A Fistful of Lead

I can only assume those good reviews are from relatives of the writer and director, because this was a very amateurish production. The dialogue was awful, the story might have been okay if it had been competently told (but it wasn't), and the actors all seemed like they were appearing in their first film.

The gore was gratuitous and rather than adding to the film, it just took you out of your suspension of disbelief. The comedy elements (I think they were intentional) were out of place and poorly executed. The female characters appeared to be there purely to give a nod to feminism, and to stretch the run-time a little by giving them some angry sounding lines which they did at least deliver with almost believable enthusiasm. There isn't a single likeable character.

Very poor effort. Makes me think I should try writing films. I couldn't do much worse than this.

Avoid.

My Dad bought this for me for Christmas, and I just now got around to watching it. I actually really liked "A Fistful Of Lead"! I thought this little flick had a lot to offer, honestly! It's flawed, but has a pretty solid script, for the most part.

It's essentially about a bunch of bankrobbers being chased-down by a Sherriff of the town they robbed, as well as a bunch of people from the town. They spend a lot of time out in the woods, hunting for the thieves.

There aren't many good guys in the film, honestly. One of the only ones is a really annoying British guy, that I thought was the Jar Jar Binks of the film. The guy's always rambling on, trying to make jokes that don't land. Everyone else is playing a Clint Eastwood-type character. I actually think most of them do pretty fine with what the script gives them-especially the more in-the-front female character we have (out of two female characters hiding-out in the cave everyone ends-up at, about halfway through the film). It was all pretty well-performed, if I do say so myself. It seems like all of the cast were having fun with this project.

I do think that, sometimes, the costumes-and maybe even the characters themselves-look a little too clean. Even a bloodstain from having someone killed nearby a character could look like spilt koolaid. It's hard to get that down-and-pat for a western of a lower budget, but I don't think the costumes were bad, or anything. Just a little too wrinkle-free for the grittiness this film wanted to depict.

Something I do think was absolutely HORRID was the special effects. Every single time someone is shot and killed, CGI blood splatters all over the screen. It really makes the film feel more like a costume party, for some reason. It ruins a ton of the tension that's so well-crafted, at times. CGI gore is fine, in some movies, but it all comes down to how it's utilized. It is NOT utilized well in "A Fistful Of Lead".

There's also something else I kept noticing, almost throughout the entire flick: the sheriff is ALWAYS re-dubbed. I don't think I saw that much with anyone, but there are times he's yelling but his mouth is merely mumbling. It can take you out of the film pretty easily, when he's on screen. That being said, I don't think he's a bad actor. It just seems like the director changed the attitudes the sheriff character had, in post-production, yet they never match what he has on the screen.

I might also add that I thought the ending was a little odd. Everything about the sheriff character just made me wonder, by the end, why, with his gruff, rude, scheme-y mantra, anyone would appoint him to be the sheriff of a small town in western-based times. Seems a little wrong, or irresponsible, if I were any of the people living in the film's area.

One final note is about the score: it was actually very nice. Very suitable to the flick. Almost forgot to mention it, when I originally wrote the review.

Overall, if you like more modern, bloody westerns, this might be up your alley. It was a fun time, even if it wasn't perfect. I had a decent time with what I had here, and I'm glad I got to see it.

Thanks, Dad! I love you! And God bless you!

Awful. Horrible acting and strong reliance on campy gore, because that's all they've got. My stepfather has inflicted a LOT of awful westerns on us, but this could possibly be the worst ever. I'd comment on the plot, but I'm not sure there was one. I was possibly distracted by the continual sprays of blood on the camera lens. Kind of edgy the first time you see it, but after about the 800th time it has definitely lost its shock value.

... if you want to believe all the high rating reviews ... that's your choice , i've seen the movie and have no connection to the film makers ... to me it's low budget rubbish, poor acting, poor script , action is belittled by the cheap CGI and cheap props ... i want my money back!

This film made me laugh. Seriously, how can you not love it? So simple and low budget but it still created some great entertainment. Blood splattering on the camera, guts falling on the ground, all wrapped around a very bloody and messy opening bank robbery mystery. There is no good acting but I have to give credit to Richard Sandling as Johnny Rumford. This guy makes the film what it is, a barrel of laughs. Nothing high tech to be seen here but hopefully you share my sense of humour. Sheriff Noone's use of the Confederate LaMat revolver, only added to my enjoyment. If Canada ever recovers its liberty, I'm going to get myself one of these. Fun fun if you can bear it.