Btexxamar I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Robert J. Maxwell Impressive location shooting in northern Arizona helps this rather worn plot along, and so does the acting.Tom Conti, ex teacher and ex Civil War sergeant, his wife Kate Capshaw, and their little boy Kenny Morrison, pull up stakes back east and head out West where a man and his family can escape the violence of the Civil War and breathe the fresh, clean, anarchic air.They offend one of those crusty, villainous families that are so often offended in these Westerns -- "Shane," "Will Penny," the Clantons -- and Conti and family are pursued by these revenge-driven miscreants over snowy hill and grassy dale.Well, I'll tell you. They don't know nothing' about survival in the West. Their hides are saved only by the appearance of Sam Elliott in buckskin and leather, toting a repeating rifle and various other gear. Elliott guides them through the wilderness towards the rude log cabin, miles away, that they will some day call home. But, of course, not if the evil family has anything to say about it.Time and again, the pursuers and the pursued wound one another but each carries on, leaving a trail of blood. The pursuers actually are winnowed down. One by one, they are plugged, except for the youngest, who sensibly decides to hell with it and rides off alone towards home. The rest of the pursuers don't fare so well.The plot line really is hoary. A pioneer family are unprepared for the violence they encounter and are saved by a romantic, sun-tanned stranger. The family's wife is attracted towards the mysterious savior and vice versa. "Mrs. McKaskel, if you wasn't married I'd of chased you till you dropped," says Sam Elliott, by way of declaring his deep affection for her. Mrs. McKaskel's pretty pale-blue eyes glow with pleasure.The acting is professional enough. Nobody can complain. Sam Elliott is his usual laconic, masculine self. He has a habit of holding conversations while facing at a right angle to the other, which gives him an opportunity to stare over his shoulder at the person he's addressing. Poor Tom Conti is saddled with a face that's about as interesting as a bowl of porridge, a kind of fleshier Dustin Hoffman, and his voice sounds like he suffers from an adenoid condition. He handles the role very well but those attributes knee-cap his performance.Kate Capshaw is quite a fox when you get right down to it but she's usually cast as a properly brought up, middle-class figure, as she is here. Only one film, whose title I can't remember, gave her an opportunity to show a slinkier and sexier side. I was genuinely worried about the family's son. He's about ten or eleven years old. I quailed at the thought of another cuddly kid saying cute things, but this kid can act. It could have been awful. He might have had disabling asthma attacks under stress or something. I shudder at the thought. That I never wanted to stomp him like an insect is a tribute to his talent.I enjoyed the message though. I thought it was carefully considered, thoughtful, and humane. Only Wussies swear off violence. Real men kill.

meritcoba With a title that was later reused for another movie, one would expect that this western would show at least one gun fight, you know like the one at the OK corral, but this movie hasn't one. What the title is referring to is a mystery and that is probably the key word for this western.Now the first mystery is the mysterious stranger played by Sam Elliott. Sam Elliot? Yep, the same. I am probably like many other people who instantly respect a man like Sam Elliott without actually knowing why. Sam Eliott is known, but if you ask me to tell you what from I have a hard time to tell you. Sam Elliott is a decent actor, but apparently not considered to be able to carry a leading part in a major movie. Or at least.. I can't recall one. But never mind about that. Here Sam has a leading role. Now the mysterious part about the mysterious stranger points to an overarching mystery. The question to ask is: why? Why does Sam Elliot help this family that is riding out, all alone, into the wilds? Why is this family braving the wilds on there own? The reason supplied is that they go to some place to breed cattle on the invitation of a family member, but still.. is traveling on your own such a good idea? Why are the bad guys sitting around in some forlorn village, consisting of 4 houses, lacking any inhabitants? Were they waiting for this single family to happen along so they could rob them, kill the men (a man and his son) and rape the woman? It remains a mystery.Another mystery: there is an half breed Indian helping them.. why? He just happens along, gets a drink and he is the best of mates with these bad dudes. Again we don't know why.So these bad dudes steal the horses of the family.. and thus the story kicks in. The husband of the family gets the horses back, covered by the mysterious stranger who shoots one of the bad dudes. And the bad guys then want revenge. While the family treks through the wild hoping to outrun the bad dudes, the bad dudes try to catch up with them. Several times they do catch up, which results in some fighting which whittles down the group of bad dudes.. who thus thirst even more for blood. The story then follows a rather linear plot and ends in a predictable way. It is nothing to write home about. And again another mystery rises: the family went out in the wilds to do some cattle raising. Where is the cattle? They didn't bring any along.. and the hut they end up in seems to be in some valley in between mountains. Not the kind of country one would associate with cattle raising.The whole story is like that: a mystery as to why people do what they do. But the greater mystery is just the failure to make more of this story. The mysterious stranger confesses himself to be a half breed, just like the half breed Indian who helps the bad guys. One would expect something to result from this. They could have been brothers. They could have been anything more than adversaries, but nothing develops. There is a potential conflict between the mysterious stranger and the husband in the family, but even that sizzles out to nothing.The story is bland. It is not the acting that makes this movie mediocre on it's own. It is the lackluster plot that is pretty linear and shies away from anything interesting.This movie is a forgettable movie.

Woodyanders 1876, Wyoming. Niave newly arrived settlers Duncan (well played by Tom Conti) and Susanna McKaskel (a fine performance by Kate Capshaw, who looks positively ravishing) require the assistance of rugged frontiersman Con Vallian (a superb and convincing performance by Sam Elliott) in order to protect them from a group of outlaws led by the weaselly Doc Shabitt (veteran character actor Matt Clark in top slimy form). Director Robert Day, working from a smart and engrossing script by James Lee Barrett, relates the absorbing story at a steady pace, presents a flavorsome, yet unsentimental evocation of the old west, and stages the gunfights in a realistic and exciting manner. Con makes for a strong and interesting flawed hero who isn't entirely noble; he has lustful feelings for Susanna and keeps embarrassing Duncan every chance he gets. Moreover, the bad guys are a memorably scurvy lot, with especially memorable turns by Patrick Kilpatrick as fearsome half-breed tracker The Ute and Jerry Potter as the foul and lecherous Red Hayle. Kenny Morrison registers nicely as Duncan's loyal son Tom. Dick Bush's polished cinematography makes elegant occasional use of fades and dissolves. Steven Dorff's harmonic score does the tuneful trick. A worthwhile sagebrush saga.

John Hitchcock The story of The Quick and the Dead is very simple: a young married couple and their son accidentally anger a gang of bandits and they begin pursuit, then a mysterious drifter begins helping them out and protecting them from said gang. However it is still a well-written story that manages to keep you interested in what's happening.The acting is decent enough. Sam Elliot is no Clint Eastwood but he does a good job as the stranger who befriends the young settlers who are heading West. Kate Capshaw, who you may remember as Willie Scott in Indiand Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Tom Conti also deliver some great performances as the young married couple who are travelling to the West with their son in the hopes of starting a new life.The villains are also well-portrayed. Matt Clark manages to be intimidating as the leader of the bandits, but he manages to be a fairly complex character rather than just a cardboard-cutout villain. The rest of the gang does have their own inner-conflicts which they deal with over the course of the story.I also thought the historical references were interesting. It is mentioned that the film takes place shortly after Custer's Last Stand, although the actual events have little bearing on the main plot beyond a very brief sub-plot which I'm not going to go into detail about.Overall, this is a very entertaining and interesting film and I'd recommend it to any fan of Westerns.