Review of Ride with the Devil (1999) by Chris W — 26 Aug 2011

The Civil War is one of those topics that is so popular that any sort of thing which uses it is basically guaranteed to get people to check it out. That said, I'm rather puzzled as to why this particular film is so underrated and underappreciated.

The story here, based on the novel Woe to Live on by Daniel Woodrell (the same guy who wrote Winter's Bone), concerns a group of men who take up the side of the Confederate sympathizing Bushwhackers during the Kansas/Missouri guerrilla fighting during the Civil War. Maybe one reason for why this film is underappreciated is because it tackles a part of the Civil War itself that is not as heavily focusd on, and that's a shame.

Of course, I'm from Missouri, and I currently live in the southwst portion of the state, so this movie means a little more to me, especially since I've actually studied what it portrays under the tutelage of a historian.

Now that I have my bias out of the way I can try to give this a proper review.

What I liked is that this film is about the guerrilla fighting, and that it does shed light on a part of the war that hasn't been done to death. The fighting in the Transmississippi was very brutal, had little to do with big, broad politics, and was mostly concerned with local issues, and the 19th Century conceptions of honor and loyalty. Oftentimes, the proceedings were almost never clear cut black and white, and instead were a heavy shade of gray.

What makes this film interesting is how it too shows the characters and events as complex and well rounded. Of the four main bushwhackers the film follows are a true blood rebel out for revenge, a southern gentleman fighting to preserve his way of life, and two odd, but not totally unlikely minorities (Roedel-a Gernan American, which is odd since Germans tended to side with the Union, and Holt- a freed slave fighting out of a sense of loyalty to his friend who bought then later freed him). It is these last two charactrers who get the msot screen time, and they are the most interesting, especially the former slave.

With Roedel being of German descent, he is almost always at odds with most everyone around him who are frequently suspicious of his motives, and almsot never completely trusting of him. Holt draws attention simply since, at least on the broad scale, slavery was such a big issue for the war, so it seems odd that he'd fight for the side that's in favor of it. He has his reasons though, and they are passable, and make the character quite intriguing.

I think that's what I appreciated the most about this movie. It has its moments of action and violence, but its more of a study of character and personality, and the dynamic of these things within the context of the larger events going on. In a lot of ways, this film is like a nentertaining version of a scholarly text.

What's probably the most interesting thing of all though, is who directed this, and that is Ang Lee. Who would have ever thought a film about the American Civil War would be directed by a guy from Taiwan. It seems odd, but this actually allows him to see things from an outside perspective and thus be more objective in how things are treated. He does a really good job of handling the material and executing the action scenes. He's done period pieces before, so it's no surprise that that aspect is also top notch.

Like all history based films, this film can't be 100% historically accurate, and this has its fair share of errors, but it's more accurate than not, and what good attention to period detail there is is much appreciated. I did like this film, but it's got issues aside from authenticity.The writing seems uneven, and some of the subplots need to either be cut out completely, or expanded upon more. The film is long, and the pacing is rather on the slow side, but, even though it does need to be tightened up and quickened some, it doesn't drag as bad as I was led to believe.

The cast has some real notable names here. Tobey Maquire, Skeet Ulrich, Jewel, Simon Baker, and Jeffrey Wright all have big roles, while people such as Jonathan Rhys Meyers, James Caviezel, Tom Wilkinson, and Mark Ruffalo all show up at various times for varying lengths. Their performances are uneven, with some being more wooden and stilted than others, but Wright does a great job, Maguire is passable, Ulrich is decent, and Jewel is not completely terrible.

It sucks that this film has the status thast it does. I'm biased, and I admit it, but even then I think this film is worth a look. It does have some problems, but until more people (if any) decide to give this part of the Civil War another cinematic treatment I suggest you come to it with an open mind and just be thankful that this film tried to deal with it to begin with.