The Homesman (2014); directed by Tommy Lee Jones

large_MV5BMTQ4NTkxOTEyMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTI1NzcwMzE_._V1__SX1196_SY648_

The Homesman really got to me. A feminist Western. Disturbing, emotional, messy, strange.

My review of The Homesman is now up at Rogerebert.com.

This entry was posted in Movies and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to The Homesman (2014); directed by Tommy Lee Jones

  1. bybee says:

    I just read this book last month. Cannot wait for this movie to hit Korea!!!

  2. bybee says:

    Bless the Beasts and Children was Swarthout’s “answer” book to The Lord of the Flies.

  3. sheila says:

    Really!! How interesting! Can you tell me more?

    I saw the movie when I was – 10? 9? It was on afternoon television. It upset me so much that I couldn’t sleep that night. It’s been years since I saw it but I will never forget that first experience of it. Then I took the book out of the library and read it. I was a glutton for punishment, I guess.

    Also, that he also wrote Where the Boys Are??

  4. sheila says:

    Did a bit of Googling around and found this quote from Swarthout:

    “This book has the idea that people are not bestial in nature. It is just the opposite of Lord of the Flies. The idea is, if you isolate boys with the right combination of circumstances, they will do great things. So much is now anti-hero. This is a ‘yes’ book.”

    I really need to read it again – as well as his other stuff.

    Did you like The Homesman, bybee? Sounds like you did, right?

  5. bybee says:

    Bless the Beasts and Children…That’s the quote I was thinking of, Sheila!

    The Homesman was such a satisfying read. A different take on the Old West…what happens if you can’t hack prairie life? The odd pairing of the claim-jumper and the woman homesteader. The minister who conceived of the program to rescue these women…probably the most positive person of the cloth I’ve seen in fiction in decades. Nobility like in BtBaC, but Swarthout doesn’t trumpet it.

    Once upon a time, about 8 years ago, I was in a used bookstore in Seoul. Saw a paperback copy (movie tie-in) of The Shootist. Passed it up. Went back next time and it was gone. Still kicking myself.

    • sheila says:

      Speaking of The Shootist – Criterion just released it with another Monte Hellman Western. My friend Kim has a video-essay on Warren Oates included – very excited to take a look at it!

      And I agree about the minister!! He’s the same way in the film, a truly concerned individual, who tries to figure out the best way to handle the situation. The most compassionate way. He’s not fire and brimstone. These poor women are also his congregants – they are, in his mind, under his care. He does his best.

      Streep has a great cameo too – it’s real fun to see her and Jones together again after Hope Springs (which I loved).

  6. Glenn Wilhite says:

    I read your Rogerebert.com review after searching for one on Google. I went looking for an explanation of this movie which I found disturbing and, as you put it, strange. Thank you for making sense of it all and for giving me a greater appreciation of this film and its creators. I also enjoyed reading about Marilyn Monroe

    • sheila says:

      Glenn! Thank you so much for seeking me out to tell me your thoughts. I am very intrigued by them. Yes: disturbing and strange … I keep coming back to it to try to parse it out, to try to be with it and its message – particularly the wacky ending – which I found very intriguing – and it took me a while to realize that it made the title make sense. It’s about him, not the women – and his relationship to them and caring for them. I’m still not sure about this – it continues to intrigue me. And how about James Spader?? What on EARTH…. I bought on DVD just so I can have it close at hand.

      Thanks again for reading and commenting. I appreciate it very much!

  7. Eugene Housego says:

    I watched “The Homesman” recently, and then cycled back to read your beautifully written review on Ebert.

    In the film, I was seriously knocked off kilter by the sudden plot twist involving Cuddy and also by the postscript at the end as her tombstone is kicked into the river. In both cases, I didn’t know how to go on as a viewer.

    It seems there were acres and acres of untold grief in the old west. Thanks for shedding some light as to why.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.