Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

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

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.

Christopher I will say just a few things: 1) I would watch it again ... as part of an endurance challenge ... maybe.2) I would suggest that anyone watching this film go in with the understanding that you will stay sane by pretending this is a western comedy.3) My wife would not, rather could not endure the film and my continuing to watch it and laugh out loud woke her up multiple times.4) Having to expend the energy to drive this movie back to the Redbox was excruciatingly difficult.If you are looking for something to make fun of for an evening, or a lesson in the legal foundation of the revenge taken by Doc Holliday, I can recommend this movie. I could also recommend Wizards of the Lost Kingdom II for the first point, but unfortunately not for the second.

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.