, kind of uplifting in a “triumph of human stubbornness”, “determination to survive” kind of way. Jeremiah Johnson (in the film) was pushed to the edge — and yet, he lived.
Mr. Hall says I should talk about the “violence” in the movie. Yes, there is a lot of violence in the film, but it’s not gratuitous “violence for the sake of violence”; in a way, it’s often very understated, which makes it all the more shocking and horrifying. The tone of the film is expertly crafted.
Performance
Robert Redford is so good. He’s convincing as the young, inept version of Jeremiah Johnson who first arrives in the snowy woods in the mountains — and he’s convincing as the older, beaten-down Jeremiah Johnson, pushed to the limits of his endurance — and yet, still alive, never giving up. He gives a great performance, as well as a stunningly detailed performance — Robert Redford is riding horses, he’s messing with (real) dead animals, and all in the snow (REAL SNOW; no coconut flakes for him. The film looks like it was utterly grueling to film).
Of course, all the other actors in this movie (of which there are only a handful; basically, is a tour-de-force of Robert Redford) give great performances, too. I can’t point at a single actor in this movie who seemed mis-cast or didn’t seem to be giving it their all.
Music
The music is… um. Well, let’s just say that it’s the one part of the movie that feels like it’s from the era that the movie came from. Oh, it’s not terrible — it’s fine — and it doesn’t hurt the film. After the initial song, I didn’t even notice it. But as soon as I heard the opening song, I was like, "Oh, so this movie is from the 70's, eh?"
"The Ballad of Jeremiah Johnson"
Not that there is a lot of music in this movie — and other than the handful of songs, the soundtrack is nature and silence. The silence is appropriate, as this movie is about raw, painful reality; the reality of being out in the snow, in the cold, trying desperately to start a fire so that you don’t DIE. Because if you fail to start a fire, you will die. But you might die anyway because you failed to catch a fish to eat. And then you will probably die anyway because snow just fell on your fire and put it out. Did I mention you are going to die?
SPOILERS and Historical Context
Some hideously horrifying stuff happens in this movie, but — for the history buffs amongst you — I will spoil one thing: the actual historical Jeremiah Johnson was known as “Liver-Eating” Johnson due to his (reported) penchant for eating his enemies’ livers, and this does not happen in the movie. (His enemies [Native Americans of the “Crow” persuasion] believed that they needed their livers intact in order to successfully achieve the after-life, so there was a “method to his madness”, as they say. FYI, he wasn’t just eating Crow livers to be a jerk, and it wasn’t that he disliked Native Americans as a whole (quite the opposite); there was a matter of the Crow tribe murdering his family over some perceived slight that launched the whole debacle. Now, the family murdering does happen in the movie — as does the war between Jeremiah Johnson and the entire Crow tribe — but no liver-eating.
The historical man. Somehow... the name suits him.So, I suppose I could complain that the movie, therefore, is historically inaccurate. But I’m not going to complain. I do realize that movies have to abbreviate material (especially when their material is a person’s entire life) in order to tell a story within the length of a normal film. And as far as leaving out the “liver-eating” detail… I would suggest this was probably a good call on their part; Jeremiah Johnson comes off as more heroic and determined, and less insane and disgusting, as a result.Ultimately
Well, my summing-up here shouldn’t come as any surprise based on the rest of the review… I think this movie is well-acted, looks great, feels great, and (despite featuring a rather 70’s-sounding theme song and not going as gruesome as the movie could have gone)… feels more realistic than many “realistic” movies that I’ve seen. It’s also disturbing — and, whether you like it or not, it will stick with you, and you’ll might just have a bit more respect for the determination of the people who settled the West.
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
No comments have been added yet.
