High Plains Drifter review

 Number 652 on the top 1000 films of all time is Clint Eastwood's Western film 'High Plains Drifter.'

Clint Eastwood plays an unnamed lone gunslinger who becomes the unlikely saviour of a frontier mining town who are under threat from a trio of dangerous outlaws.

High Plains Drifter was definitely one of Eastwood's weaker Westerns and weaker films overall. It was a formulative, repetitive affair that followed the all-too familiar pattern of cowboy films: a mysterious stranger is drifting through a quiet sleepy town, when suddenly he turns into an unlikely hero. Throw in some equally unlikely love interests and lots of gun-shooting for good measure.

Clint Eastwood's unnamed character was little different to any other character he's played in any Western film or at all to be honest. He played similar characters in the Dollars Trilogy or The Outlaw Josey Wales, But in every film he basically plays a grumpy old man. This was the case here.

Yet he wasn't the only strange casting choice. None of the cast were particularly memorable especially Geoffrey Lewis, Dan Vadis and Anthony James who played the outlaws without any nuance or charisma. They were your daily villains. The female characters were pretty vapid too.

I could see Eastwood attempting to distinguish this film from its predecessors by leaning into a supernatural element. Was the mysterious gunslinger actually a ghost wreaking rightful vengeance? This was largely left up to the reader so who knows the truth?

But what is true is that this was definitely one of Eastwood's worse films.

Blazing Saddles review

 Number 507 on the top 1000 films of all time is Mel Brooks' parody of the Western genre: Blazing Saddles.

Bart (Clavon Little) is a black railway worker in 1974 on the American frontier. When the townspeople of Rock Ridge realise they're going to be bullied out by the corrupt politician Hedley Lemar (Harvey Korman) they designate Bart to be the sheriff of the town. He is assisted by alcoholic gunslinger Jim the Waco Kid. (Gene Wilder)

My favourite Mel Brooks' film is his parody of Robin Hood: Men in Tights. I thought it was absolutely hilarious and so clever. In many ways Blazing Saddles was his warm-up act - to a lesser extent, you also had Young Frankenstein. But Blazing Saddles shared the same meta-humour as Men In Tights. Men in Tights even hearkened back to its spiritual predecessor.

Granted, Blazing Saddles gets a bit ridiculous toward the end where it not only breaks the fourth but the fifth, sixth and seventh walls. Bart and Jim's posse fight with Hedley Lamar's posse spills out onto a neighbouring film set and the real world with Lemar escaping to a nearby cinema. The cinema is showing none other than Blazing Saddles. It was silly, but I didn't mind.

The film was full of tis funny meta-humour like when Lamar recruits a posse and everybody from the SS to the KKK and the Hells Angels turn up.

Yet this film wasn't all just humour. There was also some good performances from Cleavon Little - for the longest time I thought it was Richard Pryor in the lead role, but he just wrote the script. Gene Wilder also showed his comedic chops with a touch of emotional intensity as Jim.

Overall, I enjoyed Blazing Saddles. Sure it was silly at times, but it was just a warm up for Men in Tights. Mel brooks was a master of parody, wasn't he?

The Magnificent Seven Review

Number 456 on the top 1000 films of all time is John Sturges' 1960 Western The Magnificent Seven.

A poor Mexican village is constantly being exploited by the cruel Calvera (Eli Wallach) and his gang of bandits. Having had enough, the villagers rally a posse of seven cowboys led by the Cajun gunslinger Chris Adams (Yul Brynner) to battle against Calvera's gang.

The Magnificent Seven is a famous remake of Akira Kurosawa's epic 'the Seven Samurai.' At three hours long, the Seven Samurai is not for casual film fans or even supposed film fanatics like me. Thankfully, the Magnificent Seven managed to tell the same story in a far more palatable two hours.

And it was certainly a great story - seven of the biggest actors of the time including Brynner, Steve McQueen and Charles Bronson team up to face off against Eli Wallach. Even for casual Western fans like me, it was certainly entertaining.

The on-screen, and at times, off-screen, rivalry between Yul Brynner and Steve McQueen underpinned much of the film, but all of the cast were good. Despite having a large ensemble cast and a limited two-hour run time, John Sturges took the time to develop each character into somebody interesting. You had the young upstart Chico (Horst Bucholz) as well as Lee (Robert Vaughn) who is haunted by a troubled past. Vaughn was a dark horse as he brought a quiet intensity to the role.

Eli Wallach's villainous Calvera wasn't as memorable as he could have been. Although it was probably overshadowed by his later and most famous role of Tuco in Sergio Leone's iconic 'The Good, The Bad and the Ugly.'

Nevertheless, John Sturges directed a fun and entertaining film, which balanced humour, heart and terrific set-pieces with a palatable two-hour run time.

Tombstone review

 Number 444 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1993 Western 'Tombstone.'

Tombstone details the events that led up to the famous Gunfight at the Ok Corral in Tombstone, Arizona. Wyatt Earp (Kurt Russell) and his brothers Virgil (Sam Eliot) and Morgan (Bill Paxton) are three retired men who are looking for a quiet life in Tombstone. However, when the Cochise County Cowboys, led by Curly Bill Brocius (Powers Boothe) start pushing their way around town, the Earps are reluctantly drawn out of retirement to deal with the threat, helped by their close friend Doc Holliday (Val Kilmer.)

Anybody who knows me knows that I've never been a big fan of Westerns. The Gunfight at the Ok Corral as well as the Earps and Doc Holliday might be legendary parts of American folklore, but it's never been a topic that has really interested me. I'm not sure this film did too much to move the needle.

Of course this isn't to say that the film was explicitly terrible unlike some others I have seen, but it just wasn't for me. I can see what they were going. The charismatic Kurt Russell plays the sheriff who is reluctantly drawn back into his old life. He was good enough, as were his deputies Virgil and Morgan played by Sam Eliot and Bill Paxton. They played very different characters than in Frailty or the Big Lebowski. I think the good guys had a better characterisation than the Cochise County Cowboys. 

Perhaps that's because they were little more than a lawless rabble without more hierarchy or organisation. They were led by Curly Bill Brocious - Powers Boothe always gives recognisable performances, but the rest of the gang largely blended into one.

For me, the best part of the film was Val Kilmer. He played Doc Holliday - a cherished friend of the Earps who was suffering terribly from tuberculosis. Kilmer was definitely a dark horse considering his role was little more than just giving support to the Earps. Despite that, Holliday was a very tragic character who was also loyal to his friends. Kilmer's performance helped to demystify one of the most interesting characters of the Old West.

I'm sure there are many people who would love this film. These guys would also be big fans of the Wild West. I am not a fan of the Wild West, so I didn't much care for Tombstone, but that's just me.

The Outlaw Josey Wales review

 Number 395 on the top 1000 films of all time is Clint Eastwood's 1976 Revisionist Western 'The Outlaw Josey Wales.'

Josey Wales (Clint Eastwood) is a Missouri farmer whose family were murdered by the ruthless Union Captain Terrill (Bill Mckinney.) He joins a group of Confederate bushwackers to get revenge, but after the Civil War ends, they surrender to the union. All except for Wales who continues his quest for revenge. He is joined by ageing Cherokee Lone Watie (Chief Dan George) and pilgrim love interest Laura Lee (Sondra Locke.)

I've always been of the opinion that Eastwood is a better director than an actor. He won Oscars for directing both Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby. He has also directed critically acclaimed films like Invictus, Letters from Iwo Jima, Gran Torino and Changeling. However, the Outlaw Josey Wales was one of his weaker efforts. While by no means terrible, it was strangely structured and badly-paced.

Initially, it seemed like this would be a straight-forward revenge story with Wales exacting vengeance on the killer of his family. Wales is aided by a rag-tag band of rebels. It was all building to an exciting climax, but then the tension dissipated.

In the film's third act, it seemed like Wales had completely forgotten about his quest for revenge and was more interested in setting up house with his new found family - Cherokee Lone Watie, Navajo Little Moonlight (Geraldine Keams) and pilgrim Laura Lee and her grandmother along with a couple of others. It was a sure fire way to stop the pace dead at a time you think it would be heating up. 

There were glimpses of a secondary villain with a Comanche tribe, but our roguish cowboy quickly makes peace in an anti-climatic, and ultimately, inconsequential fashion. The Comanche played little role in the rest of the film.

Just when it looked like Wales might get his happily ever after, he's tracked down by Terrill and his goonies. The battle begins. But this climatic moment felt more like an afterthought, as if Eastwood had just remembered about his villain.

As I said earlier, he is a better director than actor. In his later films, he plays a grumpy old man. In his earlier films, he plays the antihero lone cowboy. Josey Wales was pretty similar to Eastwood's other roles as the Man with No Name in the Dollars trilogy. Not the best range from Eastwood.

During film, Eastwood and Locke began an illicit relationship while both of them were still in nominal marriages. But this off-screen chemistry didn't translate to the screen, as Laura Lee as much use as a wet blanket and had all the charisma of a stale ham sandwich. True, she joined the final fight, but she never felt like a suitable love interest for Eastwood. If anything, I think he would have been better suited to Little Moonlight whom he rescued from some unscrupulous men. She was more fun, interesting and gritty than Lee.

Despite these criticisms, The Outlaw Josey Wales was certainly an enjoyable enough film. It just isn't anywhere near as good as Eastwood's later films. That's a shame, as Eastwood is a great director. He's won two Oscars for a reason.

The Searchers review

 Number 307 on the top 1000 films of all time is John Ford's 1956 Western 'The Searchers.'

Ethan Edwards (John Wayne) is a civil-war veteran living during the Texan-Indian wars. When his niece Debbie (Natalie Wood) is abducted by the local Comanche tribe, he and his nephew Martin Pawley (Jeffrey Hunter) mount a years-long expedition to find her again.

Time for one of my least-favourite film genres: Westerns. I've never been a fan of cowboy films - not for any egregious reason. They're just not for me at all. The Searchers didn't really do much to shift the needle.

Perhaps that's because of John Wayne. Wayne was well-known for his cowboy films, but, after a while, they all kind of blend into one. From Ethan Edwards to Tom Doniphan to Rooster Cogburn, they all featured the hulking Wayne always playing the same role in the same way.

Edwards has strong anti Native-American sentiments, bringing him into conflict with his nephew Martin who is an eighth Comanche. Jeffrey Hunter was more convincing as the more straight-forward, as cut-and-dry hero. In contrast, Edwards was more of a not-so-lovable rogue.

His bigotry also rears its ugly head when he realises that Debbie has voluntarily assimilated into the local Comanche group who abducted her. Wood is a decent-enough actress. She was Oscar-nominated for Rebel without a Cause, as well as Splendor in the Grass and Love with the Proper Stranger. But she never had the proper time to shine here.

Yes, the Searchers had the stunning cinematography that depicted the old American-West, but it didn't do anything to make me become a fan of cowboy films.

Midnight Cowboy review

 Number 350 on top 1000 films of all time is John Schlesinger's 1969 drama 'Midnight Cowboy.'

Jon Buck (John Voight) is a Texan cowboy who goes to New York to seek his fortune. As part of his hustle, he starts prostituting himself. He also strikes up an unlikely friendship with con man Enrico "Ratzo" Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman.)

This film surprised me in many ways. At times, it was bold, and stylistically flashy, but at others, it was understated, subtle and quietly powerful. At its heart was the relationship between Buck and Ratso. Both are hustlers with Ratso very much being a mentor to the naive, starry-eyed Buck. When Ratso becomes sick, Buck starts to take care off him. As Hoffman is a method actor, I wouldn't be surprised if he went out and caught pneumonia for real.

But Dustin Hoffman and John Voight's relationship under-pinned the whole film. They had great chemistry. I enjoyed seeing them share the screen together. And it was great seeing them become closer and closer, as their fortunes worsened. That all built toward a suitably tragic ending. I won't go into spoilers, but I did like its under-stated nature. It was quiet and simple, which was all it needed to be.

All the louder, more dramatic moments were saved for the flashbacks that showcased the dark past Buck was running from. These were also shown in black-and-white making them all the more sombre. They were hard to watch, but well-shot all the same. This shouldn't be a surprise really. Midnight Cowboy went onto win three Oscars: Best Director, Picture and Adapted Screenplay.

Midnight Cowboy definitely surprised me. I wasn't sure what I was expecting, but an unlikely friendship between a cowboy sex worker and a sick con-man was definitely not it. 

The Wild Bunch review

 Number 286 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1969 epic revisionist Western 'The Wild Bunch.'

Pike Bishop (William Holden) is the leader of an ageing band of cowboys who are finding their way before the outbreak of the first world war. Wishing to retire soon, they want to do one last robbery, but they are pursued savagely by a rival gang led by Pike's father partner Deke Thornton (Robert Ryan.)

The Wild Bunch takes place at the end of the cowboy era, as these rustlers and would-be outlaws try to find their way in the ever-changing world. It is a swan-song to their legacy, but I would argue it is also a swan-song to the Western genre itself.

By 1969, Leone had released his dollars-trilogy and the best days of the Western genre were behind them. Spaghetti Westerns were becoming a thing of the past. Roll on the 70's with the resurgence of the gangster genre, as well as the rise of the Vietnam war films. Coppola and Scorsese released the Godfather and Mean Streets, which were followed at the end of the decade by the Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now. But the Wild Bunch paid homage to the best of the genre while keeping everything grounded in a gritty realism.

These aren't the romanticised, pretty-boy cowboys of Gary Cooper in High Noon, but rather the brutal anti-hero that Eastwood played in the Dollars' trilogy. The Wild Bunch have their own code of honour, but this doesn't apply to the civillians around them who are largely seen as collateral damage. It was a nice demystification of a highly romanticised figure. The Wild Bunch were just petty crooks masquerading as honourable cowboys.

They were led by William Holden in another morally duplicitous role similar to this Oscar-winning turn in Stalag-17. But he was good as the ageing, world-weary protagonist who just wants to retire and put the world behind him.

The Wild Bunch was an intensely violent, but enjoyable affair that acted as a lovely swan-song to the Western genre.

True Grit 1969 Review

 Number 885 on the top 1000 films of all time is Henry Hathaway's 1969 Western 'True Grit.'

Mattie Ross (Kim Darby) is a teenage girl living in Yell County, Arkansas when her father is unjustly killed by outlaw Tom Chaney (Jeff Corey,) she enlists federal marshals Rooster Cogburn (John Wayne) and La Boeuf (Glen Campbell) to bring him to justice. Accompanying them on their mission, Mattie soon forms a close relationship with Rooster and La Boeuf.

For a Western film, I quite enjoyed True Grit. This goes for both the original and the 2010 remake. Generally, I find cowboy films tedious and overly-long *cough cough* Sergio Leone, but True Grit was thoroughly watchable.

One reason was because of Mattie Ross. Just like in the remake, she was far from the typical damsel-in-distress cliche that many women of her era were relegated to, so it was very refreshing to have a character with as much agency and pep as Mattie did. She was a feisty female before that was even a thing. I do think it's a shame they gave her a tomboyish appearance though. She's a woman. Let her look like a woman. The Coen Brothers let Hailee Steinfield look feminine. Why not the same for Kim Darby?

True neither John Wayne or Henry Hathaway thought much about Darby's acting abilities, but I think that was more down to her dialogue. Her lines were so verbose and clunky, it was like she was in My Fair lady having elocution lessons with Rex Harrison. Her actions were also rash and impulsive and drove a lot of the film's conflict, but again that's more her writing than Darby's acting.

John Wayne gave a good spin as the irrascible Rooster Cogburn. It was good that he won the Best Actor Oscar. And I did enjoy his performance. He was a very likeable cinnamon swirl. Robert Duvall was also great as minor villain Ned Pepper. If anything he was better than Jeff Corey's rather simplistic performance as Tom Chaney.

Overall, I enjoyed True Grit more than I thought I would. It had John Wayne giving a great lead performance, a fresh spin on the standard female character and had that glorious cinematography that you would expect from a cowboy film.

A Fistful of Dollars review

Number 269 on the top 1000 films of all time is Sergio Leone's 1964 Spaghetti Western 'A Fistful of Dollars.'

Clint Eastwood stars as 'the Man with No Name,' a mysterious drifter who becomes embroiled in a battle between two warring families in a Mexican border town. Believing there is money to be made, he decides to pit these families against each other, and to save the rest of the town from also being consumed by this conflict. 

A Fistful of Dollars marked a number of firsts. It was the first of the spaghetti Westerns to be brought before an American audience. It was the first of the 'Dollars trilogy,' and the first time that Eastwood would play the Man with no Name. But it also marked the first collaboration between Sergio Leone and composer Ennio Morricone. And the music was the first thing I noticed about this film. Morricone might be best known for the classic theme tune from the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, but I would argue he was just as good here, if not better. Every piece of music fitted the scene perfectly. Every note bolstered the tension. It was just brilliant.

I can't say the same for Clint Eastwood. I've never liked him as an actor, as I always feel he plays the same part over and over again. And that part is the grumpy old man. He has no depth beneath that. And 'a Fistful of Dollars' is where that all started. He played the gruff, anti-social loner and has been type-cast as that ever since. It was difficult to see any type of warmth from his role.

Yet Leone still directed a great film. The cinematography was brilliant as always with contrasting shots of the vast desert landscape to the extreme close-ups of the character's eyes at pivotal moments, which was a great way to build up the tension.

Many of my long-term readers will know all about my confusion as to why Italian films were recorded without sound and later had all the dialogue (badly) dubbed in. A Fistful of Dollars was no exception to this. I have finally found out the reason! It all goes back to Mussolini who made it as a law as he wanted to check all the dialogue for himself, just in case, it contained any subversive material. Even after his death, they continued the tradition. I don't know why, because it just looks so terrible, but the more you know.

I have to admit that generally I'm not a fan of Western films, but when you get a cowboy film that has Ennio Morricone scoring it, how can you not like it?

Brokeback Mountain review

 Number 585 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ang Lee's neo-western romantic drama 'Brokeback Mountain.' 

Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Ennis La Mer (Heath Ledger) are two cowboys working up a mountain. After spending one fateful night together, the two fall madly in love. They spend the next twenty years seeing each other in secret, while trying to live 'normal' lives with their families and jobs. Michelle Williams and Anne Hathaway co-star as Ennis' and Jack's wives respectively.

At the 78th Academy Awards, Brokeback Mountain controversially lost Best Picture Oscar to Crash. Many thought Brokeback Mountain was a highly superior film. Having seen both, I absolutely agree with this sentiment. Whereas Crash was contrived and half-arsed, Brokeback Mountain was wonderfully understated, but also very moving.

Great romance stories always hinge on the two leads. If they didn't have chemistry, the film would have fallen flat. But I thought both Ledger and Gyllenhaal were great together. They were very believable in the roles of the emotionally conflicted cowboys. Both of them are living double lives; trying to maintain their stoic cowboy image, while seeing each other in secret.

Heath Ledger was hesitant about taking the role, as he didn't think he would be able to do it justice. These fears were unfounded, as he was brilliant. Granted, he sometimes spoke with a gruff, mumbling diction that made him difficult to understand, but he was still superb. He gave a compassionate and layered performance. Gyllenhaal was equally good. Both actors played off of each other well.

The cinematography was also spectacular. Wide panning and master shots emphasised the sheer vastness and splendour of the landscape. It was reminiscent of the old spaghetti Westerns. 

I've spoken a lot about the male actors, but the female leads were just as good. Granted Anne Hathaway was under-utilised, both she and Michelle Williams were very good, as Alma and Lureen - two wives trying and failing to understand their husbands.

I thoroughly enjoyed Brokeback Mountain. It was subtle, nuanced and powerful with some great performances. And it certainly deserved to win Best Film Oscar.

High Noon review

 Number 195 on the top 1000 films of all time is Fred Zinnemann's 1952 Western 'High Noon.'

Marshall Will Cane (Gary Cooper) is ready to hang up his hat following his marriage to Amy Fowler (Grace Kelly.) However, he learns that Frank Miller (Ian Mcdonald,) an outlaw he put away, has been released and is coming for revenge. Will Cane must choose between running away with his new bride or standing and fighting.

I've never been keen on cowboy films. Westerns have never been something I've found engaging, so it's difficult for me to review this fairly, but I shall try. Honestly, I just found this film to be boring and generic. There was never any drama or tension. It was obvious that Marshall Will Cane would stay and defend his town. And that he would fight the outlaws alone after trying and failing to raise a posse.

This causes a problem with his Quaker and pacifist wife who threatens to leave without him, but jumps off the departing train at the last minute. All rather predictable. Grace Kelly did the best with what she had, but Amy Fowler was just a product of the female characters of her time - little more than inconvenience for the male protagonist rather than a character in her own right. Although I will admit that I did enjoy seeing her pick up a gun and shooting one of the outlaws. That was a nice touch of agency.

Gary Cooper won the Best Actor Oscar for this role. But I am at a loss to why. He has a reputation for being the strong, silent type, which I think is code for a big, block of wood. And that's exactly what he was, but, then again, I don't think the role of Will Cane afforded him a lot of opportunity to be anything else.

While some people might love Western and Cowboy films, they've never been for me. 

Open Range review

 Number 817 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2003 Revisionist Western 'Open Range,' directed, produced and starring Kevin Costner.

Boss Spearman (Robert Duvall) and Charley Waite (Kevin Costner) are two cattlemen hired to drive a herd across the state of Montana. But they quickly get on the wrong side of the local town mayor Denton Baxter (Michael Gambon.)

This Western strongly reminded me of the great Spaghetti Westerns of the 1960's. Of course, I'm talking about Sergio Leone who dominated the genre with his "Dollars Trilogy." Costner employed the same fantastic cinematography that made those old Westerns so visually stunning to watch. I loved the sweeping visuals of the great American landscape. It really emphasises the immensity and isolation of living in such an expanse.

Unfortunately, Costner traded off great cinematography with a plodding narrative. The pacing was slower than it had any right to have been. Except for the ending, which we'll get to, much of the pivotal violence happens off-screen. For example, Baxter's men attack Spearman and Waite's two ranch-hands killing one and badly injuring the other. We knew this was coming, so there was no surprise reveal. But because we didn't see this violence, we don't get to see Baxter's true villainy - or, in this case, his hired gun Butler (Kim Coates) who led the attack. Either way, Gambon's presence as a villain was severely hurt.

In the build-up to the climatic sequence, we get lots of banter between the two leads delivered in Duvall's most gravelly and Costner's all-American tones. And this wasn't the most interesting to watch. Waite also purses a relationship with the doctor's sister Sue Barlow (Annette Benning) which I found a little unbelievable. An attractive older woman like Benning has managed to stay single for just long enough for the cowboy Costner to sweep her off her feet?

We plod along to the final gunfight between Spearmen, Waites, and Baxter, and his posse. By all accounts, this should have been the most exciting part of the film, but we spent so long getting here that I had almost lost interest, The super-powered guns and questionable physics did little to help things either.

To be honest, I've never been keen on Westerns. Sure, they look great on-screen, but cowboys has never been something that's interested me. Open Range did little to change that opinion.

3:10 to Yuma review

 Number 489 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2007 remake of the Western action 3:10 to Yuma.

Christian Bale plays Dan Evans, a down-on-his-luck ranchers and family man. With steadily mounting debts, he decides to risk everything and earn a big reward by bringing outlaw Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) to justice. Gretchen Mol, Ben Foster, Peter Fonda and Alan Tudyk all co-star.

Since starting this challenge, I've watched my fair share of Westerns and I can safely say that I don't care for cowboy films. Cowboys and gunfights have never been something that's interested me and, as such, I was pretty bored throughout this film. This isn't a valid criticism, but more personal preference. Obviously it has to be good, otherwise it wouldn't be on this list, but it wasn't for me.

As I wasn't interested in this film, I wasn't particularly invested in any of the characters. Yes, they do have arcs and they show some growth, but I don't think it was enough. Throughout the film, we're led to believe that Daniel wants to deliver Ben Wade to the law, so he can collect the reward and pay off his debts. Admirable motivation for sure. But at the end, it's revealed that all he wants is to make his sons proud of him. Yet I think that this happened too late for it to have any input. And I don't think it's very credible.

Yes it's established early on that he has a rocky relationship with his son William (Logan Lerman) but that doesn't stop him from accompanying his dad on his mission. The two of them fight side by side on multiple occasions.

Ben Wade's arc was a bit more interesting. he's quickly established as a ruthless outlaw - brutally robbing an armoured stagecoach and killing all but one of the Pinkerton guards. Wade later kills another man in his sleep, but as he and Daniel grow a burgeoning respect, Wade starts to reform his ways. In the end, he voluntarily goes to prison so that Daniel's family can have the reward money. Characters are never wholly good or bad.

Having said that, Ben Wade's right hand man Charlie Prince (Ben Foster) was pretty evil. In a hell-bent mission to rescue his boss, Charlie executes surrendering federal Marshals and shoots a man in the back. This unwavering loyalty was by far the most interesting part of the film and I wish they explored that further. I don't think they properly addressed why Charlie was so loyal.

While Western afficionados might love this film, it wasn't for me in the slightest.