Schneller als der Tod

Yes, I know the critics at the time panned it. But if that was the baseline for greatness, films like Wonderful Life and Citizen Kane would be lost to obscurity. Bottom line, this is a "high concept" film that is much more entertaining than you would guess. The timeline is fascinating. In the 1960s, after a half-century run, and massive exposure on the new medium called Television, the classic western started to disappear. But, as they say, nature abhors a vacuum; and at the same time the sun started to set on the traditional western, it started to rise on something called the "italian westerns" or re-imaginings of the genre from Europe. This is for example how Clint Eastwood went from forgotten TV actor (Rawhide) to #1 box office attraction. This new genre lasted barely 15 years or so and soon disappeared as well. Yet out of nowhere, 20 years later someone in Tinseltown gets the idea to re-imagine the ALREADY RE-IMAGINED western, this time starring a female. Sharon Stone was past the apex of her career by this point, making the project more of a challenge. The other talent was awesome. A pre-Oscar Russell Crowe, a pre-Titanic diCaprio, and all backstopped by Hackman, I mean, wow. The big question, did it actually work? Answer yes. It was uneven in parts and an argument could be made that Hackman overdid the "bad guy" role or, alternatively, the part was over-written. Stone was awesome, proving she had the chops to take on a bizarre role and make it hers. Actually gets better with each successive viewing. ((Designated "IMDb Top Reviewer." Please check out my list "167+ Nearly-Perfect Movies (with the occasional Anime or TV miniseries) you can/should see again and again (1932 to the present))

With The Quick and the Dead, Sam Raimi approaches the old west with a very new/contemporary style. With its brisk energy and competitive characters, the story often feels like a sports movie with lots of photography tricks. If you want a top western, this might not be your film, but if what you seek you is good old pistol-whippin' American fun, this might do the trick.

Thanks to James Cameron, since T2, there has been nothing sexier than a woman with a gun. Sharon Stone actually brings a fairly macho 'Sarah Conner' quality to her character. She plays Ellen, a young cowgirl who rides into a mysterious town for a very special event, a gunslinging competition. The mayor of the town is a dangerous fella and one of the most feared gunslingers around. It is this man who Ellen is after. The question is, why? In order to fight him, she must beat everyone else in the competition. There will be blood, for sure.

In order to make up for his superficial plot, Sam Raimi has a lot of tricks up his sleeve. One of his most recognizable through his career is going over the top in an amusing way, which he does here too, mostly at the climax. He doesn't make great movies, but he makes clever and entertaining ones, which this is.

Now I enjoy western movies and although this doesn't have that traditional western vibe going for it, it's still pretty darn entertaining. This movie is like watching a comic book western movie come to life and although the plot is a bit absurd it's creative and has substance to it. Despite the it going in a narrow direction but it goes in a narrow direction with at least some substance. The plot is about a woman named Ellen aka Lady(Sharon Stone) who is a badass cowgirl that comes to a western town with a motive and ends up in a quick draw tournament with bunch of contestants. Anyone can challenge anyone in this tournament. The reward for winning the tournament is 120,000 dollars and the last man standing takes it all. What I liked about this movie besides it being a movie about a quick draw tournament in the west is how fun, intriguing and creative the action scenes are. A bit wacky at times but still pretty cool to watch, even the dialogue is a bit comic book like. Sharon Stone is charismatic and very attractive in this, especially with the cowgirl attire. Leo is pretty good as the Kid even if he can be a little annoying at times. Gene Hackman stands out as the villain without overdoing it and actually backs up what he says for the most part unless when he is unsure. So it isn't a shock why he owns the whole western town but this isn't the first western Gene has been in. Russell Crowe is in this and although he plays decent part in the story his character ain't nothing special and sort of comes off mundane but he was in good shape. Despite his mysterious past. Overall I enjoyed this movie, not one of the best western I seen but it's a pretty cool one.

7.8/10

In the Western town of Redemption John Herrod runs everything, they say he gets half of every dollar spent or earned. In order to face his enemies face on he runs an annual quick draw contest where fights battle each other until only one remains. The winner takes home a small fortune – the losers leave wounded if they are lucky. Into this contest comes a group of hopefuls including a woman who has personal reasons for signing up.

Looking at the list of names it is evident that the casting director is very good at his/her job as they managed to catch several big names, get several stars who were a few years away from hitting big and also get veteran faces as well. The ensemble of well known faces suits this film as the focus is very much on style and appearance than it is on substance. As a plot it takes the well known genre of the revenge western and makes a sort of pastiche of it. Thus we have the OTT and hyper direction of Rami and gun fights that are delivered with energy and shots that have no bearing to reality.

When I think about the actual plot, it really should bother me more than it does. The plot is pretty thin and contains nothing that you can't see coming from about the first 20 minutes of the film – certainly the woman's `secret' will be no mystery to anyone who has seen `Once Upon A Time In The West' which it clearly apes in this regard. What exists in the place of a wider plot is characters and style. The style is fun and energetic and will appeal to fans of Evil Dead etc.

The characters themselves are also pretty good, each has a little back story which helps to fill out the running time without getting too serious. Stone does surprisingly well in the lead, she's no Clint Eastwood but she leads the cast well – which is no mean feat when you look at the credits. Hackman is a gleefully good villain – even more mean and unrepentant that his character in Unforgiven. Crowe and DiCaprio were both a few years from the levels of stardom they now hold, but both are engaging and enjoyable. The support cast is also full of names and faces you'll recognise – either as solid support actors of recent films or older faces. For example – Henriksen, David, Sinise, Hingle, Bell and Blossom.

Overall this film might infuriate you if you are looking for a film that has more substance than style, as this is the other way round. However fans of Rami's style and/or revenge westerns will find much to enjoy here. Every time I see it I always find it hard not to get caught up in the atmosphere it creates.

Not a bad movie at all, but it does take a bit to really settle into. For a while, Sharon Stone is really trying to sell the macho gunslinger with baggage, but she's doing it with her Hollywood looks and pearly whites; she's missing grit. And that does improve later on, but like I said, patience is needed.

That said, Sam Raimi is clearly having fun in a sandbox full of Western cliches. The draws, the face zooms, the shots. It looks fantastic. If that's not enough, then it's worth a look for Gene Hackman's performance. No trace of Unforgiven here; dude's a genuine scumbag.