This is a movie where the landscape is a major character. Arthur Penn made the most of his Chicago locale. Much of what he used is no longer standing, but it is deeply ingrained in true Chicago-influenced art: not just the works of Nelson Algren, but Richard Wright, Theodore Dreiser and James T. Farrell, blues artists from Maxwell Street, Ivan Allbright's grotesque paintings, the non-fiction of Studs Terkel and Upton Sinclair, Gwendolyn Brooks' poems all drew a kind of grimy vitality from this landscape, as well.
There are bits and pieces of that Chicago still standing. I know them when I see them, because--even in person--they leave me with the impression of being in black and white monochrome rather than color. If you get to see this black and white part of Chicago or some other big city (older parts of Tokyo are like this too), you will see how a place can exert such a powerful influence on the people in it. If you accept that premise in this movie, the actions of the characters become more understandable. What may at first glance seem absurd becomes reasonable (if not rational), given the influence of the environment.
There are bits and pieces of that Chicago still standing. I know them when I see them, because--even in person--they leave me with the impression of being in black and white monochrome rather than color. If you get to see this black and white part of Chicago or some other big city (older parts of Tokyo are like this too), you will see how a place can exert such a powerful influence on the people in it. If you accept that premise in this movie, the actions of the characters become more understandable. What may at first glance seem absurd becomes reasonable (if not rational), given the influence of the environment.