EL CONDOR

US, 1970, 102 minutes, Colour.
Jim Brown, Lee Van Cleef, Patrick O’ Neal, Marianna Hill, Elisha Cook Jr.
Directed by John Guillerman.

E1 Condor is a big brassy western, fairly violent and with emphasis on sexuality. It represents the type of box office adventure popular around 1970. Jim Brown is the main star - popular ex-football player with an emphasis on the strong black hero. His limited acting ability did not prevent a very successful career.

The film was directed by John Guillermin. an English director who started with fairly modest films, like The Day They Robbed The Bank of England. He then moved to America with bigger budgets, The Blue Max. In the 70s he made such spectaculars as Towering Inferno and King Kong.

1. Was this a good adventure film? There was plenty of action, was it worthwhile action? why?

2 What conventions of the adventure film did it use? How successfully?

3 Was the film overall satisfying? On the level of adventure, on characterisation, on values?

4 How was Luke the central character? Was he a sympathetic hero? The importance of the prison sequences and his escape? His shrewd calculating will towards Jaroo? His greed? His ambitions to get revenge and find the gold? Did he have any right to his search for the gold? His qualities of leadership? The confrontation with Chavez?
His using of the girl for getting the gold? Luke as a violent person and unscrupulous? His being disillusioned about the gold? His killing of Chavez and Jaroo? The importance of that final fight? What was he left with? (Did you care?)

5. Jaroo? Was he an interesting character? Sympathetic? How villainous? The initial sequence of his leading the Mexicans on and shooting them? His greed to share with Luke? His ambitions? His use of the Apaches and his shooting their leader? The motivation of greed? His going berserk at the end? His confrontation with Luke? Was there any alternative that he had to die?

6. The picture of the Indians and their greed? How just a picture? How repelling? Was Chavez a convincing character? Did he have a sense of duty? The nature of his mission to guard the gold? This mission within the political situation of Mexico? The nature of the deceit? Did he have the right to expose so many of his men to death
to preserve the gold? To return at the end? Were you glad or not that he was killed?

7. What picture of war did the film give? The nature of the outpost and the way of life there? The soldiers and what they could do in the outpost?

8. Comment on the visual presentation of the slaughters? Were they too violent? Did they have a purpose in the film? The fact that so many people died? The fact that there were two main slaughter sequences? What was your final response to this? Why?

9. How ironic was the truth? Did the film capitalise on the irony at the end? or did it merely accept it an fact?
Why did Chavez return when the audience knew that the gold was really lead? Was he proud or just trying to live up to a principle?

10. What was the final message about the futility of the whole enterprise? How ironic was this? What effect did it have on Jaroo? On the girl? On Luke? The final vision of Jaroo’s genuine gold pieces?

11. The film was a violent adventure. Did it overdo the violence? Did it exploit its theme and its violence? Did it explore any values Was this important? Did the film have any value as entertainment? Or was it a pernicious film? Critics said both.