Avis des utilisateurs

Didn't go into this movie with any expectations as I was just planning on passing a couple of hours.

Unfortunately it was a poorly made, poorly acted, poorly written effort.

A lot of hammy acting and long winded monologues at key moments. The first gunfight looked like something you'd see in a school play and things didn't get any better after that.

I watched this Western while suffering from pseudo-COVID (y'know, you have all the symptoms but the tests show negative), so the oddly muted gunfire sounds were kind on my headache-infested skull. As some of the action scenes were also in slo-mo, I linked the softened bullet noises to the filmmakers attempting to imitate life going slower and softer in a stress situation. May be wrong, just my take.

Some dialogue was good, some was flowery, and some just superfluous. Quite liked any dialogue from the stoic Gunslinger, Artemis Hollinger (Ed Morrone). Direct, judicial use of words that offered just the right level of explanation. I found the costumes and make-up jarring for people living in a hot dust bowl. No sweat-stained shirts, dust and horse hair matted pants, hats that have seen better days or limp, discoloured bandanas. It was all stiff spotless shirts and dresses, shiny hats, whitest of white aprons and patterned vests and bandanas. Repeat shots of perfect American white chompers, women sporting contemporary eyeshadow, and lots of clean styled head and facial hair conspired to crack the illusion I was watching a Western set in the US Civil War era.

Mainly watched to see Tom Berenger again, who can forget his iconic portrayal of Sgt. Barnes in Platoon?

I'm all in for hiring handicapped people but it doesn't work having dead sound effects team. I was so annoyed by the muffled cannon shots where any other movie maker would have had real rifle and gun shots recorded instead. I can't tell you what the last hour and eleven minutes were like because I found something else to watch instead. Maybe if the whole thing was worth watching I would have more than six hundred characters. Your review process is worse than the movie. Maybe if the whole thing was worth watching I would have more than six hundred characters. Your review process is worse than the movie.

All the characters were clean shaven, clothes fresh from the cleaners and those pearly, bright white teeth hurt my eyes. Reflecting on the Paramount + series "1883" had grit, dirty clothes and great writing as Two Guns had none of this.

The production is terrible. The sound is so bad.... The gun shots sound really fake like muffled cannons, all the background sound is laughable, with extra wind noise, muffled sound one minute, one minute nothing at all. I'm not sure the horses moving ever sounds right. The story is good, and Tom Berenger is ok. Everything else is just bad.... Characters even die in funny ways.

Parts of this movie were enjoyable, and the ending was quite nice, however, getting to the ending takes a bit of effort.

Since I love the old style dramatic Westerns,,CGI and special effects I can do without, but "sloppy" wardrobe is something that doesn't cost a lot to do well. There were no pre-printed paisley bandanas back then. The real ones were probably solid color rags from this or that. These (which literally EVERYONE wore) looked like they had just come off the shelf from Walmart. At least they could have washed & dried them (and the brand new cargo pants with the buckle in the back and all the "brand spanking new" vests and crisp shirts) No ironing, and leave them out in a dust storm a bit, especially the hats! This wardrobe GLARINGLY said "Fake".

Some very poor acting and writing, Jeff Fahey and Danny Trejo almost stole the whole movie with one scene.

Nice to see Tom Berringer looking and acting so well in his '70's - Wow.

Barely watchable. However, it had a pretty good "feel good" kind of ending.

Poor make-up, poor sound quality, poor Foley artistry. The sound effects were inconsistent, the make up was like cheap Halloween make-up, and the sound was all over the place. I've seen worse, but it's been a while. I'm guessing the budget was really low or poorly spent.

Ed Morrone plays Artemis Hollinger, an uncorruptible and determined law enforcer hired by the legendary Marshall Terrance McTeague (Tom Berenger) to chase the cold-blood killer Abel Cruz (Casper Van Dien) in a classic "good vs. Evil" manhunt.

The mediocre sound quality of the film, the poor acting of some secondary characters, the discrepancies in timing between a bullet impact and the physical reaction of the bodies being shot at (which are in fact highlighted by slow-mo takes) are all strong reminders that this is a low budget movie.

But, if we manage to put that aside, we´re left with a nice story which reminds us that the world doesn´t always fall into the clear-cut, black-and-white model that we´d want it to fit most of the time for the sake of our peace of mind.

Chivalry, honour and ethics strugle to find a share at a place and time where those qualities maybe were rather unusual.

Despite the feeble general production of the movie, director and writer Justin Lee succesfully achieves the task of delivering a story that is worth to be told.

BTW, there is a cute redeeming post-credit scene that somehow enhances the plot twist that the whole movie ends up revolving around. Make sure you don´t miss it.

Yikes..

I have no idea if this movie has a good plot.

The sound is horrible. Horrible. Within the first few minutes, the sound mix goes from stereo, to mono, and then back to stereo. Background noises, like saloon noise, suddenly cuts off without leaving the scene. I stopped watching midway when the only sound in one scene was the wireless mic on an actor riding a horse, and all you hear is the mic rubbing against his costume with every bounce of the horse. Then, when he gets off the horse... holy crap, nothing but unintentional mic noise and mic scraping.

Few things in movies annoy me more than dialogue which is obvious ADR, but sometimes ADR is necessary. This movie demonstrates this need, hundreds of times. I don't think any ADR took place at all.

This whole movie seems like just a rough cut prior to proper sound mixing. Even if you like the actors and the genre, don't waste your time. Watch and old western on the Grit tv network instead.

If you like westerns and Jake Busey (big fan and it's criminal he's not in more) then you'll accept this film and watch it.

Action wasn't that good for a western but it wasn't the worst.

I enjoyed this film for what it was and I would recommend it only to big western fans.

7/10 - 7 because of the cast.

I had the opportunity to sit down and watch the 2022 Western movie "A Tale of Two Guns" from writer and director Justin Lee here in 2022. And seeing that there were indeed a handful of good actors on the cast list, of course I sat down to watch it.

However, it was obvious pretty early on in the movie that this was not really a top notch production. How so? Well, from the very first gun fight, which actually starts off the movie, you have a feeling of it being an amateurish production actually, especially in terms of cinematography and the sounds. I've never sat through a movie with guns of any kind where the gunshots sounded so pathetic as they did in "A Tale of Two Guns".

The storyline in "A Tale of Two Guns" was actually fair enough. It wasn't the most riveting and compelling of storylines, but it was sufficient enough for a single viewing.

The movie does have a good cast ensemble, with the likes of Tom Berenger, Casper Van Dien, Ed Morrone, Judd Nelson, Jeff Fahey, Griff Furst, Jake Busey and Danny Trejo among those listed. However, most of these were just in the movie for a moment or two. And the audience are treated to Casper Van Dien and Ed Morrone for the majority of the movie.

I don't understand why they opted to show the gunfight scenes in slow motion. It didn't really add any excitement to the scenes. If anything, it just served as a nuissance, especially when laced with those god awful pathetic sounds for the guns.

All in all, "A Tale of Two Guns" was watchable for a single viewing, and that was about it. This was by no means a milestone in the Western genre. Nor is it a movie that brought anything new to the genre.

My rating of writer and director Justin Lee's 2022 Western "A Tale of Two Guns" lands on a four out of ten stars.

Terrible movie with really bad special effects, atrocious acting, and an even worse plot. Or maybe I should say lack of any real or in depth plot. Zero in the realm of anything to call a climax or even a rise for that matter. With a crap ending to top it off. It's as if the writer missed the essential parts of story telling most elementary school kids have been taught. I won't even get into more advanced things like character development, perspective, pov, conflict, etc etc. Enuff was missed at the elementary level. You would be better off to watch tombstone or unforgiven for the 16th time if your in the mood for a western.

B+ movie, I didn't find the audio that annoying as other reviewers did.. What I did find was an enjoyable script and decent acting. A good hunt them down movie that took it's sweet time between action scene, but I didn't mind because the dialog was just so refreshing to listen to. Good simple folks, Bad guys with friends that you would play poker with.

Was the costume/wardrobe the greatest, no, but not horrible by any stretch of the imagination... Was the scenery spectacular...no...in fact not bad actually, yeah some of the buildings looked a little too new, but all in all, not bad.

Just a Western with a different slant than most today's movies take, and it made for an enjoyable view. If not for a few curse words and graphic blood scenes, this could be mistaken for a somewhat family friendly movie, since today's movies curse every other word. 8/10 (High rating for me).

Who sewed Judd Nelson's Captains bars on his uniform? They should have been fired. So much for historical reference checks. I understand every actor has a movie that doesn't make a killing at the box office but with a film that has alot of big names it should have been better. I watched hoping that it would get better but it just had he same mellow mood throughout. Time period is messed up with costumes, piano music and Apache warriors. Mr. Berenger can't get away from Longstreet as Van Dien ,Starship troopers. Mix of Wyatt Earp, Tombstone, Young guns and 3:10 to Yuma. Just no cohesive cast to draw the viewers.

DNF'd. The sound is awful, the guns sound particularly odd, the foley is repetitive, all the things others have mentioned but by far the worst crime is the dialogue. There's some decent acting buried under it all but the writing is such a mess of stilted, awkward phraseology. It's the kind of writing that maybe, maybe works on the printed page but the minute it leaves an actors lips it falls apart.

There's a weird folly of writers that period pieces must be elevated with long words used in a colloquial way, and an abject lack of compound words in order to sound adequately "oldy-timey"; with westerns being the worst offenders. In truth, it only makes the characters feel less real.

Just, bad. Bad. Bad.

This movie was Way Good! This may be my top movie of the year so far. It was so much better than I expected and took surprising turns in a wonderful character-driven story that had much more depth than many films of this genre. Casper Van Dien is not a stranger to Westerns and stole the show, in my opinion. But the other lead was also well acted and played a character you care about. The movie takes you on a journey following both men to what will inevitably lead to a showdown. But the journey gets complicated and so does your thoughts on where it's all heading. There are some badass western moments all over and the gun fights pack a punch that is really satisfying. And in some beautiful backdrops. Speaking of badass, Tom Berenger had that in spades! His Marshall character was awesome and I would love to see him play that character in another movie. Very well acted. Very excellent Western and I had a blast watching it. More please!