ReaderKenka
Let's be realistic.
Phonearl
Good start, but then it gets ruined
LouHomey
From my favorite movies..
Plustown
A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.
Tony Heck
"A judge can only go by the facts in hand and then he must use his best judgment." In 1882 after the shootout at the OK Corral the Clanton gang was not happy with the Earp's or Doc Holliday. Soon after the gunfight Morgan Earp was shot and killed but because of lack of witnesses the killer was never convicted and is free. Not a group to rest Wyatt Earp and his friend Doc Holliday have been canvasing the Tuscon area looking for the killer. Joseph (Voitila) and Elizabeth (Hayes) Cooley are staying at a logging camp when a wounded person shows up at their door. They attempt to help him but when Doc Holliday shows up things begin to change and no one knows who is in the right. There really isn't too much to say about this movie. This is yet another nearly unwatchable cheesy western with awful acting. The main star in this is Tom Berenger. He plays a judge that really has nothing to with the story other then to explain what is going on in a voice over. It may be because I think Tombstone is one of the best movies of all time and it's hard not to compare anybody's portrayal of Doc Holliday to Val Kilmer but this guy was bad. He was only in it for a few minutes though so that helped. This is nothing but a bad western that was really a struggle to get through. Overall, a movie that was really hard to watch and not laugh at. I give this a C-.
Juan Tamad
The sepia-toned intro didn't bother me so much, I guess, but the gunfight did drag on. I guess that was supposed to be the OK Corral shootout? Why dwell on such little points? Because they're portents of doom.I got about 10-15 minutes into the film before giving up. It attempts to set the plot through dialogue that's badly written and has the characters carefully explaining the back story to each other. Ashley whoosis (Elizabeth) has a heart-sinking line early on, when she is asked if "Jack made it up from Texas"...she replies, in her best Valley Girl imitation, "He did, actually." Yessir, it's 1882.Then there's Joseph, who declares in a conversation with Elizabeth that he "doesn't believe in firearms." But when we see a full-length shot of him in the kitchen a moment later in movie time, he's wearing a revolver on his hip. And another few minutes later, after the trio finds a wounded Indian, Joseph the humanitarian is arguing that they should leave him to die.Back in the '40s, James Thurber wrote a short story satirizing the Erskine Caldwell/Tennessee Williams literary style and themes. It consists of 4-5 pages of dialogue (in dialect) among a Southern cracker family; suddenly Thurber breaks it off and ends the story by saying, "If you continue writing for a few more pages, you have a screenplay." Well, it doesn't always work. Continue this script and you still don't have a watchable "B" Western.
benjaminstoker
My wife picked this up at a redbox with a free code, and it wasn't worth the money. The writing was just atrocious, they didn't even try to get the dialogue to sound like it was anywhere near the 1880s. The acting was so bad I actually joked to my wife that it was the acting of a porn without the benefits, and come to think of it, the writing fits this description as well. As a whole, this movie looked like it was put together by a seventh grader during his free time. Not sure what they were thinking putting this out, but I'm sure the budget was so low that they'll end up making money on this thing even if they only sell 10 copies of it. Don't waste your time, it was so bad I didn't even get 10 minutes into it before we returned it.
info-224-609917
Why did Tom Berenger lend himself to this obvious low budget film? One can only guess. Early indicators for me were the cheap effects that were meant to set the historic context, but blurred faces and two bit actors shooting at each other for minutes in brown-tone? Tom appears first as if in a documentary talking with a badly done - ghost like - cut out effect that sets him against a 'western' landscape, introducing more of the context - later on the same effect is used in a court scene, making him look even more like a ghost. These wishful attempts to give the story substance fail and only amplify the minimal acting and storyline. 2 points for the effort.
