Scarecrow

1973 "The road leads itself to somewhere."
7.2| 1h52m| R| en| More Info
Released: 11 April 1973 Released
Producted By: Warner Bros. Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Two drifters bum around, visit earthy women and discuss opening a car wash in Pittsburgh.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Max

Director

Producted By

Warner Bros. Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!
Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Matho The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.
Roxie The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;
kevinosborne_99 The story is slight yet much happens in this apparently aimless film that seems to wander as these two men wander, with personality but without much conviction. Yet it turns out there is a reason for everything, and while that reason may seem insufficient to some I expect that is because the journey has been so satisfactory. Gene Hackman considered it one of his best films and he is fabulous as a drifter who picks up with Al Pacino's character, a young man on a mission but seemingly not in a big hurry to accomplish it. This isn't a buddy movie, in fact exactly what it is would be hard to define in a few words. If you need a lot of action, snappy dialogue, and a Holy Grail to make a movie work for you (and there's nothing wrong with that) Scarecrow isn't for you. If you like terrific acting and a life mirrors art sort of experience, and/or if you like these actors and would enjoy seeing them in something different, this is the one for you.
dougdoepke Not a movie for all tastes. There's no real plot. Instead the narrative follows two drifters as they pursue their car-wash dream. Max's (Hackman) problem, however, is that he can't stay out of trouble, given his combative personality. Still, he buddies up with Lion(el) (Pacino) who has abandoned his pregnant girl friend to become a sailor. Now he's taken on a frivolous "what will be, will be" attitude that Max finds appealing. But will they ever get to Pittsburg and their car-wash dream.The movie really depends on whether you find the characters interesting enough to stick around for two hours. Characters other than the two leads don't stick around long, which I guess befits two drifters. Thus, there are other interesting types, except for Frenchy (Wedgeworth) who raises the whole idea of "bimbo" to new levels of exaggeration. Also, there's no attempt to pretty-up anything or anybody. It's pretty much a back roads America as it really is, and not as Hollywood would like it. And, unless I misread the subtext, the movie follows pretty much in the wake of 60's rootless counter-culture This is Hackman's favorite movie, though it did flop at the box-office. As the hulking Max, he's completely convincing as a "planner" who can't really plan. (Note how he gets entangled in the wire in the film's opening scene—a tip-off of things to come.) Pacino's role is more complex. My initial impression was that Lion is a gay man being drawn to the macho Max. That would explain why he left his girl and took up a roving life whether as a sailor or drifter. Nonetheless, the movie leaves this gay factor uncertain. The film's dramatic highlight is when a grieving Lion grabs a nearby boy and tries to baptize him in a fountain. That's because he thinks his own son died before baptism and therefore now dwells in eternal limbo. Of course that assumes Lion's been told the truth by the supposed mother. But then she would have reason to punish Lion since he did abandon her.Anyway, these are some conjectures on a film I really enjoyed. Still, I can understand why others might be bored by a narrative whose virtues do tend to meander. But, if they do, it's in the manner that real lives also do.
Armand many movies are shadows of its time. techniques, vision, cast, spirit. in this case, all is different. the cause - two amazing actors. a smart script. and the science of details. Al Pacino. Gene Hackman. as axis of an entire universe. so, it is not easy to review it. because , more than a movie, it is reflection of a state of soul, pure romanticism, image of Don Quijote in the American reality. road movie, sparkles of Great Crisis atmosphere, slices of 1970 and importance of small things. a film about friendship. like many others. but different. secret - the courage to be more than part of a time sensitivity. and the perfect performance. that is it !
ElMaruecan82 No pun intended but 1973 was a 'good year' for road-movies, "Paper Moon" in comedy and "The Last Detail" in drama, both featured characters crossing a crisis-stricken America, learning to know each other in the process and to embrace the future with brighter hopes. All things come in three with "Scarecrow", Golden Palm winner at Cannes Festival. No child and no sailor, but rather an ex-sailor with a child-like personality: this is Al Pacino as Francis Lionel Delbucci aka 'Lion', and no rookie who's going to jail, no streetwise bad-ass, but a robust and short-tempered ex-convict: this is Gene Hackman as Max Millian, forming with Lion one of the most unlikely and endearing pairing of the New Hollywood period. After the gripping documentary-like "The Panic in Needle Park", Jerry Schwartzberg signs another piece of art about two misfit characters, indulging in more poetical and philosophical statements about life, from two vagabonds who meet in a two-lane road penetrating deserted hills, the fitting setting for two men at the crossroads of their lives. Max wants to go to Pittsburgh where he sent all the money he earned during his jail time, his plan is to open a car wash. And 'Lion' left his girl Annie (Penelope Allen) while she was pregnant. He was so scared he never knew if it was a boy or a girl and never made amend of his irresponsible act except by sending money for five years. Carrying a little lamp in gift-box, he wants to see his child and Annie to forgive him, before starting a new life. The gift-box is the reminder of actions that might contain the roots of his juvenile and optimistic attitude, trying to make people laugh as a way to hide a tormenting guilt. We're inclined to believe this because Max, the one who paid his debt to society, has nothing to blame himself on anymore, and exudes self-confidence and moral strength.The contrast between Lion and Max is the soul of the movie and the cement of their relationship, almost a 'friendship at first sight' but the real decisive step was when Lion gave his last match to Max, a gesture that made Max develop a genuine fondness and instinctive trust of Lion: he proposes a partnership in the car wash business and Lion's acceptance doesn't say much because he strikes as a character who never says 'no'. As the movie goes on, we know more about his philosophy of life, maybe sometimes in a too explicit way. Lion believes that making people laugh is the best antidote against hostility and aggressiveness, in a nutshell, "scarecrows make crow laugh". Al Pacino conveys the illusion of an optimistic nature that hardly hides a desperate desire to be loved and accepted. 'Lion' incorporates within the same character the cowardly lion of "The Wizard of Oz" because he can't face the hideous side of life and the scarecrow with a heart, a big and generous heart. Al Pacino delivers one of his finest performances, even more impressive because it was made right after a total opposite role, as the charismatic and menacing Michael Corleone, indeed, this 'Lion' is no 'Lionheart'.Gene Hackman said it was his favorite performance and I can see why. he plays a strong man, a no-nonsense guy who takes no crap from anyone, who's never reluctant to fight if someone disrespects him, and sticks to his plan of car wash no matter what happens. And unlike Lion aka the scarecrow, he has the brains; he's got intelligence and street smarts. He completes Lion's naivety and lack of realism, while Lion, in his way, injects his joyful and cheerful nature in Max. Yet it would be too convenient to take their complementarity for granted. Yes they complete each other but one has more to learn about life. There's no doubt that the picaresque journey the two characters would take, will teach them a few lessons or two but Max only has to loosen up a bit, and to use a sense of humor while Lion, is the one who'll learn the hard way the limits of his theory about scarecrows, after one crucial visit to Max' sister in Denver that would end in another conviction to jail.Lion is the victim of a rape attempt from an inmate named Riley (Richard Lynch), in a scene even more disturbing because Lion is such an adorable character, he'll try to use humor as a defense, totally blinded by his own naivety, but Riley breaks Lion's shield as if it was made of paper. Max eventually avenges his friend, but after the jail episode, nothing would be the same. There is one crucial moment where Max avoids fighting by starting a striptease, and it's obvious that he pulled some of Lion's character in his attitude. Yet, it's a bittersweet moment, because at the same time, Lion stares at him with melancholy. This look on Pacino's face has been debated countless times, my belief is that he understood how limited he was in this rude life. His happy-go-lucky philosophy only had sense if he could handle tougher situations, a guy like Max can afford to make people laugh because he impresses too. Lion understands that a scarecrow still has to scare crows, otherwise, they eat the seeds. Roger Ebert compared the film to "Easy Rider" and "Midnight Cowboy" with two men joining their efforts for a a better future, I myself found a deeper and more poignant connection with Fellini's "La Strada" especially through its tragic undertones. I was so upset by the film's conclusion that I hesitated to see it twice. But it's truly an absorbing and penetrating film about two misunderstood souls, one strong enough to deal with life, and another one who … well, I can only hope, sincerely hope, for an off-screen happy ending.