Charley Varrick
The term “underrated movie” is one that tends to get thrown around with abandon these days and its overuse is in danger of rendering it meaningless. However, there are times when that label is most certainly appropriate, and Charley Varrick (1973) is a prime example. I’ve no real explanation for this, but I do have a hunch that it frequently comes down to other work by the people involved dominating the thoughts of film fans. For most people (if they’ve heard the names at all) Don Siegel is identified with Dirty Harry, and Walter Matthau with comedic roles alongside Jack Lemmon. Without wishing to disparage any of those films, it is a shame that such thinking has lead to what is arguably the best work by both of these men being virtually forgotten.
Charley Varrick (Matthau) calls himself The Last of the Independents, something that’s true on two levels - his crop dusting operation is in terminal decline due to the rise of the conglomerates, and the small-time criminal activities he’s turned to are overshadowed by organised crime. When the botched robbery of a tiny New Mexico bank yields a huge payday Charley realises that something is very badly wrong. His sole surviving partner, Harman (Andy Robinson), can’t believe their luck but Charley’s been around long enough to recognise the stench of mob money and the consequences of stealing it. When an apparently unstoppable hitman (Joe Don Baker) goes to work the chase is on, and Charley has to figure out a way of staying one step ahead of both the law and the mob. What follows is a violent and dangerous game of criminal chess played out amid the hick towns and trailer parks of the southwest. Charley Varrick starts out as a man who shouldn’t be expected to engage our sympathy (after all he is the leader of a gang of murderous thieves), but by the end of the film we’re rooting for him - when the odds are stacked so heavily against a man it’s hard not to find yourself taking his part. Added to this Charley is, almost perversely, the only figure who displays any real honour or integrity - this petty hood is the only honest one in a world of crooked bankers, sadistic killers, lowlife chiselers and sharp suited mafia front men.
Although Walter Matthau’s sourpuss features seem destined to remain forever associated with his comic roles he made a trio of tough crime pictures in the early seventies; The Laughing Policeman, The Taking of Pelham 123 and Charley Varrick. The fact that he was able to switch genres so effortlessly and credibly says much for the talent and versatility of the man. While he plays Charley Varrick as a cool and efficient veteran crook he still manages to fit in a few examples of his trademark deadpan humour. I’d have no hesitation in saying that this is the best I’ve seen of Matthau, and his career was by no means characterised by poor performances. The other standout member of the cast was Joe Don Baker as the smiling, heartless contract killer. Having said that, there is no particularly weak playing and John Vernon, Andy Robinson and Sheree North all give good solid support. Don Siegel rarely gets mentioned when top directors are discussed, but the fact remains that he regularly churned out tight intelligent films that eschewed pretension and made everything look deceptively simple. This and The Shootist are his two best films in my opinion, and I’d hate to have to choose between them. And last but not least, there’s a fine score from Lalo Schifrin that’s just about the ideal accompaniment for both the period and the mood.
As for the DVD, Charley Varrick is available in R2 in the UK from Fremantle in a nice anamorphic widescreen transfer (I think the R1 is an open-matte affair). It may not be pristine and it’s an almost barebones disc but there’s no major problems and the price is definitely right. All in all, Charley Varrick is a high class crime movie that really ought to be better known.
on November 24th, 2009 at 4:02 am
This is one of my all-time favorite crime gems, Livius. It’s so well crafted, and using Matthau here as the anti-hero was pitch perfect. And you’re quite correct about the term, underrated - and how it applies so fittingly to this film, and director. I don’t know how you did it, but you also named six of my preferred films in this review, too. Siegel directed so many movies that I’ve admired. The Beguiled, The Killers, Escape From Alcatraz, etc. along with those you’ve already mentioned.
He’s one of the reasons I very much appreciate the films directed by Clint Eastwood (he heavily credits Siegel’s influence on his behind the camera career). I’m glad to hear at least someone produced an anamorphic widescreen version of this. I have the 2004 R1 disc (now selling for over 3 times what it originally sold for at Amazon so others are fond of it, too). And, it is sadly matted at 1.33:1. I originally saw this at movie theater, and this is no way to treat a film as good as this one. I may have to order that R2 since it’s not getting the respect around here. Excellent review, Livius. Thanks much.
on November 24th, 2009 at 8:27 am
You make this one sound well worth watching. I’ve mainly seen Walter Matthau in comedies, but would be interested to see him in a crime drama.
on November 24th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Thanks folks.
Judy it certainly is worth watching, an excellent movie all round. And le0pard13, the R2 Fremantle disc is recommended for the anamorphic transfer, and it’s also cheap as chips if you shop around.
on November 25th, 2009 at 8:07 am
“Last of the Independents”
=+=+=+ Spoiler =+=+=+
Critics usually say this is a milestone cause it’s the first time the criminal gets away. Maybe they mean in the 70s it opened the flood gates for this to happen.
on November 26th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Alledgedly - and I say that because I often see this mentioned but have yet to track down a quote from the man himself - Matthau hated the film, and even if you love Charley Varrick (as we do Colin), it’s not hard to see why.
I think it almost certainly has to do with the amorality of the central character, maybe it’s the fact that there are plot holes you could drive a Buick through (which, frankly, doesn’t worry me to much). As good as Matthau is, I do get the impression he’s not *quite* comfortable with Varrick - it would have been a very different film wouldn’t it with a lead whose screen character wasn’t normally quite so amiable. Eastwood? Bronson?
on November 26th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
I had no idea about Matthau’s feelings about the role, interesting.
Yeah, I agree that it would have been something different with a more traditional “tough guy” in the lead. Mind you, a large part of my enjoyment comes from the fact that it is Walter Matthau - a man one doesn’t normally envision as a hardened criminal, even though he did start off playing heavies in westerns.
on November 26th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I mentioned it when I reviewed the Fremantle disc a while back; I was loathe to come right out and say that, yup, it was a fact that he hated the film just in case I was helping to perpetuate another ‘net myth - if anyone has an attributable reference I’d be glad to see it.
BTW, I alo mentioned that that is Jack Lemmon’s then wife that Matthau beds ‘all round the compass’ (Felicia Farr); it seemed out of kilter with the character, but I guess it helped that it was an in joke.
on November 26th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Yep, having Charley do the deed with Jack Lemmon’s wife clearly added nothing whatsoever to the story so it was obviously put there as a knowing wink to the audience - always makes me smile anyway.
BTW, hope you don’t mind John, but I added a link to your own review to your previous comment.
on November 26th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
That’s very kind Colin. Thank you, and keep up the fine work.
on November 27th, 2009 at 9:44 pm
I was loathe to come right out and say that, yup, it was a fact that he hated the film just in case I was helping to perpetuate another ‘net myth - if anyone has an attributable reference I’d be glad to see it.
Though not a quote from Mr Matthau, there is reference to this in Don Siegel’s autobiography, page 405:
“I didn’t realise that throughout its making, Walter told every reviewer that he neither liked the picture nor understood it. I felt his attitude seriously hurt the profits … because of his negative attitude, he was, to a large extent, responsible for the studio’s lack of interest in Charley Varrick”
on November 28th, 2009 at 2:02 am
Thanks Mike.
on December 1st, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Nice post. Easily one of my favorite movies. Easily one of my favorite directors.
The laserdisc was/is letterboxed, and I’ve clung to my copy waiting for a decent DVD to come along.
This deserves far more attention than it gets — but the same applies for most of Siegel’s stuff.
on December 3rd, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Excellent review. This definitely one of my fave Don Siegel films, right up there with THE KILLERS. I love the no-nonsense approach that Siegel takes with these crime films. He doesn’t manipulate you to like Varrick but to at least respect him. As you point out, he follows a professional code and many of Siegel’s films seem to examine the code of honor of a given protagonist and the conflicts they have against those who do not.
on December 3rd, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Thanks for the comment J.D.
I think the code you mention is one which features in the work of many of the great moviemakers, or at least variations on that theme seem to turn up again and again in the films I gravitate towards. The fact that it’s prominent in Siegel’s films shouldn’t really be a surprise I suppose, given that it seemed to be an integral part of the make-up of numerous directors of his era.
on December 18th, 2009 at 3:23 am
This movie is everything that todays movies are not. There is no CGI no over done camera angles. No lens flare. Just realistic actors and real scenes.