One thing I’d like to ask in advance
before I even begin this revew: Why in the Hell did the dueling
banjos scene from Deliverance become a iconic symbol of
redneck horror? The banjo redneck has nothing to do with the
assaults on the protagonists, and the entire scene comes off as quite
friendly. While the banjo player (Billy Redden) later becomes
standoffish (he seems to have autism and is uninterested in outsiders
beyond the music they play), he certainly never harms a fly as far as
we can tell. Somehow though, through pop cultural osmosis, the scene
has come to be associated with a prelude to redneck rape, and the
banjo player has become a member of the gang.
The premise of the movie is that four
Atlanta businessmen (Jon Voight, Burt Reynolds, Ned Beatty, and Ronny
Cox) decide to canoe down a river that’s about to be flooded by the
construction of a new dam. They go down the wrong branch of the
river, and end up in a confrontation with two locals (Bill McKinney
and Herbert Coward), which results in one of their party, Bobby
(Beatty), being raped and one of the attackers dying with an arrow
through his chest. So concerned that local familial relations will
lead to an unfair trial if the death is discovered, the men decide to
simply bury the body, let the flooding cover it and move on down the
river.
I think Burt Reynolds’ character is
supposed to be unlikable in this film. He’s the experienced
outdoors man, and he’s responsible for taking out the redneck
rapist. But he also likes to throw his weight around, and he’s
also the one who proposes disposing of the body. Plenty of movies
love showing that the big, tough guy isn’t nearly as impressive as
he thinks he is, but this is usually played for laughs. In this
movie though, it’s quite dramatic and realistic. He knows more
about the outdoors than the others do and he’s a good shot with a
bow, he’s also wildly overconfident and becomes helpless once
wounded in a canoeing accident.
Only one protagonist actually dies in
this movie, Drew (Cox), and in a fairly non-gory way. In fact,
debates have been raging for decades regarding whether he was shot,
fell into the river by accident or committed suicide. Personally, I
think it looked as though he jumped. However, the film itself makes
the psychological trauma the real danger.
The remaining rapist is disposed of
fairly easily. He may or may not have shot the dead man, but he’s
taken out shortly afterwards. The remainder of the film pits the
men, first against the elements, and then against their own fear as
they reach the town and are forced to lie about the events; hoping
that no conclusive evidence of the encounter comes to light, and that
they won’t be betrayed by one another.
The final act does come across as a bit
contrived to me. The townsfolk know that a member of their party
died and that another was wounded. They also know that two local men
went off hunting and haven’t yet come back. I find it rather
strange that they would see these two things as being connected,
since vacationers getting hurt on the rapids and two rednecks losing
track of time in the woods should both be fairly common occurrences.
However, it seems to be implied that the police are well-aware of
what probably happened, but can’t hold them due to lack of
evidence. I suppose that an omniscient police force was necessary to
give a final bit of kick to the film.
This is a good movie. The rape scene
was disturbing, but the remainder of the film was primarily a
well-acted, well-directed drama. I recommend it.
No comments:
Post a Comment