I love a movie that takes me down such a deep research rabbit hole that I can barely climb out of it to write my damn post. The Warriors (1979) has given me that and I am toasty-happy. Like I just woke up from a nap on the beach. (And that is how much I love obscure film facts.) I will do my best to keep this coherent and not just research dump all over the place even though I feel like a kid who just ate a bag of Skittles and has a story to tell!
Based on Sol Yurick’s 1965 novel of the same name, The Warriors follows delegates from a Coney Island street gang as they travel from their turf to the northernmost part of the Bronx, and all the way back home again while being chased by rival gangs who believe they are responsible for the murder of an important gang leader. The gang leader, Cyrus, called delegates from all over the city to rally them together to take over the city but is ultimately shot and killed in an opening scene by Luther, leader of the Rogues, who goes on to frame The Warriors. What ensues is an epic journey through 25 miles of tough New York neighborhoods and even tougher stakes.
The Warriors is a part of a small but elite set of films that depict the New York City subway system accurately... Interestingly, a lot of these fall into the 90-minute movie category: The Taking of Pelham 123, After Hours, and The King of New York. (And something called Money Train that I am so desperate to watch, I may just write about it.) Out of them all, I believe deeply that The Warriors gives the best dose of subway reality and is the superior subway movie.
The Warriors rarely leave Coney Island and so, while running for their lives, they need to engage in the mundane-- studying the subway map, transferring trains, running up those god-forsaken stairs to catch a train, even paying with a token or two. Watching it now in 2022, the movie acts as not only a time capsule of 1970s New York, but also as a reminder that not much has changed. Our stations are dirty and dingy, tiles are falling off the wall, and paint is peeling. The subway looks eerily similar to how it does today, including the countless cops on every platform. And if you know the system well, one can trace The Warriors entire journey from the Bronx to Coney accurately station by station.
These doses of realism, and the fact that they shot the entire movie in the dead of night, ground the film enough to allow us to believe the more fantastical elements of it. Like the comically over-the-top gang costuming and well-rehearsed, tragedy-like dialogue. The Warriors are depicted as real, regular people in a heightened environment and situation. At one point one of them says, “I’m sick of waiting for trains!” Gang members -- they’re just like us!
I like the juxtaposition of the surreal with the tangible and I am clearly not alone as the movie is a cult classic. At the time of its release, it was wildly popular with younger working-class fans, many from cities, before growing its reach. These fans saw themselves in The Warriors because films before this often depicted gang members as classically “bad” and didn’t allow for the infinite grey area that can come from growing up surrounded by gangs or as a member of one.
Here’s where I break to rekindle my fight with Ebert. Or as Frank calls it my “ongoing feud with a dead, well-respected film critic”. Whatever. Ebert awarded this movie two stars, claiming that the dialogue was too fantastical and unbelievable. Personally, I think he was looking for good guys and bad guys, or maybe for working-class people getting into trouble with the law. The Warriors doesn’t deliver either and he gets crabby. He also writes that he’s pissed off that the movie isn’t a true “action” film. Could it be Ebert who drove us to these relentless explosion-only movies? Because I do not find the pacing of The Warriors dull at all. It follows the very well-worn path of the Odyssey-- there’s even an all-female gang that might as well be called the Sirens (they’re actually called the Lizzies)-- moving the story along with well-timed obstacles.
Ebert also hates how stylized some of the scenes are, writing, “people move into their symbolic places with such perfectly timed choreography that they must be telepathic.” Who said it was to be that realistic? It’s not a documentary. Did Ebert give the same review to West Side Story? It’s worth noting that when the movie was remastered with a Director’s Cut, cut scenes designed as comic book pages were inserted. It’s clear now and should have probably been clear to Ebert then, that the director liked tableaus and comic books. So tableaus and comic books we got. A fantasy pinned up against harsh reality.
Director Walter Hill’s penchant for fantasy does pervade the movie and one does have to wonder what it may have been like if the movie was made as originally intended— closer to the book. From what I’ve read, the book is wildly violent and has very few white characters. And wouldn’t you know it? Turns out the studio didn’t want an all-Black cast so white people were inserted in. They did not think it would be “commercially” successful without doing so. (Just like the NYC subway, Hollywood studios have also stayed the same for 40 years.) I know none of us are shocked. The movie also seriously tones down the violence from the book and while I think this choice ultimately did make the movie a success and more widely accepted, I am sure the removal of violence also removed more complicated layers of the characters we know and love. Would someone like me be so quick to root for them if they gang-raped Mercy as they do in the book? Are those storylines better suited for a novel format? Do we need them in a movie at all?
I could ask these questions all day long, but they’d go nowhere because we have the movie we have. This is a stylized but goofy, dark but consumable, cult classic that is still being shown at drive-in theaters in the summertime because so many of us connect with these characters year after year. I still get nervous when they start their journey even though I know exactly how it will end. I question their choices. I worry about Mercy. I care.
I think it’s easy to identify with The Warriors because of our innate need to belong to something, to be affiliated somehow with something larger than us. Look at Trump supporters or sororities or football fans. We desire to be a part of something that not only sets us apart from others but also keeps us comforted and safe. We want to be both individuals and to belong. Our affiliations can allow us to have both. (Usually for a price.)
One of the first gangs that The Warriors encounter on their journey is a South Bronx gang called The Orphans. After some back and forth, and with Mercy’s involvement, the leader of The Orphans insists The Warriors take off their colors and walk as civilians through their turf. (“Colors” being their gang attire.) The Warriors decline even though it’s risky, even dangerous. Would their trip back to Coney be a cakewalk without their colors? Absolutely. But they have pride in their gang, they follow the principles of that gang, and they follow the set rules of their community. That is what they have to do to continue to belong. What they have to do to survive. And that is what they want to do out of a deeply ingrained loyalty to something that keeps them safe. (Listen, I’ve worn a Red Sox hat to Yankee stadium and refused to take it off, so I totally get it.)
The movie ends with The Warriors back at Coney Island, tired, battered and fewer in count, but also with their names cleared and a greater understanding of the world at large. The movie’s short runtime benefits from how the world is built over time. We learn the rules of their environment as obstacles come up, not in advance. The characters are only known to us by their gang-given names, and backstories into their personalities and actions are never given. In fact, when Luther is asked why he killed Cyrus he responds saying, “No reason, I just like doing things like that.” And I believe him.
-----
(Hey! There’s more I could say and there’s a lot that has already been said by great writers who love this movie. I’ve linked some in my references but if you’ve enjoyed this I encourage you to continue your reading. There’s some really juicy cast gossip you can get into too.)
References:
https://maxmadethat.com/publishing/a-gender-odyssey-the-warriors-1979
https://caneandrinse.com/come-out-to-play/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Hill
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0906640/?ref_=nm_mv_close
https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-warriors-1979
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Warriors_(film)
https://www.ghostlittle.com/blog/best-summer-movies-the-warriors-walter-hill
As you know this movie is one of my all-time favorites. It was so hard to get into see it when it came out because they were so worried about gang violence. I was 18 but forgot my drivers license, and since it was R-rated they almost wouldn’t let me in. Guards posted at the movie theaters. They thought it would incite violence in teens and young adults. So crazy for what is now considered so mild. How times do change.
Thanks for covering one of my favorite movies. I enjoyed your review, writing abilities to the max.