#haltom sees the movie as largely an exploration of the costs and benefits of 'demystifying' power relations

[mmmmalo]

An fairly comprehensive analysis of the movie, as well as a nice explanation and deployment of the power-authority-influence distinction that I see floated around here sometimes:

We may get more out of Cool Hand Luke if we observe in the film three ba­sic, political relations: influence, authority, and power.  David V. J. Bell has de­fined each re­la­­tion in terms of the mode of communi­cation distinctive of each. Bell admits that these three are am­biguous terms that invoke overlapping ideas. Still, he insists that we may profitably dis­tin­guish among communications that

a) threaten or pro­mise in order to in­duce an audience to do what other­wise they would not do [power];

b) command based on position and an ex­pec­tation of being obeyed [authori­ty];  and/or

c) persuade by revealing to an audience where their own inter­ests lie [influ­ence].

[snip]

Both power and authority are useful, so both will be used. Because both are costly, both will often be dis­guised as influence. Threats or bribes left im­pli­cit are tribute from power to influence. Commands courteously phrased as sug­gestions husband sincere but officious author­ity for occasions when more respect­ful in­fluence falls short of speakers' ob­jec­tives.