The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)

Last updated on: April 11, 2013 at 12:31 pm by Jeffrey Overstreet

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007) 2013-04-11T12:31:17-06:00 Jeffrey Overstreet

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A while back, maybe a year or two, I saw some photographs in the newspaper that revealed a new wax likeness of Brad Pitt for the famous Madame Tussaud’s museum.

My how far he’s come. It seems like only yesterday that a feisty actor with a roguish grin showed up in Thelma and Louise, and then earned comparisons to the young Robert Redford in A River Runs Through It. Since then, Pitt has blazed his own trail through Hollywood history and become an uber-icon. His personal choices have thrown fuel on the fire of his celebrity, so that it has become almost impossible to discuss his movies without being sidetracked with talk about his tabloid coverage.

You could almost swear that it isn’t Brad Pitt we’re watching in Andrew Dominick’s The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. It seems more like we’re watching the wax statue. It’s as though Pitt’s journey into legendary status has hardened him, caused him to flee from his sex-symbol status. In 2006’s Babel, he seemed determined to show us the deepening lines around his eyes and the bruises and regrets within them. And here, his laughter — once playful and charismatic laugh — is bitter and sneering. It’s as if the Legend of Brad Pitt has caused the actor to retreat from his own skin, burrowing inward. Weary of what people believe him to be, or want him to be, he leaves us with an enigma: the familiar shell, minus the youthful spirit.

This is, of course, all speculation. But it may have something to do with why Brad Pitt is the perfect choice to play Jesse James in this film. He has exactly what the role demands. I don’t know, really, whether to praise this as the peak of his career as an actor (which has included some very fine performances indeed), or if it’s really just Pitt being himself and letting us consider the connections between himself and that other American legend whose reputation became too big to bear.

Whatever the case, Pitt’s presence is both a distraction and a benefit to the movie. We can’t avoid considering the baggage he brings to the movie. But we also cannot deny how he imbues long, quiet, meditative scenes with drama and menace. There’s a subterranean intelligence behind that poker face. His restraint teases us into asking questions about the character. That’s good acting.

In fact, every aspect of this film invites us to think things through, rather than merely basking in the entertainment. Watching Assassination feels like reading a detailed novel about the Old West. That’s because it’s adapted from a novel by Ron Hansen, author of Mariette in Ecstasy. Most big-screen adaptations are reinventions, only very loosely based on some ideas from a text. Assassination makes us feel as if we’re turning the pages of a weighty hardbound volume illustrated by cinematographer Roger Deakins’ vivid imagery. Each picture lingers, letting us examine the faces of the cast, the subtleties in their expressions, and the exquisite details of their costumes and locations.

It begins with what is, most likely, the most beautiful train robbery ever filmed. It’s a late night in 1881 when the James Gang pulls off “one last job” on a magnificent passenger train. The robbery takes its toll, not just on the audience but on the robbers themselves. Frank James (Sam Shepard) has the good sense to walk away and stick to his word — he surrenders the life of crime.

But his younger brother Jesse soldiers on, intimidating and manipulating his gang of greedy fools while he slips through the clutches of the authorities like a ghost. But we know where this is headed — the gang’s coming apart at the seams.

At first glance, you might guess Assassination’s slow-burn storytelling was the work of Terrence Malick. Deakins’ exquisite cinematography gives us a view back through time as if filming through antique glass. But the imagery, while enthralling, is not as eloquent as Malick’s; it looks good, but never offers much in the way of metaphor.

No, it’s the performances that make this picture compelling in spite of its snail’s-pace narrative. Casey Affleck, playing Robert Ford, is the real surprise here, unexpectedly anchoring the picture as an insecure hero-worshipper who believes he can become a legend in his own right. And the versatile Sam Rockwell (Matchstick Men, The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy) continues to impress, playing Robert’s older brother Charlie with a delicate balance of goofball humor and sweaty-palmed terror. (In this viewer’s opinion, Rockwell’s turn is the most memorable and complicated in the film.)

The supporting cast look as if they stepped out of archival photographs. Mary-Louise Parker does a great deal with her few moments onscreen as Jesse’s wife. Jeremy Renner is frightfully brash as Wood Hite, Paul Schneider makes Dick Liddil arrogant and unnerving, and Ed Miller plays Garret Dillahunt with such fear and trembling that you fear he’ll implode before your very eyes. Zooey Deschanel and Alison Elliott both make strong impressions as women with the toughness to endure a rough world of violent male egos.

And then, again, there’s Pitt — utterly convincing as a man hollowed out by his own scandalous legacy. Most of his performance is in his fitful tongue and jaw, as if Jesse can’t quite spit out the foul aftertaste of his actions. When the title’s promise is fulfilled, it seems more a surrender than an execution.

For many, the film will go on too long. But that has more to do with viewers’ impatience in an age of fast-paced entertainment than it has to do with any flaw in the film’s artistry. Dominick understands that there is much more to the story beyond the event mentioned in the title. The subject of the film is not How Jesse Fell. There are, in fact, several “subjects” in this film. We find ourselves considering some of the same territory that Clint Eastwood pondered in Unforgiven. We watch how men can be manipulated and deceived by fear. We watch Robert Ford, and we see that even justice can be damaging if it is carried out in a wrongful spirit. And then there’s that theme so suddenly prevalent on the big screen: the corrupting nature of violence, even well-intentioned violence.

This is one of those films that will probably be considered a box office failure, due to audiences who want their shoot-em-ups to be fun and frivolous. But over the years, Assassination will earn the respect it deserves. You can be among the first to appreciate it in the best possible context… in a theater, on the big screen.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

Previous Post

October 10, 2007

Two Weeks From Today: "Auralia's Colors" at the Seattle Public Library

Next Post

October 15, 2007 Don't Underestimate the Rat in the Kitchen

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Blog Bloggers on "Through a Screen Darkly" Browser Coming Soon Endorsements Fiction Books Film Forum Film Reviews Inspirations Interviews Journal Kindlings Muse Movie buzz Music Reviews Non-Fiction Books radio Reviewers on "Through a Screen Darkly" The Auralia Thread Through a Screen Darkly Through a Screen Darkly - Bonus Materials Top 10 (or 20 or 100) lists Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 July 2003 May 2003 March 2003 September 1999

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does Paul say about weakness in 2 Corinthians 12?

Select your answer to see how you score.

"Avoid all weakness." "Weakness leads to destruction." "The weak shall perish." "God’s power is made perfect in weakness."