Fúria no Sangue

"The Deadly Trackers" has a terrific cast. Put them in any other western and it would be great. For some reason this movie isn't so good. The most annoying thing in the movie, hands down, is Neville Brand's metal hand. It's just so stupid that it's wildly distracting. That's not the only problem with "The Deadly Trackers". This movie suffers from a cheapness to the production. It looks like a low budget spaghetti western. That may have been the type of western that they were trying to make but it just doesn't work. What a shame. "The Deadly Trackers" could have been great. (Just for the record, I enjoyed this movie tonight more than I did the last time I saw it. I'll give it another go in a few months. See what happens.)

Considering what a mess this film was...Sam Fuller fired as writer/director, along with all the co stars, by star Richard Harris who then hires friend/drinking companion Rod Taylor to be his co star and re-write Fuller...I suppose we should be thankful that there are any points of interest remaining. Actually there are several, most notably making one of the bad guys an African American, certainly a most un PC move for a 70s, non Blaxploitation pic. Also there is the usual fine acting of Neville Brand as a scumbag with the ability to be shocked by the greater evil of his boss, and finally Al Lettieri, the symbol of late 60s/early 70s villainy, playing an upholder of the law and doing a convincing job of it.

But mostly, this extremely violent film, shot in Mexico, with Isela Vega, is Peckinpah wannabe stuff. Give it a C plus.

PS...After "Lawrence Of Arabia" they shoulda banned all quicksand death scenes.

The Deadly Trackers was to be directed by the author of the original story, Sam Fuller. He was replaced by one or two other directors (identities unknown) and it was up to the dependable Barry Shear to complete the film. The opening sequence of stills and voice-overs is a liability to the overall film. My guess is that Shear, due to the chop and change of previous directors, had cobbled together pieces of their unfinished work. I would appreciate clarification of this from someone who knows. The importance of the opening sequence is that it establishes the motivation for the entire film. The violent shattering of this close-knit family drives the action - and should have given the viewer a greater appreciation of Richard Harris's despair. Otherwise Shear's film is an excellent thought-provoking western with an excellent performance by Al Lettieri playing the sheriff as the revenge-seeker's conscience. Vigilante theme worth comparing to films like Dirty Harry which was released two years earlier and set a trend in American cinema.

Memo: Whoever wrote the line `He shot the roses from her cheeks' should have been shot himself.

A very uneven film, filled with a "a bit of the olé' ultra-violence", shows its troubled production and finally emerges as a curios and a signpost of the changes in Hollywood that were still evolving and not without pains.

There is a vastness to the production with a gritty feel, children in distress and some really despicable characters. The Hero's change of heart from pacifist to killer is abrupt as are some of the other plot devices that take a backseat to the carnage and and mayhem.

It does have a memorable feeling to it that seems to stem from the movie's outrageous flourishes and one wonders if this was probably the best they could cobble from all the changes in Directors and other on the set strife. The good cast, however, are all in top form.

After all, it is recommended for fans of Westerns and movie chronology. It is a definite piece of postmodern cinema that is having difficulty (although not always aware) finding its niche and as a lot of seventies films show, it was not an easy transition as the art-form was released from over thirty years of repression.

An opening scene is one that will make the anti-gun group proud. The sheriff (a sober Richard Harris) explains that guns beget guns, etc. But when a group of super-nasties kill his school marm wife, and young son, it's a whole different story.

It's vengeance time and the next hour or so has to do with the sheriff on a one-man quest to find the head baddie (Rod Taylor relishing the role) and the chase takes us into Mexico and a small village where, usually, nothing much happens.

What happens in this flick is brutality piled on brutality, and violence up the ying-yang. Look at someone cross-eyed and you've had it mister.

There is the requisite prostitute with the requisite heart of gold and, by the way, some of the best acting comes from her little girl who was fathered by Taylor. She really looks scared --- well, you know the phrase.

So, the story is standard stuff, but it will hold your attention. The scenery is neat, the 'borrowed' music is neat and, for you lovers of violence, this is heaven on film although, to be honest, it is not as gross as you may have expected, since the films of Fuller are 'full-er' violence.

The moral to the story? Revenge is not always sweet. Would the Lone Ranger have done it this way?