The Great Train Robbery

The Great Train Robbery and Story Structure

I love a good heist film — who doesn’t? — and decided to rewatch 1978’s The Great Train Robbery, based on Michael Crichton’s novel and screenplay of the same name. Here I try to do some story structure analysis based on the Hero’s Journey model.

Four Keys

Pierce (Sean Connery), a kind of “gentleman thief” in Victorian England, decides he wants to rob a train transporting gold bars. He likes a challenge and the haul would be enormous. He enlists several people to help him, including Agar (Donald Sutherland) and Miriam (Lesley-Anne Down), his love interest. They need four keys to open the safes where the gold will be. The safes will be in a locked and moving train car. The quest to obtain each of the keys is a suspenseful mini-adventure. Only once Pierce and the others have the keys, can they proceed with the actual train robbery.

Along with the famous scene atop the train, the scene with Clean Willy is particularly tense, and even more so when I read that Wayne Sleep, at the time a principal dancer with the Royal Ballet, did his own stunts. He could have died scaling the very high prison wall lined with sharp blades along the top. Ditto for Sean Connery and racing along the top of the train, which he also did himself. These are things that would never fly today (well, maybe if you’re Tom Cruise).

Stuart Voytilla and Mythic Structure

Back in February I tried my hand at analyzing Ordinary People in this post. I attempted to use Stuart Voytilla’s Hero’s Journey structure as outlined in his book, Myth and the Movies: Discovering the Mythic Structure of 50 Unforgettable Films. The Great Train Robbery didn’t make the cut as one of Voytilla’s 50 Unforgettable Films, so I don’t have his analysis in the chart below, but I am still using his framework.

Or, should I say, I tried to use this structure. Honestly, one of the first difficulties I ran into is that there is really no change in terms of the main character’s arc, at least with respect to the main plot. More on that after the chart. The point is, a lot of the structure seems to be irrelevant since the characters have a goal and go after it, with no doubts, refusal of the call, mentor, etc. If anything, Pierce himself seems to be the mentor, or at least the cheerleader (puppet master?) to the others.

Ordinary World	Pierce is a kind of “gentleman thief” in Victorian England who has finagled his way into the upper echelon of London society. As such, he is an outsider and I believe he only cares about being on the inside because of the information it gives him access to. We get no backstory as to his upbringing or prior history. His girlfriend, Miriam, is an actress, a talent which he later exploits.
Call to Adventure	Pierce hears of regular shipments of gold bars being transported via train across the English countryside in a special railcar. He decides he wants to steal one of the shipments, which will require acquiring four keys. Those keys will then be used to open the two safes inside the locked and moving railway carriage.
Refusal of the Call	I don’t see one. He certainly doesn’t refuse the call when he first hears about the gold. Nor do I see a refusal farther in. That is, I don’t see a point in the movie where Pierce sees an exit ramp from the way his life is to some other, more staid lifestyle. He wouldn’t be happy that way, so why would he do it? I also don’t see a point where he wants to give up on his goal of getting the gold.
Meeting with the Mentor	I feel like Pierce himself is the mentor, or at least the cheerleader, to the others involved. He coaches/helps Agar in preparing for the break-in at the train station, and persuades (manipulates?) Miriam and the others when they have doubts.
Crossing the First Threshold	Could this be the acquisition of the first key? Getting the first key spurs Pierce on to the quest for the second key, and so on.
Tests, Allies, Enemies	All four times they have to get a key + the actual robbery. Each episode tests Pierce’s commitment to the original goal. In particular, the scene on top of the train puts him at great physical risk, which hasn’t been the case up to that point (where the others are basically the ones putting themselves on the line, especially Clean Willy). Allies include Miriam, Agar, and Clean Willy, as well as at least one employee of the railway line. Enemies include the police, and the various bank officials. Society at large could also be considered an enemy — Pierce is an outsider and doesn’t want to abide by societal norms.
Approach to the Inmost Cave	I guess you could look at the actual time on top of the train as being this part? Maybe Pierce questions what he’s doing as he’s risking his life on top of a speeding train.
Ordeal	I don’t see any moments when Pierce is questioning who he is or what he’s doing. He seems steadfast in his objectives. The one moment I see where he might be considering something different has to do with his relationship with Miriam (see below). Not even after he’s caught does he consider changing his ways. However, his arrest might be the ordeal, if for no other reason than the fact that it curtails his liberty, something he isn’t used to.
Reward (Seizing the Sword)	Escape from prison (again, with the help of various allies)?
The Road Back	The last we see of Pierce is him literally fleeing from the prison in a carriage, racing down a road to who knows where, with the crowd cheering him on.
Resurrection	The temporary halt to his career as a thief is lifted, and he goes on his merry, scheming way.
Return with the Elixir	Could his freedom be considered the elixir here? He has escaped but doesn’t have anything left of what he originally stole from the train. Or maybe his friendships and a stronger relationship with Miriam count as elixirs. It’s hard to know since the movie ends and we don’t know what happens between him and Miriam.

Flat Character Arc

Writing teachers often talk about a reversal for the main character. Something changes for that character. They realize something, change their ways, become a different or better person, heal an old wound. You don’t always have to follow this structure, of course. It simply provides a good, basic structure when you’re starting out rather than trying to do something that might be more complicated. With Pierce, though, I don’t see any particular change in character. I suppose you could argue that he changes because the robbery isn’t successful, and he isn’t used to failing, let alone being captured. But we never see him reflecting on this and he ends up escaping, so has there been any real change?

Here, I see absolutely flat-as-pancake character arcs for all of the characters. There are no mind-blowing revelations, no will to become better people or do anything differently. No injuries or big regrets. Pierce is the pillar; the others exist in his world as support beams. No matter how classy the wrapping, the adage once a thief, always a thief, still applies. This is part of what makes the movie a great caper film. We are rooting for the success of the bad guys because they’re charismatic, beautiful, and adept, and, in the end, they only hurt Big Money. And the steps they have to go through to pull off the crime do keep us on edge!

A Glimmer of Change

The only glimmer of change I could pick up on is in how Pierce views Miriam. This is a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it moment when he smiles to himself as he watches her walk away as they are ready to board the train before the actual robbery. He seems to realize how much she has done and sacrificed to help him with the robbery. Early on in the film he warns her that he never tells the truth. Does he make a liar out of himself on this point? Do they end up together, in Paris, living happily ever after, as he tells her they will? It depends on your own imagination, because we don’t get a resolution.

A Note on the Rat Terrier Scene

I’m not much for trigger warnings but I will offer this note on the rat terrier scene. According to the movie trivia, this scene, which features gamblers betting on a dog placed in a ring to do battle against several rats, shows the rat terrier actually killing the rats. Crichton ostensibly only found out about this after shooting the scene. It’s a brief shot but you might want to fast forward.

---

Pulling at Threads is my occasional newsletter. It always accompanies my blog posts but I sometimes send infrequent updates on other goings on. If you want more of an “insider’s” view on what’s happening in my reading and writing life (or just to get notified of the latest post), you can sign up here.