Gunfight at Rio Bravo

If this is a comedy film, then it's great!

It is simply impossible to take such a game of actors seriously, shots and wounds look like effects were made in the application on the phone.

The main character is trying to be serious, but he is so unnatural that it only causes a facepalm.

There is one dialogue in the film with a hint of seriousness, but it would be better if it wasn't there.

In general, no need to waste time on this pathetic movie. Better read the reviews of this movie, it will be more useful and funny.

The only good thing about this movie is i wanted to rewatch the original RIO...

This is a comedy Western.....isn't it? Surely it's not meant to be serious. The dialogue and acting are indeed laughable but the writers forgot to add the intentional jokes and left in the unintentional ones. Every cliche, every plot point, every character, every attempt at conveying emotion.....all been done before and better.

The multi-lingual cast may be fantastic actors in their natural language. But if they have learnt this dialogue phonetically, as appears to have happened with this movie, it really doesn't help the action or the story.

You know the phrase "so bad it's good"? Doesn't apply- it's so bad, it's worse.

I should have believed all the reviews that pan this movie. Weak and basic plot. Acting basic, mostly. No surprises. Cinematography good. Landscapes beautiful. Costumes decent. Setting very good. It left me unmoved. I didn't learn anything. Find a different one to watch, like Treasure Of The Sierra Madre, Hang 'Em High, the Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp TV Series, Once upon a time in the West, Fistful Of Dollars, the Deadwood series, Tombstone, the original half-hour shows of Gunsmoke. Anything but this, unless you Want to kill your soul. I feel like I've just had a pre-frontal lobotomy. I want my life back.

OMG... Are you kidding me???? This is the worst western I've ever seen in my life!!!!! I really don't understand where come all these 10-ratings from, are you people blind and deaf? It seems to me that all the reviews were written by professionals and sent by e-mail to all the friends of Nevsky, in purpose to copy-paste them and post on IMDB.

Pathetic and helpless acting and directing, bad costumes, lack of any interesting film editing, empty lines and dialogues - this movie feels like laundering the black money for Russian mafia (kidding, still want to live) :)) The only actor that did some good work on set was Matthias Hues (still looking good low budget movies actor), all the rest of cast, including Nevsky, was terrible. They didn't even have enough material to make this failure a bit longer...

I didn't see any "outstanding performances", any "really good bunch of talented actors", any "thoroughly depicted historical scenes", any "fantastic landscapes"... I didn't hear any of "Quentin Tarantino-style dialogues", any "fantastic music", any good work of sound department, any interesting intonation at all... Ilya Naishuler was mentioned in one of the reviews, but I'm sure he would cry upon this movie and amount of money Nevsky spilled on it. And I wonder what it would be if Tarantino was reading these reviews he was mentioned in.

I know what is the category called B-movie. And I love those movies! But this so called western isn't even close to this category!

It's just bad bad bad movie...

East Texas is piney woods. The topography in this movie is more desert southwest. Could be west Texas, but no way is that east Texas.

That aside, I was expecting this movie to be a kind of a reboot of the John Wayne classic "Rio Bravo". It wasn't. Not really. The 2 movies do have similarities, but I don't think it could be considered a reboot.

I'm not a huge fan of westerns, but did like a few of the classics with The Duke and a few other classic western actors as well.

This movie was ok, I guess.

Now I'm just filling space in my review. I mean, who requires a minimum number of characters for a review. The administrator must be a high school English teacher.