Mad Dog Morgan (1976)

Powerful

People are voting emotionally.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

MAD DOG MORGAN is a low budget Aussie drama charting the life and times of the titular character, played with relish by Dennis Hopper at his outlandish best. Morgan was a real-life outlaw who pre-dated Ned Kelly and rang rings around the Aussie police after going on a rampage following his imprisonment for a minor crime. Hopper is a great choice for the role and I can think of few other actors to portray the character's bearded bravado so convincingly.The film itself is a real cheapie but nonetheless engaging thanks to the rural photography and fun supporting roles. It has a fast pace that focuses on physicality and action throughout and a really vicious streak that emphasises visceral destruction. Even better, the great Aboriginal actor David Gulpilil has a strong supporting role as Hopper's friend and comrade, while the rest of the cast features the usual eccentric Aussie characters. Watch out for Bruce Spence in a bit part.

If looking on the DVD cover that is provided by Troma (yes, that old chestnut) - and by this I mean the *new* sort-of remastered uncut DVD version released last year, not the much lamented previous version that looks like hell- you would think that you have been missing out on something really special for your whole cinematic life. How has one not seen a mid 70's Aussie-Western (also one of the very first Australian film distributed in the US) which stars Dennis Hopper as a mad bandit going around the Queensland colonies in the 19th century donning a fake beard and shooting (mostly) those who he deems deserve a killing? It could go either way: it could either be the case where it is a suppressed classic just waiting to be unearthed, or it's a piece of Aussie trash given some prestige above its other Ausploitation films due to its star. Ultimately, the movie is somewhere in the middle, though it tries to be a classic when it can, and sometimes can't help but be kind of trashy due to its budget.It's protagonist is something of an icon in Australia, like their Billy the Kid (sadly I'd yet to hear of him until this film), who started out as just an Irish farmer who enjoyed his opium, but ran away from a massacre of the Chinese in the area. He then got put in jail for one hold-up, got tortured and raped in prison, and then got out to try and become normal again, only to get shot and get healed by an aborigine. If this sounds like something interesting so far, it is. But the only downside it's at this point that the film finally takes off, after the first half hour; it's not that the opening half hour is bad in the slightest, since the cinematography by Mike Molloy is always something cool to look at in widescreen anamorphic. But the pace is kind of jerky and shaky, going from one set-up to another with a jarring feeling. This happens at other points in the film as well, but not as much as at this part.And yet, as just noted, when Morgan is shot and heals up with the aborigine (a very natural David Gulpilil), he then decides to fight back. In a way he becomes an outlaw since he's left with no alternative, but at the same time goes for it for all it's worth. He especially attacks the upper class, those who have lots of money and land, and he becomes the big target for the police and authorities in the area, garnering a 1,000 dollar reward. It's here we get to see the big bad Dennis Hopper becomes as Morgan, and the film takes on a quality that is kind of special: it's a western, but it's also an anti-western. It's not about how Morgan is just some amoral villain going around to rob and maim and kill. His terms of being criminal are partly for survival (not too oddly enough one of his old prison "buddies" goes after him now as a member of the local authority), and partly to stick it to 'the man' circa 1860 Australia. We see the people who should be taking Morgan out as being, appropriately for the time period, not very sharp: one of their goals once they get kill Morgan is to study his skull to see how primitive he is.It's this, actually, that Philippe Mora latches on to. How primitive a life does Morgan lead as an outlaw? His main compadre is an aborigine, who is barely looked on as human by the people in charge in the Aussie area, and as he keeps going along he's more at peace in an odd way with his fate. He knows how lucky he is to get *this* far, and he becomes more of a bad-ass because of it. He's a solid anti-hero, and Hopper makes the movie as awesome as it can get. He has a look about him- yes, even with that fake beard like something out of Cannibal the Musical- that is a little frightening, but also kind of sympathetic and sad. There's a scene where his Morgan is in a house with a woman, and she basically offers herself to him sexually, and he just softly speaks about how he just can't do it, and speaks about his mother. It's a very odd but touching scene, mostly due to Hopper's dedication to the role. By the end he becomes a kind of tragic figure. He's not just the only reason to see the movie; when it's at its best, Mora's direction is sharp and exciting, particularly with action scenes as you really don't know who will get it and how bad in rifle and bullet fire, the blood being a big factor as well. And the cinematography, even in a print that is still shoddy in this updated Troma release, is striking and ethereal, giving the movie a whole other quality than I expected. Is it a great movie? Surely not. The pacing is not always tight, and some of the supporting performances are weak, as they tend to be in low-budget B-movies. But for what they had to work with, star included, it's definitely worth checking out.

The previous reviewer, who complained of the historical inaccuracy of the film, somewhat missed the point. While the film may not be true to the original Morgan's personal story, it is certainly true of the conflict between legal authorities and outlaws throughout the English speaking countries during the 19th Century. The Governor at the end asks for Morgan's scrotum to be used as a tobacco pouch; I don't know if this happened to Morgan - but it happened to Nat Turner. Jesse James' corpse went on tour briefly as a carnival attraction before his family intervened; so did the bodies of Bonnie and Clyde in the 1930s. In Canada, one Indian outlaw was so feared, they used cannon to get at him in his last house rather than face him with small arms. Public hangings came to a halt in Great Britain because the crowd got raucously drunk and lecherous after-wards. The fact is, outlaws became legend because government agencies and private interests, as well as the perversity of the general public, made them so.Like Bonnie and Clyde, part of the function of this film - which is really more a 'docudrama' than an adventure film or simply another crime film - is recording what was said of Morgan once he became infamous. Of course most of it was lies - people want their fifteen minutes of fame, even if it's just for bumping into an well-known outlaw.That said, this film suffers from two major problems. First its low budget - it is clear from certain set-pieces that the film had high ambitions.. It is unfortunately clear, from the quality of the film-stock used (and its unevenness) and the awkward uniforms of the provincial police, that there just wasn't enough money to fulfill those ambitions.The second major failing is that the lead is given over to Dennis Hopper, a 'cult' actor of very limited range. He simply isn't up to it. His dialect is terrible, and he utterly lacks either the panache of a flamboyant outlaw, or the angst of a socially driven one. In fact we end the film not knowing much about Morgan, which makes all the broad lies about him believable. And that's a weakness - he needs to be a factual counterpoint to his own legend. Hopper cannot give us this, it's beyond his capabilities.Nonetheless, its an interesting film to watch, even as merely a curio. It was a risky film to make; Australian film industry had not yet attained 'world-class' status, and the strictly Australian subject-matter is certainly interesting. There is also some interesting cinematography, and the story has an odd draw to it even if its promise is never fully realized.Not a classic, but hardly the disaster some have remarked it as.

Australia, in the 1850s. An Irish man Daniel Morgan starts off as gold-seeking immigrant who turns to robbery and gets sentenced to 12 years prison time. This is where the going gets truly tough and scars his mind. After a couple years he gets released. After befriending an aboriginal named Billy, he becomes a bushranger with an ever-growing bounty looming over his head. The two go out of their way to seek those prominent figures for turning him into what he is and for pushing him to the brink of self-destruction. On his trail is the determined Detective Mainwaring, which puts even more pressure on the cracking mind of Daniel "Mad Dog" Morgan.I heard of the film before, but never had the chance to see it until just recently when I managed to pick myself up a copy of the film. Those who believe this to be a sorely forgotten Australian gem, do make a valid point and I'll be jumping onto the bandwagon too. Cult Aussie director Philippe Mora makes his directorial debut with an interestingly odd, exploratory and rampant curio piece of an Australian bushranger folk legend. It doesn't feel like your basic outlaw movie, as hounding the picture is a socially minded lashing of corrupt power taking away the respectability of a lone and misunderstood figure (Daniel Morgan). We watch the spiralling depiction of a fazed man fighting a society who thinks they are better accustomed and more civilized than him because of his actions against them (but that's far from the case). I didn't think it was going to be as harrowing and potently involving as it was, but this is very much largely thanks to spellbinding method actor Dennis Hopper's (who fell out favour with Hollywood at the time) multi-layered performance as Mad Dog Morgan. His erratic changes in mood (from being placidly polite to passionately quick tempered) are very successfully timed and indeed convincing. One of his best.Leading the way is a strong Australian support cast with their characters getting enough time to shine. David Gulpilil is a good choice as Billy and has a budding rapport that works along with Hopper's character. Frank Thring stands out as the aggressively bull-headed Superintendent Cobham and a poignantly stern Jack Thompson makes the most of his small role as Detective Mainwaring. Also lurking on screen with tip-top (and some quirky) performances are John Hargreaves, Wallace Eaton, Bill Hunter (who chews up the scenery) and Bruce Spence ticks in with a blink and you'll miss it spot. These are very human characters and cast do a fine job in bringing that to the screen. Mora has crafted a roughly violent tale that skews between cheekiness and a spiritual foray in a well up drawn period. The story jauntily breezes by to begin with then falls into some patchy holes when it can drag, but never gets dull or loses its bitingly ironic edge. It seems to be more complex in its character's reactions than the basic narrative lets on. Mora smoothly plays along with his stylish filming techniques and has a gifted eye for short spurts of flair and (at time surreal) images. No more than some of the well mounted photography by Mike Molloy focuses on the vastly stunning backdrop of the untamed Australian wilderness and accompanying the action is an diversely roaring music score that fits right in with the style Mora's going for."Mad Dog Morgan" is an overlooked Australian rarity of the 70s, which is hard not to be highly fascinated by its boldly rough and evocatively baseless treatment of the stirring material.