1966 director: Sergio Corbucci; starring: Burt Reynolds
Sergio Corbucci directed four films in 1966. That’s right, I said, “Sergio Corbucci directed four films in 1966.” Three of those films were westerns, one of which was the change-the-world-for-the-better Django. The second western of 1966 was Johnny Oro, and the third was Navajo Joe (originally titled A Dollar a Head).
Burt Reynolds stars as Joe, a Navajo warrior out for revenge when a gang of sadistic outlaws slaughters his woman and his tribe. The gang, led by the ridiculously nefarious Duncan (Aldo Sambrell), a half-breed with hatred for the entire human race coursing through his veins, has been butchering Indians for their scalps, which are then sold for a dollar each (hence the original title of the movie). This, of course, leads Duncan and his men to the bad side of Joe, who begins systematically hunting the evil bastards. When Duncan and his men make plans to rob a train headed for the peace-loving town of Esperanza, Joe manages to thwart their plan. From there, Joe convinces the townspeople to pay him a bounty for Duncan and his gang—one dollar from each person in town, for every outlaw Joe scalps—which leads to an inevitable massacre of not-so epic proportions.
Sergio Leone had struck gold when he recruited American television star Clint Eastwood to star in A Fistful of Dollars. Eastwood was the star of Rawhide, and was looking to make a transition to film. Because of the tremendous success of Leone and Eastwood’s pairing, other Italian filmmakers tried to recapture the magic with films like Navajo Joe. At the time, trying to recreate the miracle of Eastwood must have seemed like a no-brainer for Reynolds, a television actor and stuntman, best known for his recurring role on the popular series Gunsmoke. Unfortunately, Reynolds was working with a director who had made one ground-breaking western, but still had yet to find his vision, in a movie that was destined to be mediocre at best.
The key to truly appreciating and understanding Navajo Joe is appreciating and understanding the spaghetti western genre. By and large, these were films that were put together very quickly, with little regard for quality or story. The best of the genre are the ones with compelling stories, told with distinct visual style, in a manner that makes sense to people outside the working class audiences of southern Italy. These films are few and far between. After the truly good films, there comes the films that are just plain okay—at least within the context of other spaghetti westerns. That is to say that these are the films that aren’t nearly as bad as the vast majority of genre entries, but they certainly don’t stand up to much discerning scrutiny outside of the genre. Navajo Joe is one of these films. It is a better-than-average spaghetti western, but it certainly is not one of Corbucci’s better films, nor is it really all that good (unless you’re comparing it to something ridiculously bad like Django Kills Silently).
The problems with Navajo Joe are plenty, and typical of the genre. First and foremost is a script that is just plain bad. There’s no getting around it, or making excuses for it—the script is simply craptastic. But making matters worse is Reynolds’s performance, which registers almost no charisma whatsoever. Reynolds looks like the last thing he wants to do is be starring in some Italian-produced film being shot in Spain, in which he stars as a murderous Indian. And that lack of enthusiasm shows during the thankfully few times he opens his mouth to deliver the already banal and lackluster dialog. Reynolds has gone on to say that this was the worst film of his career, which clearly means he’s never watched Stroker Ace.
Where Navajo Joe succeeds is in the visual flair of Corbucci’s direction. Again, this is far from his best film, but he is clearly laying the groundwork and developing the style that would make films like Django (which again, was made the same year as Navajo Joe) and Companeros among the very best of the genre. Cinematographer Silvano Ippoliti also shot Corbucci’s The Great Silence, and it is easy to see the chemistry between the two during the scenes that actually work.
You can also see early signs of some of the recurring themes that pop up in his films, including nontraditional protagonists—in addition to Joe, the film’s other “heroes” include an aging musician and his show girl companions. This is also where some of the director’s more populist themes start to come to the forefront of the story, as the film deals with racism and injustice with all the subtlety of a Gatling gun enema. And of course, there is Corbucci’s fondness for torturing his heroes, often to the point of near death, only to resurrect them in time to vanquish evil.
Ennio Morricone, who composed the scores for close to 40 spaghetti westerns, including all of Leone’s and several of Corbucci’s better films, provides one of his most distinctive and memorable soundtracks with Navajo Joe, and offers the best overall reason to watch the movie. Not a great film by any stretch of the imagination, Navajo Joe is a movie that will appeal to true fans of the genre. But anyone looking for a film that can be considered “good” in the more traditional sense of the word, will be better off watching Corbucci’s Companeros, The Great Silence, or Django, all of which are infinitely better films.