The Outlaw Josey Wales

This film is overhyped. It is boring and pointless. The most foolish film I've ever seen.

As a long-time fan of Eastwood's who had never seen this movie, I was particularly disappointed. The plot drifts aimlessly from unrelated anecdote to unrelated anecdote, with little connection between them. The only tie is the continual search by the Redlegs for Wales, otherwise the story is meaningless and very shallow. Chief Dan George was apparently brought in for comic relief, but all the failed attempts at comedy in the movie make it a parody of parodies. Nice try for a second directing attempt, but Clint obviously needed many more years of experience to direct a movie that produced the power and the impact of Unforgiven.

Having just watching Unforgiven, I thought I'd continue on the Clint Eastwood trip and check out one of his alleged classics. I couldn't have been more disappointed. The plot often fails to make sense or rise above a general "these are sum bad dudes" mentality; all the villains are one dimensional monsters bent on raping and pillaging. The Indian characters verge on racist parody and the film never seems to decide if its a comedy or a serious drama. Indeed, I frequently find myself wondering if they intended it to be funny--but im never quite sure. It's so terrible I almost find it entertaining in the vein of Troma team films or stuff like Repo Man. Just surprisingly bad.

This is a contender for the title of Clint Eastwood's best western, possibly even his best film. I'd seen it on television in "pan and scan" format and enjoyed it but it really needs to see watching in wide-screen to fully appreciate the film. Clint Eastwood plays a Missouri farmer, during the American civil war, who joins Confederate fighters after his wife and son are murdered Kansas red-legs who are fighting with the Union. When the war is over his commander says that he is going to surrender to the Union and all the other men join him with the exception of Josey. When they are in the process of surrendering it turns out that it was a trap and the Union troops plan to murder them, as they are being gunned down Josey rides in and rescues Jamie, one of his friends who is badly wounded, and kills many union troops in the process. The leader of the Red-legs and Fletcher, Josey's former commander, are tasked with hunting him down. Josey and Jamie head towards Texas encountering a few problems including a ferryman who will back either side depending who is paying and a couple of hill-billies hoping for the reward. Unfortunately Jamie dies before they enter the Indian Nation. Josey isn't alone for long as he soon joins with a Cherokee who fought with the Confederacy, a young Navajo woman who he rescues from a trader and a mother and daughter from Kansas who he saved from a group of Comancheros. All of them continue to Texas where they head to the ranch that belonged the the elder Kansan woman's son. Here they prepare for conflict with the local Comanches but end up having to fight against the Red-legs who have finally caught up with Josey. The acting throughout the film is very good, especially Clint Eastwood and Chief Dan George who played the Cherokee Lone Watie. As well as top rate acting Clint Eastwood proves himself to be a top rate director. The film is full of quotable dialogue but it never feels as if it has been spoken just to sound cool. I would certainly recommend this to all film lovers, especially fans of Clint or Westerns... although I can't imagine many such people wouldn't have seen this yet.

The general message of the film, delivered in its clearest form from the mouth of Chief Dan, is that civilisation is bad, non-civilisation is good. Here civilisation is synonymous with white. It is an early example of the Hollywood revisionism which would lead to Dances with wolves and Avatar. From the get-go everything here is painted literally in the most black and white terms, where white is evil. The Union commits atrocities. White men are murderous, traitorous, women beaters and rapists. Even Commancheros turn out to be mainly whites with a few token Mexicans and blacks to form a Hollywood rainbow coalition. By contrast, the southerners are sentimentalised and Indians idealised. It is conveniently forgotten that the south was pro-slavery. The natives are either amiably comical (chief Dan), hardy and self sufficient (Geraldine Keams) or noble savages (Will Sampson and his band). The few good whites redeem themselves by living in the wilderness far away from civilised society. The machine-gunning down of southerner prisoners by the union near the start brings to mind similar scenes in films like the Great Escape. I cannot speak for the historical veracity of such things but as a piece of film making it is heavy handed. Other heavy handed scenes follow, hammering out the basic message in the most unsubtle terms. That's not to say there are not very good things here. Chief Dan in particular is highly engaging.There are some memorable images and much good dialogue. The great speech near the end when Wales becomes a blood brother of the Comanche chief in which people can get on with people without governments is a great libertarian tract. No doubt Eastwood was drawn to this aspect of the script, since it is a familiar trope in his work. I find it odd though, that the blatant propaganda contained here is so little commented on. Perhaps Eastwood's fans simply gave him the benefit of the doubt.

I was always mixed about watching this movie. I love westerns and I love Clint Eastwood, but I hate most movies loaded with hype and I think American westerns have sucked since The Magnificent Seven. Spaghetti westerns came in the picture and made anything else seem worthless. I watched this last night for the first time, I was wanting so hard to love it and be entertained but I wasn't, I was bored and angry. The movie had so much cheesiness with the direction and the guys riding and shooting into the air in its opening credits that I felt embarrassed. The first fight scene with Clint riding into the Yankee camp with guns blazing in open range as an easy target was just bulls**t. The way the scenes jumped around at times was so hard to keep up with what was going on and who was doing what. I like Eastwood as a director and I like Phillip Kaufman as well and Eastwood replaced him so perhaps either of them could've shot those scenes that I didn't like, The majority of the movie I thought was shot great, it was just those first few scenes in the movie that were over the top sloppy. Not Eastwoods best acting, but it was good. I personally think he went from being an honest noble farmer to being a rude outlaw very quickly and I was confused, he was practicing shooting and not doing so well, he was hurt but not badly so why couldn't he shoot, was it his anger about losing his wife and child, if so could he have really went from half ass to hero in a few days, and would he have been so eager to jump in the sack with the other girl shortly after? And how did he become so notorious, was he a gunslinging outlaw before all this, perhaps this is a sequel and I don't know his back story. I think my ignorance on that may be a joke to some, but as watching this movie as an independent release and not part of a sequence of films or a sequel I really needed to know this guys back story and I didn't get it. Most westerns allow you to get a sense of a man and who he is or was, but I didn't get it here. I think of truly great westerns like Death Rides a Horse and how you know the boy worked hard and practiced hard to become great and seek his revenge, This movie posed the question...If someone shoots my family can I quickly turn into a magnificent gunslinger and seek revenge....No, I cant and this plot had loopholes for me, but I analyze the crap out of everything. I mentioned above he was rude,I think he was way too rude. Every time he spit it made me like him less, on dead outlaws it was fitting, but what did the damn dog do to him? He was just rude, but he still did a great job. The supporting cast was mixed, some did just as you would expect. Some actors stood out and were very likable. The old Native American (Dan George)was great, I heard he had trouble with his lines, but he did so great on film I could care less about technicalities off screen. John Vernon plays a wonderful jerk in all of his movies and he did well here. Will S. as Chief Ten Bears was perfect, gotta love him. Worst actor goes to Sam Bottoms. He is such a horrible actor, I am not sure where he is from, but he has a heavy accent that makes him a bad choice for many of the simple southern accents he uses in movies, this one was the worst I have seen him in. What a joke... The movie was from the mid seventies, I cant imagine anyone wanting to see a movie with a story that had been done a million times unless it had a great director, great score, acting and a nice side story to back it up. This movie was mediocre at best. I have watched many of Eastwoods movies and this isn't the worst, but it sure as hell ain't the best.... 3 out of 10 stars.

The Outlaw Josey Wales is set during the Civil War & starts as Missouri farmer & family man Josey Wales (director Clint Eastwood) house is burnt to the ground & his family killed by renegade soldiers, he is slashed across the face & left for dead but he isn't & he joins William 'Bloody Bill' Anderson's (John Russell) gang... Jump forward to near the end of the Civil War & Bill dies, his gang is the last to accept amnesty from the Union to stop their fighting. The gang, but not Josey, decide to accept the Union's most generous offer but the Union think they are better off dead & shoot them all despite Josey Wales best attempt to save them. The Union send Captain Terrill (Bill McKinney) & ex outlaw Fletcher (John Vernon) to find & kill Josey as well as putting a large reward on his head which means his journey to Mexico becomes a perilous one... Staring & directed by Clint Eastwood who replaced Philip Kaufman as director which was a controversial move & prompted the DGA to rule that no current cast or crew could replace a director on a film & has since been known as the 'Eastwood Rule', anyway The Outlaw Josey Wales is considered to be a classic amongst many but that's not a feeling which I share as I thought it was a touch dull. The script by Philip Kaufman & Sonia Chernus was based on the novel 'Gone to Texas' by Forrest Carter & is as much a drama as a traditional Western which is fine if you like watching films that last for well over two hours where not that much actually happens, to me it just felt like Wales on horse back riding from one situation to another without much purpose to it. I couldn't really get into it, I didn't like the character's that much, I didn't think the story was anything special & it's pretty slow going at times with a run time that lasts over two hours. I don't know why really but I just sat there watching it & just not being able to get into the story or particularly caring about what was going on, I thought it was alright for sure but just not the solid gold classic I had been lead to believe. Overall a bit of a disappointment as I expected better. Director Eastwood does a fine job although it's likely that some of Kaufman's footage he shot before he was replaced found it's way into the final cut with some impressive cinematography which utilises the barren landscapes & the period detail. There's not much action in this one, no one other than Wales seems able to shoot straight as Wales blows everyone away with out much trouble. As I said this feels more like a drama set in the wild west rather than an action packed shoot 'em up. The violence is kept to a minimum with a few bloody gunshot wounds & nothing else. Technically the film is very good with good period detail & production values, set in Texas it was shot mostly in Arizona & Utah. The acting is fine by all involved. You wouldn't have thought The Outlaw Josey Wales would have much in common with Killer Klowns From Outer Space (1988) but both Royal Dano & John Vernon who appear in this featured in Killer Klowns From Outer Space. From The Outlaw Josey Wales to Killer Klowns From Outer Space, there's not that much difference there. The Outlaw Josey Wales is an average Western as far as I'm concerned but i could easily see how someone might like it much more, I just couldn't get into the story or character's that much unfortunately. Followed by The Return of Josey Wales (1986) with Michael Parks taking Eastwood's staring & directing duties.

This movie contains great scenes, but the majority of it, is slow, and over acted. A typlcal over serious 70's film, with long winded characters, that the viewer wishes they get hit by a hail of gunfire. The Indain cheif, Joesy grilfriend, the dieing person, and the conclusion griped withered, and lasted too long. The way it ends and the people who die at the end becomes very anti climatic. The bounty hunter scene, the gatlen gun scene, and John Vernon character is golden. They save this film form being a 1 to a 4. Eastwood has done better westerns.

I know, many people will say this is The greatest Western. No, it ain't. It is a horrible kitschy mesh of some western, some Civil war drama, some childish adventure, some love flick, some Look-how-good-we-are-to-the-Indians-here movie, some awfully cliché'd attempt, some more of some... Well, why is that so bad? 1. Clint Eastwood. Yes, I mean that. he is terrible here - all those dialogs, faces, grimace, gestures, attitude. One hell of an amateur play. 2. Revisionism. "nuff said 3. Too long and slow 4. Caricature style characters. THis movie cane be made a perfect parody easily. All is so overblown and puffed here 5. Bad acting all through 2 hours 6. All imaginable clichés collected on one movie. Not so funny 7. Very predictable plot and silly ending 8. Just boring Ratting - 1. This is awful

Pompous, pretentious, overlong revenge drama without a single compelling, interesting, or likable character. The acting and writing ranges from just adequate to laughably bad, and Clint's way cool action-hero lines are so contrived that they might as well be accompanied by onscreen titles saying "THIS IS A COOL LINE!" The film's fundamental gutlessness and dishonesty is evident in the fact that it essentially takes the South's side in the Civil War (which fits with its anti-American theme and tone), but never deals with the issue of slavery. The stuff with the Comanche is about the only potentially interesting thing here, apart from the cinematography. 5/10