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

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

In the opening scene of "Scarecrow," the character Max (Gene Hackman) has just been released from a six-year prison term and is walking down a hill carrying his suitcase. He then seeks to negotiate a small, barbed-wire fence, but gets enmeshed in the wire and tears his clothes. He then fails to observe a small incline ahead of him and tumbles down the hill on his ass. To add further humiliation, the entire act was observed by another hobo named Francis (or Lionel), as played by Al Pacino. Max prides himself on carefully planning everything out in advance. But he is caught in the lie in the earliest moments in the film.Hackman and Pacino create two unforgettable characters in this oddly matched pair of drifters. While both Max and Lion are running from their past, the film does not dwell on the past or even the future in their shared pipe dream of starting a car wash operation in Pittsburgh. Rather, the focus is on their present adventures, or encounters.Hackman is clearly infusing the character Max with his personal life story of a streetbrawler. At any given moment, his temper can flare and his smiling demeanor can turn on a dime. Pacino's character Lion is similarly on the edge with a disturbing proclivity to act out dramatic moments as a mask for his guilt at abandoning a woman whom he impregnated."Scarecrow" is successful in finding the right balance between the humor and the seething realities of the characters that lie beneath the surface. Nearly all of the small roles in the film are memorable, as the characters who come into contact with Max and Lion sense the danger under the congenial surface of the characters.When "Scarecrow" was released in 1973, film critic Roger Ebert wrote a mediocre review, criticizing the screenplay and the film aesthetics. But those very values are what are so striking today with the decline of quality and risk-taking in films. For this reason, it is difficult to find any "road picture" in the past half century that rises to the level of "Scarecrow."

Jerry Schatzberg made two interesting movies early in his film career, this and 1971's "The Panic in Needle Park." And, while both are well made, with very good acting, both seem pointless by the time they hit the end credits.I guess following the characters is the point in both films. But, their journeys seem to lead nowhere, and I guess that's the problem for me. I wonder what the point of all of it is. In "Panic," (spoiler alert) the two drug addicts we follow end up in the same place they started. In "Scarecrow," (spoiler alert) one of the two characters doesn't make it at all.Here, the film benefits from the excellent cinematography from Vilmos Zsigmond, in one of his earlier films. Al Pacino and Gene Hackman are very good in their respective roles. And, the film is well made. But, when the film just kind of ends as it does, you wonder what the point of it was.It's especially interesting concerning Schatzberg, since he went from these iconoclastic films to something like "The Seduction of Joe Tynan," a straight-down-the-middle romantic comedy drama. What's most notable about "Panic" and "Scarecrow" is that they are prime examples of how gutsy 1970's cinema could be.***** (5 Out of 10 Stars)

I conclude those facts with this movie :1) it's clearly a 70s movie as it tells a moving, human story about losers, freethinkers, non conformists, ordinary people. It tells something about some fundamental values like friendship. Now, this kind of movie has just disappeared from American production as they are just about heroes blasting enemies and reconstructed biopic of famous « people ». 2) Pacino is a fabulous actor as he just exudes humanity. So, it's just a pity he did so many movies about characters with too little humanity (gangsters, cops, major, celebrity) because when he played ordinary people, you can see he's compassionate, funny and fragile ! 3) I think Gene Hackman belongs, like Adrian Brody, to the club of the exceptional but underrated artists : Here, he's excellent playing a grumpy but courageous and loyal friend. 4) At last, this movie points exactly where i am now : i remember watching « Dark Water » writing it was like my battle against a leaking studio, then « une vie meilleure » writing it was like my shared moments with the kid of my friend, now with this « Scarecrow », like « Just like a woman » or like « Hideous Kinky », it's about the fullness of living empty. Like all those characters, the daily life has become just so complicated that it would be a dream to ran away with nothing and take a day after a day with the dream to start from zero again...

Gene Hackman and Al Pacino play two drifters(Max & Francis) who befriend each other, and decide to form a business partnership in Pittsburgh, where they hope to open a car wash. Film details their adventures along the way.Both actors are very good as usual, and being filmed on real road locations helps, but film, which feels very inspired by the far superior "Midnight Cowboy" never amounts to much, feels like an extended sketch study stretched to feature length. Hackman(Max) is a hot-tempered brawler, which gets them in frequent trouble, while Pacino(Francis) is a simple man who just wants to see his son again, but fate has other ideas. The ending is disappointing because it just stops, without any real emotional resolution. Nice try, but misses.