O Xerife Pistoleiro

RELEASED IN 2017 and directed by Timothy Woodward Jr., "Hickok" stars Luke Hemsworth as the titular lawman and gunslinger, nicknamed Wild Bill, who is commissioned as Marshal to tame the wildest cow-town in the Old West, Abilene, Kansas. Kris Kristofferson plays the noble mayor and Bruce Dern the town doctor while Trace Adkins is on hand as the nefarious mogul of the town. Cameron Richardson plays the woman they vie for whereas Kaiwi Lyman appears as Hickok's gunfighter rival.

Except for the opening sequences, this is a town-bound Western similar in theme to those Wyatt Earp Westerns where Earp has to clean up a town (Dodge City, Tombstone, whatever). Since practically the entire story takes place in town it's irrelevant that California substitutes for Kansas. It's great to see old Western stars Kristofferson and Dern in fairly significant peripheral roles. Luke is stalwart as the protagonist and the movie really drives home the bold resolve it would take to tame a wild cow-town. Meanwhile the hulking Adkins is formidable as the heavy.

While this is a relatively low-budget adult Western (with a little bit of cussing, nudity, covert sex) and there are obvious mistakes here and there (e.g. the kid's bandage appearing on the wrong leg), not to mention the cast probably learned their lines the night before, as well as the predictableness concerning Mattie's kid, the script and main cast keep things compelling. There are several highlights and a few spectacular shots, like the train bridge in the opening act and, later, the moonlit sky.

In short, the movie's entertaining for a low budget Western that doesn't overstay its welcome. Western fans who don't demand Grade A quality should eat this up. Keep in mind that not every Western can have the mega-funds of blockbusters like "Dances With Wolves" and "Unforgiven." Just don't look to "Hickok" for accurate history. Nevertheless, I'd watch "Hickok" over the comparatively dull "Wild Bill" (1995) any day.

THE FILM RUNS 1 hour 28 minutes and was shot in Agoura (Paramount Ranch) & Santa Clarita, California. WRITER: Michael Lanahan.

GRADE: B/B- (6.5/10)

The dubious factual integrity of this tale of Wild Bill Hickok's tenure as the Sheriff of Abilene does nothing to enhance what is a stubbornly ordinary saga, despite the efforts of a decent cast. Liam, the older, arguably least successful, of the Hemsworth brothers works hard in the title role, and receives solid support from Trace Adkins, Bruce Dern and Kris Kristofferson, but the plot never really engages and Timothy Woodward Jr's direction lacks imagination.

Lazy, terrible script, one dimentional characters, flat and boring. Exactly the same kind of stupidity yyou find in series like CSI and similar garbage.

Wild Bill Hickok (Luke Helmsworth) comes to Abilene, a western cow town that needs taming and Mayor Knox (Kris Kristofferson) makes him the Marshall.

This is somewhat disappointing because there are good acting scenes and poorly acted scenes. You decide how correct I am. The scenes with Hickok and Dr. O'Rourke ( Bruce Dern) were very good; and also the dialogues between Hickok and Mayor Knox were spot on; and I even liked the banter between Hickok and John Wesley Hardin (Kaiwi Lyman-Mersereau). All the rest of the scenes and dialogues were not as good, but the talks between Hickok and Mattie (Cameron Richardson) his love interest were okay. Trace Atkins is okay as Poe, the owner of the saloon. He originally likes Hickok, but after Hickok affects his business by not allowing guns in town, he does everything to have his boys kill Hickok.

Was I looking for a shoot-out between Hickok and John Wesley Hardin? Of course. Checking with Wikipedia we see that Hickok and John Wesley Hardin did know each other and when Hickok told Hardin to turn in his guns, he did. But in the movie he didn't. In the movie, Hickok made him a Deputy Marshall.

Yes, Hickok does pretend that John Wesley Hardin is not John Wesley Harden for if he was, then Hickok would have to arrest him because Hardin is a wanted man. Interesting take here.

Was this a really good western? No. A lot of stuff needed work, mostly quicker responses from the players at times. Let me say this: if the bad guys were better bad guys, then this may have saved the movie. Didn't happen. For example, the bad guys shoot into a cabin where Hickok and Mattie are and throw a stick of dynamite into the cabin. Hickok tosses it outside, but the bad guys think they killed Hickok and didn't check. See? This was just one small example.

Also I kept hearing that this was Drover town, but I didn't see one cow. A Drover is someone who drives cows to market. We should have seen at least one cow. Bummer.

A sort of interesting aside: I noticed most players wore their guns in not the usual place on their hips.

All in all this was watchable, and yes, somewhat disappointing, too, and we wished it was better. (5/10)

Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: Yes, almost when Hickok and Mattie get together. Language: Small stuff and not much of it.

Disappointing is a word I would normally use when discovering a below par movie, but I did not expect much from this movie to begin with so the bar was set quiet low in my expectation. Somehow the director managed to lower that bar considerably. Terrible direction, no style of any kind whatsoever.. terrible sound editing,, a gunshot sounds like someone farted loudly.. awfully clichéd dialogue, wooden acting at its worst, lighting was poor, cinematography was childlike and vacuous,. This was a calamitous endeavour from start to finish. Watch it only to learn how not to make a western.