ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,4/10
22 k
MA NOTE
Un ancien chasseur de primes aide à contrecoeur un riche propriétaire terrien et ses sbires à retrouver un leader révolutionnaire mexicain.Un ancien chasseur de primes aide à contrecoeur un riche propriétaire terrien et ses sbires à retrouver un leader révolutionnaire mexicain.Un ancien chasseur de primes aide à contrecoeur un riche propriétaire terrien et ses sbires à retrouver un leader révolutionnaire mexicain.
Joaquín Martínez
- Manolo
- (as Joaquin Martinez)
Avis en vedette
Joe Kidd is discreditable ex-bounty hunter who's facing a couple days in jail, but a well-known big flier landowner Frank Harlan pays his fine hoping that he would join his group of hunters in tracking down the revolution leader Louis Chama. Who's upset about the treatment his people have received in the land reform policies and he goes into town to show he and his group mean business. But Kidd has nothing against him so he declines, but that all changes when he finds out Chama and his outlaws stole his horses and touched up his carers. So after that, Kidd decides to join in the hunt, only to discover that maybe he's on the wrong side.
How many times have we seen it, don't mess with Clint! After the highly significant cop thriller "Dirty Harry", he returned to the western foray with not-so forcible results. "Joe Kidd" is what you can call, one of Eastwood's lesser westerns, but I actually enjoyed it. Maybe that's because I knew very little about it and I wasn't expecting anything revolutionary, but I found this little slam-bang western to be an earnest vehicle for Eastwood, which has a capable supporting cast in Robert Duvall, Don Stroud and John Saxon and in the director's chair is John Sturges. With those names involved it could have been much more, but it's not all a waste.
I thought that it started off unusually and far from your typical Eastwood western. It's quite unpredictable and it's laced with a lot quick-witted humour, but when it gets into its groove with the journey part of the story. Then it falls into a systematic pattern. There's nothing overly dynamic about it, but since it's quite a short flick it goes by quick enough without any meandering sequences. We get an even amount of humorous wisecracks, sturdy action set pieces and a steam-rolling climax for the undemanding. The performances are extremely good as the main characters are very egotistical. Eastwood provides his causal persona in the lead role, although this character seems to have a little more spruce and morality in his actions than that cynical edge we come to love. Duvall is influentially striking as the snaky villain Frank Harlan. Saxon is a superb character actor and that translates into his minor performance of Louis Chama. Don Stroud, Paul Koslo and Stella Garcia were more than decent too.
The consciousness story by Elmore Leonard is rather weakly drawn-up with very little in the way development and little to pushy in it's unjustifiable moral high ground. Although I loved the ironic judge, jury and executioner symbolism that fate has in-stored for the main villain. Sturges' direction won't blow you away, but it was a competent display and he manages to incorporate the sublime backdrop of the High Sierras with on spot, open location photography. There are many well-placed angle shots and leeway in its execution. Another facet that was surprising was Lalo Schifrin's distinctively, pulsating score that's never over-powering, but it was always there.
You might forget all about this western after a day or two, but with these class people involved in this production, just expect some captivating, light entertainment. I found it satisfying enough, but Eastwood would go onto better things a year later with the cruel, spell-binding "High Plains Drifter".
How many times have we seen it, don't mess with Clint! After the highly significant cop thriller "Dirty Harry", he returned to the western foray with not-so forcible results. "Joe Kidd" is what you can call, one of Eastwood's lesser westerns, but I actually enjoyed it. Maybe that's because I knew very little about it and I wasn't expecting anything revolutionary, but I found this little slam-bang western to be an earnest vehicle for Eastwood, which has a capable supporting cast in Robert Duvall, Don Stroud and John Saxon and in the director's chair is John Sturges. With those names involved it could have been much more, but it's not all a waste.
I thought that it started off unusually and far from your typical Eastwood western. It's quite unpredictable and it's laced with a lot quick-witted humour, but when it gets into its groove with the journey part of the story. Then it falls into a systematic pattern. There's nothing overly dynamic about it, but since it's quite a short flick it goes by quick enough without any meandering sequences. We get an even amount of humorous wisecracks, sturdy action set pieces and a steam-rolling climax for the undemanding. The performances are extremely good as the main characters are very egotistical. Eastwood provides his causal persona in the lead role, although this character seems to have a little more spruce and morality in his actions than that cynical edge we come to love. Duvall is influentially striking as the snaky villain Frank Harlan. Saxon is a superb character actor and that translates into his minor performance of Louis Chama. Don Stroud, Paul Koslo and Stella Garcia were more than decent too.
The consciousness story by Elmore Leonard is rather weakly drawn-up with very little in the way development and little to pushy in it's unjustifiable moral high ground. Although I loved the ironic judge, jury and executioner symbolism that fate has in-stored for the main villain. Sturges' direction won't blow you away, but it was a competent display and he manages to incorporate the sublime backdrop of the High Sierras with on spot, open location photography. There are many well-placed angle shots and leeway in its execution. Another facet that was surprising was Lalo Schifrin's distinctively, pulsating score that's never over-powering, but it was always there.
You might forget all about this western after a day or two, but with these class people involved in this production, just expect some captivating, light entertainment. I found it satisfying enough, but Eastwood would go onto better things a year later with the cruel, spell-binding "High Plains Drifter".
Joe Kidd (Clint Eastwood) is a former gunman and bounty hunter, hired by the landlord Frank Harlan (Robert Duvall) to chase Luis Chama (John Saxon), a Mexican-American fighting for land reform. Along the hunting, Joe realizes that Frank's men are cold blood killers, and decides to help Luis Chama. He convinces him to fight for his rights in the court of justice. In the way back to the city, Frank's men try to kill Luis Chama. Clint Eastwood has another great performance, having a great duel with Robert Duvall. The story has some flaws, but anyway, maybe the greatest problem is the expectation generated by the name of John Sturges: we always expect another masterpiece from him, and maybe this is the reason why there are some underrated comments about this above average Western movie. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): Joe Kidd
Title (Brazil): Joe Kidd
This is a pretty good though very simple Western and I am sure that the somewhat low ratings are due, in part, to the movie not being exactly what Clint Eastwood fans expected. In this film, he plays Joe Kidd--a decent sort of guy but not exactly as super-human as "the man with no name" in his Spaghetti Westerns. He's a lot like Eastwood in UNFORGIVEN because he seems not so super-human, except that he is a fundamentally decent person in JOE KIDD, whereas in UNFORGIVEN he's almost like a multiple personality (one nice and the other evil). The character Joe Kidd shows off his abilities here and there, but he isn't the amazing man with a 6-shooter as you'd expect from Eastwood either--though he sure does pretty well with a rifle or train (you'll have to see what I mean by seeing the picture). So overall, this film is very good but a bit subdued and more realistic than most of Eastwood's Westerns--plus at under 90 minutes, it's pretty short as well. One way I knew this was a pretty good flick was that my wife sat and watched the film with me--and she hates Westerns.
I've seen "Joe Kidd" quite a few times but not as many times as I should. This movie gets better every time I see it. For some reason it is probably my least seen Clint Eastwood western. I can't explain it. Last night as I watched it I enjoyed almost everything about it. The dialogue was smart and often very funny. The cast was very strong, especially Robert Duvall. Duvall gives an excellent performance. I have many books on movie westerns. None of them give "Joe Kidd" its due. It took me many years to get up to speed with this movie. "Joe Kidd" is another solid entry in Clint Eastwood's Hall of Fame resume.
Everything about "Joe Kidd" suggests quality of the highest order. Here you've got Clint Eastwood co-starring with Robert Duvall (in one of his first post-"Godfather" roles), to say nothing of an excellent supporting cast that includes John Saxon, in a western directed by John Sturges whose name I will always utter with reverence because he gave us "The Great Escape." And it's based on an Elmore Leonard novel. Prepare to be impressed.
"Joe Kidd" opens well with Clint Eastwood all duded up in the most splendid threads he ever wore in a movie. In no time at all, though, it all goes rapidly downhill, becoming as memorable as a Hopalong Cassidy B-flick. Everyone involved acknowledged it was a disappointment, but why? Patrick McGilligan's recent bio of Eastwood (which is close to a hatchet job) suggests Sturges had succumbed to alcohol by then and simply wasn't up to the job, but star and co-producer Eastwood, humble in the presence of a man who directed so many fine films, was reluctant to usurp the reins. The movie's inferior reputation may now be in its favor. Having read so many bad reviews of the film, Eastwood fans who haven't seen it yet may have such low expectations that it may seem better than it is. If so, enjoy.
"Joe Kidd" opens well with Clint Eastwood all duded up in the most splendid threads he ever wore in a movie. In no time at all, though, it all goes rapidly downhill, becoming as memorable as a Hopalong Cassidy B-flick. Everyone involved acknowledged it was a disappointment, but why? Patrick McGilligan's recent bio of Eastwood (which is close to a hatchet job) suggests Sturges had succumbed to alcohol by then and simply wasn't up to the job, but star and co-producer Eastwood, humble in the presence of a man who directed so many fine films, was reluctant to usurp the reins. The movie's inferior reputation may now be in its favor. Having read so many bad reviews of the film, Eastwood fans who haven't seen it yet may have such low expectations that it may seem better than it is. If so, enjoy.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesJohn Sturges had an alcohol abuse issue during filming and was supposedly often drunk on set, resulting in the assistant director taking over the camera on more than one occasion. Apparently Clint Eastwood was annoyed and disappointed with Sturges' lack of professionalism during the shoot and felt it compromised what could have been a great movie. These thoughts would be echoed by Michael Caine three years later during production of L'aigle s'est envolé (1976), where Caine felt the final film did not reflect the quality of Sturges earlier work due to him being constantly distracted.
- GaffesThe movie takes place in New Mexico, but saguaro cactus can be seen in the town (Sinola County) scenes. Saguaro cactus can be found only in the Sonoran Desert of northern Mexico and southern Arizona, with the thickest concentration around Tucson which is where those scenes were actually filmed (at Old Tucson).
- ConnexionsReferenced in McCloud: The New Mexican Connection (1972)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Joe Kidd?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 6 330 000 $ US
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 6 330 000 $ US
- Durée1 heure 28 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant