El pistolero

This is not a good film, and much of the criticism of it is justified, but the comment that the use of the LeMat revolver is ahistorical may be mistaken. This film is set prior to the Civil War, and thus before 1861, but subsequent to California statehood, and thus after 1850. The LeMat was first manufactured and sold in 1856. If this is set between 1856 and 1861 the presence of the LeMat doesn't need to be a problem. The use of a katana, on the other hand, is a problem. Extremely few Japanese, or those familiar with the Japanese, arrived in the U.S. before the 1880s, and those who came then were almost exclusively farmers, rather than samurai: Katanas would be very unlikely to be found in antebellum California.

This movie apparently takes place in pre-Civil War California and everybody rides horses instead of Harleys, but other than that it's a typical Laughlin film, except even dumber. Laughlin plays a guy who is trying to save local Indians from being sold into slavery. It's difficult to figure out who exactly the bad guys are, because Laughlin kills whites, blacks, Mexicans, Indians, rich, poor . . . in fact, he blows away just about everybody (in the name of justice and equality, of course). Laughlin's idea of conveying anger (the only kind of emotion he shows in the picture) is to grit his teeth, talk slow and appear to be constipated. He carries an odd kind of shotgun/pistol (which didn't exist at that time, but why quibble...) and a samurai-type sword and proceeds to use both on everyone within eyesight. Fred Williamson, usually a reliable actor, also conveys a lot of anger, but it's probably directed at his agent or whoever got him to agree to do this movie. The story bounces around and goes off into every tangent possible, the "acting" is generally atrocious, the photography at times is so dark it's hard to see anything. Laughlin was apparently trying to make an "anti-Western", but in one respect he falls back on a bit that a lot of B westerns did: he manages to fire a limitless number of rounds from a six-shooter without reloading. Then again, maybe it's supposed to be an early version of a machine gun; that would make about as much sense as anything else in this picture . . .

Tom "Billy Jack" Laughlin spends most of his movie speaking in a monotone, wearing silly-looking floppy hats, and either shooting people or hacking them up with a Samurai sword. The exterior scenes (filmed mostly along the Pacific Coast) are often strikingly photographed, but the dialog and acting are stiff and ridiculous. Like the BILLY JACK movies, Laughlin has a lot to say about man's inhumanity toward his fellow man. But, after about 10 minutes of listening to his preaching, you won't care anymore. With just a few changes to the screenplay, and an update to the 20th century, this could have been another BILLY JACK movie. At least the BILLY JACK movies were somewhat entertaining.

Tom Laughlin didn't have to stretch much for this role, to be sure, but as the previous poster said, Barbara Carrera alone is worth the price of admission. If you liked the Billy Jack flicks, you'll undoubtedly like this as well. If you like westerns, you'll like this too. It's a pretty solid performance, and Laughlin is surrounded by a good cast. This movie also has considerably higher production values than the first Billy Jack pictures. This is particularly noticeable in the cinematography, as well as the set design. One would suspect this is because by the time this was made, Laughlin was beginning to enjoy some degree of success and fame due to the buzz generated by the two previous Billy Jack installments.

Great music score,great scenery,interesting camera angles,good atmosphere(especially during the showdown moments),good to decent acting and gun/sword fighting and awesome cinematography. Whatelse can I say about the 'Master Gunfighter', it is a very entertaining Hybrid/Anti-western movie only Tom Laughlin and the crew could bring. Sure some of the movie elements could have been better like some of the editing (which wasn't that bad but could've been better) and some parts from the novelization of the movie should have been in the movie to explain some scenes better but all in all it is a really entertaining blend of Spaghetti western,samurai, and Tom Laughlin.

The story revolves around Finely (Tom Laughlin, one of the coolest figures in motion picture history) a guilt tripped gunfighter and swordsman who witnessed a massacre of a peaceful coastal Native Americans by his brother-in-law and lifetime friend Don Paulo (Ron O'Neil, thats right Priest from 'Superfly') and his goons. Finely leaves but returns three years later when Paulo plains to do it again. This is where the gun play and samurai sword comes into play. Both Laughlin and O'Neil have a six chambered, double action pistol almost like a LeMot and a Samurai sword.

A lot of critics and people complain about the peace through violence or redemption through revenge method but "To expect peace, prepare for war"-(Tom Jane,THE PUNISHER). Either that or they complained that it is too much like Billy Jack or not enough like Billy Jack, this movie was never meant to be a 'Billy Jack' movie.

But I would suggest renting or borrowing the DVD, watch the movie and the special features to learn about the movie even more, it is actually quite interesting when I watch the interviews with the cast and crew. But if you are a western,samurai,Tom Laughlin, or just a 70s cinema fan then you should pretty much buy the movie. But everyone has their own opinions so I would say rent before buy.

The story was adapted from an 1969 samurai flick called 'Goyokin' and this movie alone was only made on a budget 3.5 million of the Laughlins' own money and it is better than most movie with 10 times it budget.

I also recommend 'Red Sun' or the legendary TV series 'Kung Fu'.