Shadowheart

The movie was great. The first comment was absolute trash and he needs to just enjoy movies for movies, and not "critique shots" and think that him and his child could write a better plot. It isn't always about the technical aspects. You are just looking for something to be wrong with every movie and can't enjoy a fictional tale. It's like getting upset with the Matrix because there's no way you could do any of that. So I guess what you are saying is that Tombstone sucked too eh? (No I bet you liked that one even though the good guys had a fraction of a chance. But I guess that's OK since it's Kilmer and Russell, right?) It is essentially the same story, which most westerns are. Good guy comes in to clean up town controlled by bad guys. Just GAD and learn to enjoy the stories for once.

The first thing I pay attention to in watching a movie is whether I care about the characters. I couldn't bring myself to care about these people, mostly because the writing and acting was not good enough. The feel of the whole thing was that it was amateurish. The story didn't flow in a way that felt real. Also, I don't like stories where there's not a good resolution or denouement, even if not a happy ending. This didn't leave me with the feeling of satisfaction. The theme seemed to be relentless evil without any real hope of the good guy winning out in the end. Without giving away the end, I'll just say that if it was meant to tie up the plot, it failed to work for me. I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone.

As I watched this terrible film, I was reminded of a bad High School drama project. The characters are one dimensional, the story line is something that any HS kid could come up with, very formulaic.

The score leaves nothing to the imagination. You have the soaring violins and happy sounds when we meet the dad and are expected to learn what a good man he is, as an example.

Bad guy goes from having rotten teeth in the beginning of the movie, and 15 years later has a set of pearly whites. I guess they invented cosmetic dentistry in the interim.

And even small things, like the guns are from the early 1800s, but are supposed to be late 1800s models.

Looking at the film, you realize there was some budget here, as the cinematography is fine, but the rest of the film is just dreck.

This movie could have been more fun than it was but some of the people in charge of doing it right either didn't care or lacked the knowledge to do it right.

Some of the plot was predictable and seemed amateurish. The plot lacked realism and it didn't have to do so. For example, at one point our star is seriously wounded, but recovers with amazing speed as does his brother-in-law who experiences a painful injury. Within a day or two both are up and moving around like there was nothing wrong them. The director could have shown these guys slowly recovering and show some pain from their wounds once they do get back into action. Come on. That would have been easy!

The film lacked period authenticity. There is an outdoor evening wedding dance that is illuminated by what appear to be round "Chinese lanterns." Inside can be seen light bulbs. This is suppose to be 1865 and post Civil War. The light bulb hadn't been invented yet! Who was your technical adviser on this show?

A period of time elapses from the opening scene to the later ones and yet some of the characters never aged. The sheriff looked older in the beginning of the movie than he did at the end. In the opening scene two women are seen walking down the street with dome like parasols over their heads. Amazingly these women show up walking down the street years later with the same parasols.

There was no need to make out two surveyors to be bumbling eastern hicks. They could certainly still show fear at having been threatened but surveyors in the west would not have looked, acted and been dressed like that. The costumer, Jenevieve Busseau, and Wardrobe supervisor, Fanny Mac, get low marks for authenticity in this movie.

During the early Civil War battle scenes we see Union infantrymen with bright white canteen straps. These appear to have been newly issued from the prop department. Canteen straps got dirty pretty quick during the war and the prop guys should have dirtied them up so they could hardly be seen.

In the battle scene we see the bright yellow stripe of a cavalry sergeant as he bayonets a Confederate soldier. Possible, but more believable would have been to see another Infantryman doing it. Cavalrymen didn't tend to carry rifles that had bayonets unless they were mounted Infantry and then they wouldn't be showing that yellow stripe.

Questionable authenticity is also true in the scene where a few Navajo Indians are being herded of by some Union troops and being taken to a reservation. In addition in that scene, neither the commanding officer or his subordinate officer wore shoulder straps or any kind of insignia. After the Civil War the volunteers were back in their home states. The Regular Army was back in charge and uniform regulations would have been more adhered to. It is doubtful that two officers would have been dressed like these two were in the herding scene. The subordinate's double breasted coat indicates his rank as being that of a major or higher. That means that you had a major and his superior officer, who had to be at least a colonel, leading a small band of less than a dozen Indians to a reservation. Nope. Wouldn't have happened.

In another scene, the first prisoner that our star brings in to justice doesn't have a hat. Why not? It was hot. Everyone wore and kept a hat. The prisoners face was well tanned though, as if during the day he didn't wear a hat. Maybe he was a 2009 tanned movie star and not an 1860's desperado! Take a look at today's cowboys and farmers. The tops of their foreheads are white from being shaded from the sun by their hats. Put a hat on the bad guy!

There were more but that's enough. In summary, while some scenes were well done and the actors were appropriately dressed, there were too many slip ups to let us just sit back and enjoy the movie. Let's hope the next attempt at a western or a Civil War period movie hires technical experts that will be listened to and will thus help make the film more believable.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Justin Ament...you are not leading man material, or a producer. PLEASE, PLEASE...stop making movies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I believe you have let your ego overwhelm you good judgment. You area supporting actor at best. Clichéd, predictable and formulaic! "Not that there is anything wrong with that!" There are reasons movies are released to video, not the theaters, that go beyond being an independent production. Under the above stated circumstances, Angus MacFadyen did some exceptional work, set in an environment of simplistic or unenlightened sets, dialogue, camera angles, lighting; etc., etc., etc. Or maybe I was just in a bitchy viewing mood.