Bite the Bullet

I’ve always been a big western fan, especially those with an epic scope, but BITE THE BULLET has been one of those of this genre that has escaped me over the years, occasionally catching bits and pieces of edited versions on TV. And I wondered why, considering the cast and the director, it was not better known, or held in a higher esteem, among cinephiles; certainly the actors involved have legions of fans. So recently, to fill in this gap in my movie knowledge, I bought the DVD and decided to find out for myself, discovering a lot to like in this film, but also gaining an understanding of why it has never quite obtained the status of a classic.BITE THE BULLET’s plot certainly grabbed me: set in 1908, it centers on a grueling 750 mile horse race across the American West, with the winner getting a prize of $2,000, no small sum in those days. The film’s protagonists are a motley group of familiar types, each with their own motives for putting themselves through the hell it will take to cross the finish line and claim the prize. They are a pair of ex Rough Riders, played by Gene Hackman and James Coburn, old friends who have gone their separate ways; Candice Bergen as a prostitute who can ride with the best of men; Ben Johnson as an old cowhand on a Last Hurrah; Jan Michael Vincent as a young punk, Johnson’s complete opposite; Ian Bannen as a wealthy English sportsman; and Mario Artega as an impoverished Mexican, whose toothache literally requires him to bite the bullet. There was a lot of star power and talent on display, with all these actors at the peak of their game in roles that fit them like a glove. But the behind the scenes star was writer-producer-director Richard Brooks, who had started in the business making movies for MGM, and had gone on to make CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF, ELMER GANTRY, IN COLD BLOOD, and one of the greatest adventure westerns of the 60’s, THE PROFESSIONALS, about a sundry group of men paid to go on a dangerous mission. Brooks’ script worked in the themes of friendship and loyalty, sportsmanship and the notion of doing what it takes to win at all cost; the passing of the Old West, and those displaced by it; and animal cruelty, specifically against the horses, some of whom are literally run to death in graphic scenes in order for the their riders to stay in the race. All of this is set to an evocative score by Alex North, and cinematography by Harry Stradling, which makes some striking use of slow motion in order to show the perspective of a character. The American West has never looked better, or more beautiful, this is one 70’s western that most definitely was not shot on the Universal back lot.Gene Hackman was at the top of his 70’s stardom at the time, and I think his Spanish American war veteran with a soft spot for horses is one of his better roles, one that highlighted his ability to say a lot without dialogue, he has a couple of truly memorable scenes opposite Jan Michael Vincent, one where he and Coburn literally slap some manners into his punk cowboy, and another one scene, completely wordless, where, on a hot desert floor, there is another confrontation over Vincent’s treatment of his horse. That part of the movie is not for those upset by the sight of animals in distress. Ben Johnson has a monologue delivered so movingly he should have gotten another Best Supporting Actor nomination, and Bergen, who acting skills came in for a lot of grief during those years, acquits herself well here, although she just too classy to convincingly play a lady of the evening. It is sad to see the young Jan Michael Vincent now in one of his best 70’s films, he really was a big deal back then, and a lot of fans thought he would go on to great things; sadly for him, not to be.But though there is so much to like in BITE THE BULLET, it never quite seals the deal with me, never hitting that high gear that all of my favorite movies achieve. And I think this has a lot to with Brooks’ script, which to me, never adequately develops, or properly exploits, the full potential of his story’s premise. This is a movie about a grueling cross country race, yet for most of its running time, we never know who is ahead, thus fumbling an opportunity to create and sustain genuine tension, allowing the pace to falter. There is a third act twist with Bergen’s character that comes out of nowhere, with no foreshadowing, it seems to happen only to allow a big action sequence to be inserted into the narrative. The final sequence, where the winner crosses the finish line, something the whole movie should have been building toward, feels very abrupt. Brooks fails to give his protagonists a clear and distinct motive to win the race: Hackman wants to save his ranch; Coburn has gambling debts; Vincent wants to be a big shot; Johnson wants dignity; the Mexican needs the money for his family, but they are mentioned almost as though they are afterthoughts, not goals driving them to win against all obstacles and opponents. I felt like we never become as fully invested in these characters, and their fates, as much as we should. Which is a shame, because a decade earlier, in THE PROFESSIONALS, Brooks made a western about a similar group of characters that was tight, suspenseful, and engrossing from beginning to end; clearly he was going to the same well again in BITE THE BULLET, but not with the same results.I think BITE THE BULLET suffered from bad timing, it got a big release in the summer of 1975, the year JAWS pretty much sucked all the oxygen out of the room as far as its competition was concerned. BITE THE BULLET got decent to mixed reviews, and under performed at the box office. By the mid 70’s, American movie critics were very much taken with the young Easy Riders and Raging Bulls generation of directors – Coppola, Friedkin, Bogdanovich, and Spielberg, and they had a noticeable lack of patience with older directors like Brooks, whose careers stretched back to the big studio days. It didn’t matter that Brooks had a string of hits in the 60’s, often with edgy material, he was now totally passé, and the fact that he had made a movie which easily could have come out 20 years earlier only proved their point. That BITE THE BULLET was something of a throwback was undeniable, I think with a few revisions, Brooks’ script would have worked well for Howard Hawks in 1954, with John Wayne in the Hackman role.Still, this movie has many fans, and despite my criticism, I think it earns them fairly, and it certainly deserves to be seen by more people, as there is much to like here, as many of its themes are timeless and universal. I would also add, that I think BITE THE BULLET would be an excellent candidate for a remake, especially for a younger film maker desiring to make a western; the genre hasn’t died, it just doesn’t work as hard as it used to.

Lots of unusual and unexpected twists and turns to this story line!! It was great!!

I'm not a huge fan of westerns, although I've enjoyed some of them a great deal. I first saw "Bite the Bullet" at the Paramount Theatre in Denver, CO, in the summer of 1975. When I learned that the movie was available on disc, I wanted to see if I still liked it as much as I did then. The story is about a horse race taking place in 1906 across much of what was then very wild territory. The old West is slowly fading away, and modern developments are changing the way things are done. While automobiles existed in 1906, and a handful had by then even made the trip from one coast to the other (starting in 1903, with a Winton), none are to be found in this film. At that time, automobiles were mostly toys which belonged to the wealthy, and weren't yet used as day-to-day transportation by the masses, especially in the remote West. The only internal combustion device in the film is a motorcycle, piloted by a reporter who is covering the race. It's painted to resemble an early Harley-Davidson, but is in fact a Montesa of the early 1970's, with modifications of make it look like an antique. The story revolves around the different characters entered in the race, their reasons for wanting to win, and how they relate to one another (not always smoothly). After watching the film for only the second time, I found that it has held up well, and I still enjoyed it.

Westerns were falling out of favor as a genre when this movie came out in 1975. At the same time, the U.S. was preparing to mark its bicentennial. According to the new book "Tough as Nails: The Life and Films of Richard Brooks" (available from amazon.com), writer-director Brooks wanted to make a movie that looked back at what had made America great. That was quite different from so many movies of the period, which took aim at what was going wrong in the country.Brooks had made only two other westerns in his career as a screenwriter and director, but he had managed to make an impression with both. "The Last Hunt" focused on how buffalo fell victim to racism against the American Indian, and "The Professionals" was a solid action movie anchored by a great script and solid direction.For "Bite the Bullet" he wrote an original script (those other two westerns had been based on novels) about a 700-mile horse race, the kind of endurance race popular at the turn of the 20th century. Along with Gene Hackman and James Coburn he cast western veteran Ben Johnson for the movie's most poignant character.Some people consider this movie a bore. I have yet to talk to a western fan who didn't like it, particularly for its cinematography. Its music got an Oscar nomination for Alex North. If you can, watch the widescreen version instead of the pan-and-scan format. Tough as Nails: The Life and Films of Richard Brooks (Wisconsin Film Studies)

If nothing else, this movie has a great cast and a very interesting storyline. It begins in the first few years of the 20th century somewhere in the West. A 700 mile race is promoted by a newspaper that sets rider and horse against each other and the elements. It also pits the wealthy and their resources against those of more modest means with obvious results. However, I feel the strengh of "Bite the Bullet" is not so much a story of classes as it is the characters themselves. With a plethora of well-known character actors, the movie takes the time to develop each of these characters in a manner that makes "Bite the Bullet" an enjoyable and very watchable movie. Obviously, as a person who loves the wide-screen version of any movie, I cannot wait for "Bite the Bullet" to come out in DVD and widescreen format. However, until that time, I feel that once you see the cast involved in "Bite the Bullet" you will enjoy watching this wonderful and underrated version an era coming to an end.

This Western has a light touch, without ever being camp or dated.The plot surrounds a 700 mile endurance horse race, and the varied contestants that enter it. As the movie unfolds, there are themes of 'do as you would be done unto' and also that striving for the best does not have to mean sacrificing the things that are important - in this case, how you treat animals, and indeed people.Although fun, it is never a comedy, and the superb casting makes for some moments rich in pathos, such as Ben Johnsons excellent turn as the old man wanting to make his mark and become somebody, or Ian Bannen as the wide eyed Englishman who looks up to the ideal of the West and wants to be part of it. The only weaker role is Candice Bergen, in a role that seems inserted for the sake of having a woman present, and does not add a great deal to the movie. Jan Michael Vincent also does well in his role as the brash and thoughtless young cowboy who wants to be somebody and will do anything to get there - though his transformation to nice guys seems somewhat rushed at the end.The main acting chops go to Gene Hackman and James Coburn who as ever lend genuine gravitas to what could otherwise have been too frothy a concoction. Gene Hackmans character gets the best moments, such as his relating the story of his Cuban wife to Candice Bergen, and the times when he cares for animals or people - the eyes tell the story of him being 'simpatico' as one character puts it.The scenery is varied - sometimes confusingly so, as the riders trot from desert to green forest in a few screen minutes, and beautifully captured with excellent cinematography. The script is deft, allowing for fun to be had with zingy one liners ('Aint never known a man that can hold liquor the way a bottle can..' and as one girl asks 'Buffalo Bill - aint he the fastest gun in the West?' the brothel madam replies 'only in bed, hon').The music by Alex North is rousing and effective, riffing frequently on Camptown Races, but not entirely memorable.Some might find the plot similar to Hidalgo, but this is simultaneously a simpler affair, being a more straightforward Western, and a richer affair, for having the excellent ensemble cast and a deft script which only runs out of steam somewhere near the end of the movie.Well worth a watch, especially at the reduced price - will fill in a lazy Sunday afternoon! And the moment of 'biting the bullet' might put you off the dentist for a while...

THIS IS AN ENJOYABLE WESTERN THAT IS A PLEASURE TO WATCH, DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT WAS FILMED MANY YEARS AGO. THE MAIN CHARACTERS, ESPECIALLY THE ONE PLAYED BY HACKMAN ARE TOUGH, HONEST PEOPLE WHOM YOU WANT TO SEE WIN THE PRIZE THEY'RE AFTER.RECOMMENDED TO THOSE LOOKING FOR "OLDIES BUT GOODIES".

Loved this, first saw it on tv and just had to get DVD to watch again.

Loved the plot, great acting, western with a twist

Got this for my Husband and he was well pleased with it...great film for Gene Hackman fans.....