Dead Men

Wayyyyy too long....if the plot was more coherent they could have done a three part series. Some acting was good (indians and 1/2 of the cowpokes) and other parts just marginal. So, not bad if the budget was under 500k and it was shot in 60 days.

I didn't find it too bad but having watched Justified, 1883 and the somewhat fictionalised American Primeval this didn't:t stand a chance really. So.manybof them look.alike with their hats and unshaven faces. I am seriously having trouble with Vance. He looks like the ex Cavalry friend of the brother:s father who got shot and I thought was dead but if it's him alive he now seems in cahoots with Coles. As an ex Army Officer I expect him to be superlative in the art of battle but I just cannot for the life of me figure out the guy with the one eye, exactly. I don't intend giving out spoilers here.

The action is fun but the movie overall confusing.

The only thing entertaining was the location and the horses and somewhat the Apache wardrobe. The firearms were no where near the period you have this taking place in 1868-1869 the colt peacemaker didn't come out until 1873 as well as the 73 Winchester, the 86 Winchester didn't come out until 1886, the 94 Winchester didn't come out until 1894, and the composition shingles that were on the roof of Roberts place didn't come in to production until 1970's the storylines were all over the place I couldn't tell what as going on or what was the main objective.... revenge of the father or the goldmine claim or rescue of the Apache wife or reuniteing of the brothers, and the dialogue! Ghastly

A 3 hour conglomeration of every single poor western cliche ever portrayed in previous B flicks. Even use kids plastic poker chips lmao...soooo bad