The Outsider

In recent years there have been in the direct to DVD world a number of westerns made on very low budgets. This is one of them, and I think that despite it having a number of flaws, it is a touch above most other modern low budget westerns. Now, it IS very cheaply made, but I could see that the filmmakers tried very hard to hide this fact, such as with the use of limited lighting in a number of sequences. And they did spend some money when it counted, such as with the use of a rain machine in a few sequences, which does add some atmosphere. The filmmakers were also able to with the limited funds generate a few decent scenes of action and/or suspense.

However, these points of merit only take the movie so far. While the movie is atmospheric, it is undeniably VERY slow to unfold, made worse that the core of the story is simply a rehash of revenge westerns from the past. A quicker pace would have helped things considerably. Also, the movie is hurt by the fact that the central protagonist (played by Jon Foo) doesn't give a particularly good or engaging performance. There are also a few badly directed sequences that will momentarily puzzle viewers as to what exactly is happening in front of them, or what just happened moments before.

Despite these and other flaws, I admit that I wasn't at any time BORED by the movie, and while I may not be giving the overall results a passing grade, I do think that under the low budget circumstances, the filmmakers deserve an "A" for effort.

One last note, this one to fans of Danny Trejo: He only shows up for a couple of minutes.

The origami crane on the grave are japanese tradition not Chinese. Also in the church, Christianity doesn't use incense to carry prayers to heaven.

There's no bank heist or cowboys Vs indians in this movie, just a very tragic story about a chinese man (yes, a chinese man) seeking revenge. This is why most people hate The Outsider: because it offers nothing they were expecting after they read "western".

If you're just looking for a nice film, you'll find an interesting plot that switches gears about halfway through, so much that even the protagonist is not the same anymore. Looking at the cast Foo, Adkins and Flanery deliver good performances, while Trejo is in there for 5 minutes and quickly forgotten.

It takes an open mind to appreciate everything: if you're not too hardcore about westerns, you're gonna like this movie.

This movie is POORLY directed. TOOOO much of the movie is black, dark....as in "Not Enough Light"!!! Too many of the scenes (frames) are spend entirely too much "filler time" on any particular frame. Add more light to the dark scenes move from one scene a bit faster than 5 minutes and it "may" be a better film.

Not sure where the 8,9,and 10 star reviews came from. Trace Adkins seemed to be trying to channel Sam Elliot. The guy playing the villain pretty much chewed the scenery. The hero wasn't developed at all. The action was too little and was either filmed so close or so dark you couldn't see what was happening. Danny Trejo usually brings some life to the screen, he was nice and menacing, but dialogue sounded like he was reading it off cue cards. Flanery was probably the best part of the movie, but his character wasn't really developed either. There were some really strange decisions about what to film. Why closeups of people chewing food?