423 Walker

[pauling]

Criterion should put a sticker on the outside packaging: "Moustache approved"

[Fletch F. Fletch]

Austin Chronicle review.

L.A. Times ran a brief interview with Cox:

Director Alex Cox's Waterloo moment

The Brit's 1987 film 'Walker' was a strange protest against U.S. foreign policy in Nicaragua, and Hollywood never forgave him for it.

By Dennis Lim, Special to The Times

BRITISH director Alex Cox made his name in the 1980s with two cult hits, the nihilist fantasy "Repo Man" (1984) and the punk valentine "Sid & Nancy" (1986).

His third feature, "Walker" (1987), finally arriving on DVD this week (Criterion, $39.95), was the last film he made in Hollywood. At once a biopic of a forgotten 19th century soldier of fortune (played by Ed Harris) and an act of protest against the Reagan-sponsored Contra war in 1980s Nicaragua, it remains one of the boldest and strangest political films ever made for an American studio.

In the years since, Cox has become a genuine outlaw filmmaker, working with minimal means on the margins of the system. He has directed a string of inventive, low-budget films, including "Highway Patrolman" (1991) and "Three Businessmen" (1998), some of which have been released straight to DVD. He recently completed a feature, shot on digital video and produced by Roger Corman, called "Searchers 2.0," a comic riff on the John Ford western. His website (alexcox.com) contains detailed information on future projects -- among them a slate of single-take "microfeatures" and a documentary about the Trident missile -- and offers free downloads of his produced and unproduced screenplays.

Speaking by phone from his home in the mountains of southern Oregon, Cox reflected on the perils of political filmmaking and the movie that just might have ended his Hollywood career.

When did you first become interested in Central American politics?

What was interesting to me was the way the media portrayed the Nicaraguan revolution. In 1979, right after the revolution, the Sandinistas were portrayed very favorably. We were told they were these passionate revolutionaries who had overthrown hated dictators. But then the slant in the media changed radically, and that's what got me interested. I went to Nicaragua around the time of the presidential election in 1983, met some teenage guys and made the mistake of telling them I was a filmmaker. They said, "Well, you should come down here and make a film about Nicaragua."

How did you learn of William Walker? And why did you make him the focus of the film?

There's a sign on the wall of a church in Granada that says it was burned in the 1850s by the retreating army of the filibuster William Walker. When I got back to the States, I saw an article in Mother Jones about the continuity in American foreign policy. It wasn't something that began in the 1920s with the Marines -- it started way back in the middle of the 19th century. And I'd never heard of this guy. But Walker was hugely popular in the 1850s. There were more columns and pictures in the newspapers devoted to Walker than all the presidents, which must have really annoyed them. In a hundred years, are people going to have heard of the "great liberator general" Tommy Franks, the hero of Fallujah? They're just guys who serve a purpose and then they don't.

With its broad humor and surreal anachronisms, the film has an unusual tone for a historical-military biopic.

We were all excited by the momentum of the revolution, and to go in there and make a conventional film would have been a bit lame. If we'd made a film in the usual American way it would have been from the point of view of a sympathetic journalist, who would go there with the very best of intentions and just watch things unravel, like "The Year of Living Dangerously" or "Courage Under Fire." Our intention was actually to make a broadly popular film, which is why it's full of jokes and violence and beautiful women.

Looking back now it seems amazing that "Walker" was made for Universal.

It was incredible, but since 1988 I have not had one offer of work from any of the Hollywood studios. I've existed entirely independent of the studios. You make one political film, and that's it -- blacklisted. But that's OK, it's a good film to be blacklisted for. In the end, it has to stand on its own merit, not because it was made with good intentions, and I actually think it does. It's crazy, it's about a madman, but it moves quickly, many exciting things happen.

[kaujot]

I'll post more indepth later, but I was very impressed with Walker. There were many shots and scenes that left me with my mouth agape.

And man, people call Ace in the Hole an "angry" film? I could practically see Alex Cox spitting in rage.

[arsonfilms]

I'm so glad people are giving this one a chance. I was very impressed when I saw it in London a few years back, and the initial skepticism when the DVD was first announced made me a little sad. I'm going to wait for one of the sales before I pick it up, but its too much fun not to have. A joyful expression of sheer rage if ever there was one.

[kaujot]

A joyful expression of sheer rage if ever there was one.

That's a really excellent way of phrasing it.

[Fletch F. Fletch]

The Onion A.V. Club interviews Cox about Walker.

[Cronenfly]

The Onion A.V. Club interviews Cox about Walker.

Wow, he addresses the 'stache and being married to a woman named Tod in the same interview...nice.

[colinr0380]

The feature where Cox discusses Walker's reviews is available to download here.

Jonathan Rosenbaum reposts his positive review of Walker.

[zeroism]

Just have to add an expression of love for this film. I see part of Cox's approach as making a statement and not holding anything back in doing so. Whereas some films use shocking imagery for a similar effect, this film builds on a surreal atmosphere that develops into... well, sheer insanity.

It's muddled (like I said before, Cox never seems to be sure what he wants to do)

I think this is precisely one of the strengths of the film and why the character of William Walker as portrayed in the film was right up Cox's alley. Walker is the hypocrite who believes absolutely in what he's doing but at the same time has no idea what that is, and seemingly has no idea that he has no idea, and so on.

I suppose it's a difficult film on many levels, but I think it's a whole lot of fun.

[Venom]

Just got this one. The back of the box says the trailer is an extra but I can't find it. False advertising, or is it hidden like how the segment on Cox reading reviews is in the A? (BTW are there any other Criterion releases with Easter Eggs?)

[knives]

http://criterionforum.org/forum/viewtop ... aster+eggs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Venom]

Thanks, wow I really need to revisit some of these.

Still, is the Walker trailer on the disc?

[schellenberg]

Just watched this and was highly disappointed. The film had the potential to be a fascinating story. Unfortunately, it was made for one reason and one reason only: to bash America's then foreign policy. Cox really dropped the ball and let his radical political views get in the way of what could have been an interesting biopic.

[tarpilot]

Anger towards perceived imperialism is a "radical" concept? Hmm, your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

[oldsheperd]

Just watched this and was highly disappointed. The film had the potential to be a fascinating story. Unfortunately, it was made for one reason and one reason only: to bash America's then foreign policy. Cox really dropped the ball and let his radical political views get in the way of what could have been an interesting biopic.

Stick to your RNC talking points will ya? The Koch Brothers will scold you.

I think Guzman's The Battle of Chile may be to your liking.

[Mr Sausage]

Also, this movie doesn't want to be an "interesting biopic." It's a parody of the traditional Great Man biopic. It has a lot of fun setting up genre expectations and then undermining them. See, for example, when Walker learns he's taken the country. Instead of having taken it in a grand, glorious battle, he suffers a terrible defeat and slaughter, retreats, and while sitting on the beach nursing his ill-fortune somebody just walks up and announces that the country has now surrendered, and everyone kind of sits there and goes "oh...". Walker misses his own finest moment.

[chucktatum]

The Egyptian Theater in L.A. screened this in 35mm tonight and it looked gorgeous. (The first half of the double feature was Highway Patrolman, which I rather loved and could nicely work in a separate double feature with Luis Estrada's Herod's Law.)

Alex Cox did a Q&A between the films explaining the connection between Walker & Patrolman. In short, he scouted locations in Mexico for Walker because Universal figured a Nicaragua shoot would be impossible due to the civil war there. They made Walker in Nicaragua anyway, and a few years later Cox remembered the locations they'd seen in Mexico. His producer Lorenzo O'Brien wrote the script (inspired by a local they'd met) and they secured $1.5 million in Japanese financing to make Highway Patrolman.

After the Q&A, I asked Cox if Walker would be upgraded to Blu-ray. He said he already asked Criterion but they weren't interested. (A real shame considering what a beautiful film it is. And odd that Criterion would upgrade something like General Idi Amin Dada but not this.) As Cox headed out, he said to me, "Complain to them!"

[beamish14]

Assuming that was the same print that Cox presented at the Cinefamily, attendees were definitely in for a treat. It looked like a answer print struck
from the original camera negative. Cox smiled and put his arms out at the "Visit Universal Studios" tag at the end.

[feihong]

Walker is already out on blu ray in Germany. It is a beautiful disc; it looks and sounds great.

[tenia]

It uses the Criterion HD master they used for the DVD, so it remains a bit dated-looking though, but it's very serviceable indeed.

[swo17]

BD-only revamped release Apr 12

[FrauBlucher]

Beaver

[hearthesilence]

It shows its age, but for an HD master made in I'm guessing 2008, it looks good. I've never bought this in any form so I'm definitely getting it.

[L.A.]

CineSavant.

[Drucker]

Watched this film this morning as the idea of a "fever dream" historical Western biopic that Criterion describes the film as really appealed to me. Unfortunately I found myself in agreement with the first few posters in this thread, that the film has a lot of great ideas but doesn't land them all quite that well. I found the pacing difficult and the film muddled. More time spent with Walker may have done the film good, or perhaps more time spent with his troops or the other Central American government leaders may have made the film easier to follow. I also really didn't like shoehorning in contemporary things like People Magazine and the automobile. It didn't do anything but take me out of the film.

Anyway, I loved the burning of Grenada sequence, and feel like the film's production background and existence was enough to draw historical parallels. If Cox had taken that for granted, he could have spent more time on some of the admittedly beautifully shot scenes and character study of Walker, rather than the nitty-gritty historical details.