Meek's Cutoff

Last year I was really surprised with the latest film of Niclas Winding Refn, Valhalla Rising, mainly because of how he was able to generate such a grand-scope epic with as minuscule a budget as he must've had. His production consisted basically of taking a group of actors, props and costumes into some stunning locations and start filming, just trying to capture the magnificence of those landscapes the best way they could. The result was somewhat awe-inspiring, a film that created some visions so epic that it made Peter Jackson's The Lord Of The Rings look tiny and unimportant in comparison, almost like they had reversed budgets. in many ways, Meek's Cutoff does just that, although in turn it delivers a much, much better film as well.

The film is set during the travels through the Oregon Trail in 1845, where three families led by a contractual guide Stephen Meek get lost in the desert. Meek keeps saying they'll be there soon, but the route he promised took no more than two weeks to get through has already lasted for five, and they seemed nowhere close to the mountain pass they were aiming for. As he becomes more and more unreliable, and water starts running out, they come across a native, who they capture and want to force to have him lead them to water.

There are a couple of reasons why this reminds me of not only Valhalla Rising, but also Werner Herzog's Aguirre: The Wrath Of God before it. The most obvious connection between these films is that they all treat that notion of a group of people foreign to a particular land begin a journey through it and quickly lose their way, so much of the film we spend seeing them drift aimlessly through these landscapes, becoming more desperate about the growing shortage of food and water. Then, as I mentioned earlier, there's also the matter of the production scheme - Herzog did something similar when he made up these rafts and dressed a troupe of actors as conquistadores and went ahead and started telling his story. In the case of Meek's Cutoff, what we see throughout the entire film are a group of people, oxen and horses carrying a couple of wagons with them across some superbly shot arid landscapes, with the story needing only that to flesh out, but it is all so incredibly captured, so nicely treated from the sound and the atmosphere, that one can't help but be engulfed by what he's watching.

Much like Herzog and Winding Refn, though, what also makes this film work is that there is a constant sense of a metaphysical element working in the background. It is not just merely that these natural terrains hold an ancient charm to them, in a sense that you can almost imagine the world's history just by looking at them, but because all of these locations are heavily tinged by the native culture and beliefs, by their rituals and their own codes and languages. All throughout this journey, within each location one can notice several paintings on the rocks, carvings, and signs such as rocks piled up in an almost totemic fashion. This all becomes more apparent when the native character appears in the scene, and thus the protagonists are also forced to live with the culture and beliefs of this individual without being able to communicate with each other. There's an absolutely magnificent moment late in the film where a man falls down due to dehydration, and the native beings to spray sand on him and sing and everyone around him just looks. It's a sequence that reminded me a lot to that shot in Aguirre: The Wrath Of God where Aguirre is standing beside a man playing a traditional Andean melody on a panflute.

It's an absolutely wonderful film and I urge everyone to see it, a stunning meditation on the idea of the foreigner invading a land and culture he does not truly understand. The ending left me chills running down my spine.

Its unorthodox – 'revisionist' – take on the Western will stimulate more debate than the story itself. It's sure to be praised for its presumed artistic qualities, but I watch Westerns for their brio and sense of fun, never as art.

My verdict is that 'Meek's Cutoff' is slow – definitely slow and not 'well-paced' – desultory and monotonous. And yet every time the film was on the cusp of being disengaging, it did something to regain my attention. I saw the film twice and still couldn't decide what it was about. This is a film of suggestion. We're responsible for how the story ends.

After a wordless opening, we encounter a motley crew, some Irish but mostly American. They're being escorted, along with their few wagons, donkeys, horses and oxen, across the beautiful and baleful Oregon plains to a valley, where we assume they will settle. Their escort is Stephen Meek (Bruce Greenwood), a loquacious, over-friendly cowboy, who has a tacit propensity for violence.

An etching by one of the band (prolific youngster Paul Dano) on a dead tree updates us on their progress: 'Lost' (something inhabitants never are in Westerns; their sense of geography is always mind-bogglingly good). They've been travelling for several days in the wrong direction and are in desperate need of water. Meek insists they will reach their destination soon.

Film factotum Kelly Reichardt, here director and editor, keeps us in the dark for much of the film. The camera pans back when there is conversation. What dialogue we do hear is muffled and limited (or incomprehensible when spoken by Meek). It's like we're eavesdropping and aren't supposed to know something.

A solitary Native American is spotted. His presence in these deathly quiet lands frightens the band. He is captured by Meek and Solomon Tetherow (Will Patton). Some argue that he will lead them to more Indians, so should be killed; but Solomon reasons that he can be used to lead them to water and their destination.

The band continues their voyage, taking 'The Indian' with them. Still nothing happens. Gradually, an ominous sense creeps in, made palpable by Jeff Grace's eerie score and Chris Blauvelt's atmospheric cinematography. (Both men have played second fiddle on big films, but show their competence as lead fiddlers here.) Suddenly the possibilities abound. Is that a smile 'The Indian' affects when one of the wagons is demolished? Does he plan to ambush them? Will the band ever reach the valley?

Apart from film students and die-hard Western fans, I can't tell who to recommend this critically acclaimed film to. I found the vistas beautiful to behold and I appreciated the tranquility. There's a faintly mystical quality. But I found it plodding and I can't forgive the ending, which I thought was criminally abrupt.

www.scottishreview.net

"Is he ignorant, or is he just plain evil?" Three families decide to start a new life in 1845 Oregon. They hire master guide Meek (Greenwood) to lead them along the Oregon Trail. When a shortcut turns out to become dangerous Emily (Williams) begins to openly question his abilities. This is one of the rare westerns that have been released in the last 10 years. A good one, almost a great one. While this movie does have it's slow moments the scenery and acting (an all star cast) more then make up for it. This is one of the independent movies that I talk about when i say that big budget movies that are crap get more publicity then the little ones that need it, and are 1,000,000 times better. This movie also has two of my favorite underrated actors in it, Bruce Greenwood (in an Oscar caliber role) and Will Patton. This is one great movie. Overall, not only one of the best westerns in the last 10 years, but one of the best movies period. Watch this, it's awesome. I give it an A-

Would I watch again? - Probably

'Who knows what's over that hill? Could be water, could be an army of heathens…blood or water' – the words of Stephen Meek, a hardened pioneer of the Western front, whose name is more than a slight contradiction of character. The year is 1845 and Meek is the guide for members of three families who have left the settlements on the thriving Eastern Seaboard of America and are now undertaking the last leg of their long journey, through Oregon desert. Although they are at the brink of their destination – the uncertainty of their route, the need for food and water, and more than anything the threat of Indigenous tribes – is deeply felt.

Kelly Reichardt has been an intriguing presence on the independent scene for several years now. While sparse and potentially esoteric, her previous films Old Joy and Wendy and Lucy felt very unique, rich in atmosphere and subtext. This one, shot in the 4:3 aspect ratio – this is clearly not about gorgeous panoramic Western vistas, but an arid environment and sense of isolation, constriction and fear that the characters can't escape. The cinematography is enveloping – every image and sound has clarity of intent and authenticity that's impressive, but not mechanical, there's a level of artistry here that's seamless.

Reichardt has done a remarkable job. The way in which we first encounter this group has an almost voyeuristic dimension. We observe them bringing their belongings across the river, cages and basket across, a woman pregnant. The classic wagon vehicle. We see the necessity they feel to wade through and continue on their journey no matter what. Reichardt's not interested in fulfilling the conventions of the genre or even screen writing at large – nothing is indicated, nothing is too obvious – and the decisions she makes in terms structure and thematic elements are felt on a subliminal level, right up until the final shot. By defying expectations of the genre and her film becomes all the more engrossing.

This is quite a simple story about people with simple customs and practical needs – driven by a need to fulfill their 'Manifest Destiny' – the inherent right they feel to colonize this new land. Setting off on the journey, Meek himself tries to enforce his high status, telling the youngsters cautionary tales of bears and brutes and emitting a seemingly affable macho persona. For the rest of the group, there is a sense of communal obligation and not too much time for soul-searching or camaraderie. Reichardt does not draw attention to anything - whether it be the name actors she has playing these very pared down roles or the multitude of themes and messages running beneath the surface.

Among the eclectic ensemble of actors in the film is Michelle Williams, Reichardt's muse previously on Wendy and Lucy – who continues to go from strength to strength in proving her versatility and conviction as an actress. Here she plays Emily Tethero – a young mother on this trek, and eventual moral compass for the audience. She's invisible in the role - in the best sense; there is no big announcement or introductory close-up of her arrival on screen as 'Two-Time Academy Award®-nominee Michelle Williams', now playing dress-up in the desert – the blatant heroine of the piece. No, Reichardt is smart and knows how to treat the audience with intelligence, she does not indicate anything. However, as the narrative unfolds, Emily's increasing speculation over their route, her concerns about water and private ideas of gender roles makes her an adversary for Meek.

These tensions come to a head however when they encounter a Native American Indian. From the moment this happens – Williams' character immediately decides to take very practical action to the threat. But soon enough this Cherokee man becomes a possession for the group, an entity they fear so intensely yet cannot let go of – they interrogate him to find out the route, to know of any more like him who may attempt to destroy. The fear of the Other is palpable and the ultimate intent of the film is revealed.

However, Emily Tethero is the one who listens to him – she hears him praying despite not understanding his words, she also repairs his shoe. She begins to become more lenient with him, despite her upbringing and societal beliefs. As the group's situation begins to become more desperate - these various gestures and allowances enrage Meek – with a turbulent dynamic beginning to form and some consequence and yet it never descends into hysterics.

If the job of the artist is to deepen the mystery - then Kelly Reichardt has succeeded. By the end of this film there are no clear answers. There is no sense of the world being set to rights by this story, the film does not presume that what it is has to say about race relations (still relevant in 2011 and beyond) is closing the book on the topic, not for the characters, nor the audience. The film is not about these people's ultimate destination because the sense of closure and satisfaction felt at the end of most movies is an illusion - an entertaining one, which we can suspend our disbelief to enjoy, but an illusion nonetheless. Here that kind of compromise is not necessary, and to witness this on screen is like a window into the past.

It is interesting reading all of these angry people here, who seem to appreciate having seen an amazing film but don't understand why it does not have a 'three act structure' or Hero's journey. If you are a fan of early Michael Haneke or even Tarkovsky (to a lesser extent), then you will like this film. It is a very gentle observational piece which takes its time to even let you hear human voices. It wants you to feel the wind on the scrub desert or to hear the bubbling of the river.

To make a film like that, especially in America where the audience is weened on cleanly prepared stories that have beginnings, middles and ends, is brave, stubborn and amazingly lucky that Kelly Reichardt was able to raise the money to make it.

Fantastic. Unique, Beautiful.

But just do not expect to be 'told' what happens next, because nothing massively important actually does. Just like life really.