Very Cool!!!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I really have a sympathy for the kind of film-making this film aims at. I respect the intentions, i am always able to live in the environments films like this try to create. But when this sort of film fails, it's never a glorious failure, nor an interesting one. The thing slides to fields of boredom and emptiness.For what concerns direction and, to me, acting, this film fails totally. Not because it's incompetent, simply because it's not engaging, there is not a visual idea Hellman tries to explore. This is his only film i've seen so far; here he connects his narrative to the character, the actor (who apparently starred in many of his other movies). It is what certain film writers define as "character study". Well, i think that may be done, if the character is interesting, and that depends on whether the actor is interesting as an actor and as a person. So this drastically reduces the possibilities of success in such a kind of film. I didn't think Warren Oates was interesting enough for me to follow him willingly. This made the film as uninteresting in its content as the life of the straightforward cock trainer.But something redeems all these flaws. the cinematography is unobtrusive and beautiful in many ways. Almendros was one of the cinematographers who could masterfully move away from protagonism and yet build a worthy mood we want to get into. Pairing with Truffaut, he gave us some exquisite moments of minimal photography, in the sense that he transcends through an apparent "naturalism". Striking... If you watch this film you may be led to believe, like i did, that some of it was bureaucratic work Almendros had to do to narrate the boring character Hellman proposes, but other moments are shining and worth watching. Among those are the cock fights. the cock close-ups are beautiful, and the careful editing allows the fight scenes to be really tough. The inner sets, when associated to intimacy, are also cozy and mood evoking. Apart from those, you'll want to see a certain scene: it's by a lake, the protagonist and his lover caress each other, and talk about their life and relation. The shot starts as a close-up of their faces, over a totally white background. Than the camera slowly zooms out, reveals the environment, and that's when we get the lake. All this is done with a subtlety which is really hard to see. This shot will be with me for a long long time.My opinion: 3/5 watch it, for the cinematography, only.http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

This Roger Corman produced movie about the dubious sport of cockfighting probably occupies similar ground to Cannibal Holocaust in a way. They both exploit animal violence for their goals but those goals stretch beyond mere schlocky entertainment (and I have to say that CH is no more hypocritical than the people who condemn it and then chow down on burgers).True there are actual cockfighting scenes in the movie and real animals were harmed and killed and the fights themselves are presented in a very grim way, so animal lovers are advised to stay away. But Cockfighter is also a Monte Hellman movie and not content with wadding its way through schlock. It's similar in many ways to his masterpiece Two-Lane Blacktop in that it is an understated character study disguised as something else (in Blacktop's case a road movie, here a movie about cockfighting), introvert and contemplative without any pretense and stripped of all fat.Warren Oates almost totally silent performance is great, relying on glances and gestures and understated enough to suck you in his character's tormented psyche like a Lon Chaney of 70's hardboiled cinema. His character is reminiscent of the G.T.O. he played in Blacktop three years earlier, once again a drifter, a man that has fallen out with society and himself and is now trying to come to terms with life in his own way. As is true for other Hellman movies and his great talent, things are never spelled out but are left vague as if incomplete but still carrying all the meaning they're supposed to carry. The puzzling ending is another example of this and I think the movie is better off because of it.Newcomers to Hellman's movies might wanna start elsewhere and work their way to Cockfighter. This is still characteristic of his work and Oates is in top form, but it's not as good as Blacktop although maybe more accessible. A must-see for fans of Sam Peckinpah too.

"Cockfighter" is one of a number of collaborations between Monte Hellman and Warren Oates, with a brilliant, austere script written by Charles Willeford (also author of the book) and equally simple yet elegant cinematography by Nestor Alemendros, D.P. of Malick's "Badlands" and "Days of Heaven".This film really captures an emerging respect and relationship between Hellman and Oates, who barely utters a word through the whole film. Like "The Shooting", "Ride in the Whirlwind" and "Two-lane Blacktop", Hellman turns to Oates for a unique and character-driven performance. It's qualities envoke a very specific 60s and 70s motif of existentialism, a rambling from place to place and between relationships. Oates' stoicism really carries the feel of the film, with very honest performances from supporting actors Harry Dean Stanton, Richard B. Shull and Laurie Bird. While not wanting to ruin the plot, it must be stated that the "sport" of cockfighting, while playing a part in the plot and cinematography, is really the backdrop of the story. Oates' Frank Mansfield is the true subject of the film, who, from the beginning, is a broken man on a mission, willing to keep going against the odds for his small piece of redemption. His path is very idiosyncratic, yet empathy for his positions and desires is universal. From the cover and other reviews, it may seem that "Cockfighter" is an adventure film, rife with shock value and violence. While there are distinctly beautiful and poignant images of cockfighting (animal lovers beware), it's pace and personality are more like that of an "art film". In an effort to market the film by famed "shock" producer Roger Corman, posters and alternate titles ("Born to Kill") depict a film for a mass, Middle-American audience ready to see blood drawn. As a huge fan of Hellman and Oates, especially Cockfighter, my opinion is that the marketing of the film and it's outer "cover" (literally and figuratively) were designed to get it seen at any cost. This is Independent Film before it had a name, when it was simply at any cost and by any means. "Cockfighter" is a film full of philosophy, humility and respect, underrated if one ever was.

I'm just glad I saw this movie on an empty stomach. The cockfighting scenes are too graphic and made me nauseous. It's not clear whether Hellman sees these guys as heroes or idiots. Maybe both. Still, I thought Warren Oates was amazing. He's the only actor I can think of who can make a mute, borderline-retarded cockfighter seem poignant, without being exploitive or gimmicky. He's one of the great character actors from the 1970s and 1980s, and he has good chemistry here with Harry Dean Stanton.Piece of trivia: The videostore guy told me that Hellman rented rooms to hold the cockfights but neglected to tell hotel management about it.