Avaliações de usuários

Mediocre Western with a relentless revenger , William Holden , post-¨Wild Bunch¨. The rancher named John Benedict (William Holden) goes back his ranch when he meets his family has been slaughtered by a gang of marauding Comancheros and his farm is devastated . Holden is decided to take a group of prisoners and strike a blow against the Comancheros bandits . He goes to a Territorial Prison where he gets a gang of misfit thieves, and other mean convicts . As he assembles a band of outlaws prisoners to act as his posse as they chase the bunch responsible for the deaths of his loved ones . The misfit group is formed by lawless of various countries as a French (Roger Hanin), German (Reinhard Kolldehoff), Mexican (Jorge Hoyos) , a mestizo (Jorge Luke) , an ex-slave ( Woody Strode ) and of course the Yankees (played by William Holden and Ernest Borgnine ), but the men came too late and stayed too long . After that , they go across Mexican territory , being led by Benedict and his ragtag team . At the ending the Wild Bunch makes a violent stand against Indians who besiege a northern fort.

This average Western packs lots of action, shootouts, and explosive violence . Taut excitement throughout, beautifully photographed and with spectacular bloodletting but lousy realized with flaws and gaps . William Holden is good as peaceful rancher who turns apart , becoming two-fisted avenger. As Holden is nice as the older gunfighters with their own ethic codes . Furthermore, fine secondaries as Arthur Hunnicutt , Woody Strode , an excessive acting of Ernest Borgnine and Susan Hayward in her last film gives one of the best performances as spinster who falls in love with Holden in some silly love scenes . The story is exactly like ¨The magnificent seven ride ¡ by George McCowan¨ in which the starring, Lee Van Cleef-a Holden lookalike role, after massacred his family enlists convicts in ¨Dirty dozen¨ style with customary outlaws band formed by an eclectic group ; adding brief touches Spaghetti Western with usual theme as 'Vengeance' as leitmotif . The film gets action Western, exciting go riding , shoot outs, it's entertaining , although nothing new but displays a bad pace . The movie contains some moment of grisly violence and even touching on the relationships between the inmates . Colorful cinematography filmed in Mexico by Gabriel Torres Estudios Churubusco Azteca, Mexico City, Distrito Federal, Mexico (studio) and on location in Lagunas de Zempoala, Morelos, Parral, Chihuahua, Torreón, Coahuíla,Tres Marias, Morelos,Viesca, Coahuíla. Atmospheric musical score fitting to action Wesstern by Pino Calvi. The motion picture is regularly directed by Daniel Mann , an expert on dramas as ¨Come back little Seba , Rose Tattoo , Last hungry man ¨, but no in Western genre. Recently restored and reissued with perfect remastering is agreeable seeing for spectacular Mexican outdoors. Rating : 5, 5 , passable.

Definitely a cut above the average B western this US/Mexico production holds interest and features good production values. Daniel Mann's direction is solid with fine looking cinematography from Gabriel Torres, Oscar nominee screenplay writer Wendell Mayes (Anatomy of a Murder '59) lifts the dialogue slightly above average. William Holden has an active role for his age as a ranch owner and family man, driven to seek revenge and is well supported by Woody Strode and Ernest Borgnine, with Susan Hayward coming out of retirement to join the cast - scenes with Hayward and Holden are particularly well done.

Maybe not a great Western, still, far better than many others of its kind. The film did not fare well but just looking at the original advertising poster would turn most people off (promoted like a cheap Italian/Spanish thing) should have been sold much better.

Indians led by a renegade kill William Holden's family, so he rides from Colorado to Mexico to pick out violent prisoners to lead in a vengeful raid.

This western remake of THE DIRTY DOZEN has some fine performers in its ranks, including Ernest Borgnine (who overacts), Woody Strode, Arthur Hunnicutt and, in her final film role, Susan Hayward sporting an Irish accent. There's a nice bit of writing, involving points that the earlier, better known movie often slides over: here, the violent criminals are not team players. The ending may look like they ran out of money for the production, or as if Holden wanted to get back to drinking in Africa, but it's decently set-up, and there are plenty of explosions.

Cinematographer Gabriel Torres shoots springtime Mexico in a style that suggests the Hudson Valley school of painting as it evolved in the second half of the 20th Century.

Elements of "The Revengers" are very familiar, though the overall package is reasonably original and engaging.

The story begins with the writer telegraphing what will soon happen. After all, John Benedict (William Holden) is deliriously happy as he returns home to his family on their ranch. You just KNOW something bad will soon happen...and it does. While John is at another part of the property, bandits arrive and massacre his wife, his four kids and a friend. Soon John vows to spend his remaining days looking for the scum who murdered these innocent souls...and it soon becomes an obsession, like Gregory Peck's character in "The Bravados".

To get revenge, however, Benedict cannot go off half-cocked. After all, a gang of bandits and renegade Indians did this, and it's not like he alone can take on these thugs. So, much like "The Professionals", Benedict goes to round up expert killers to help in his quest...and settles on prisoners ("The Dirty Dozen"). But it won't be easy...these men ARE killers and sociopaths! What's next? See the film.

There are a few minor problems with the film, such as how quickly and easily the hired killers seem to reform and buy in to Benedict's quest. Also, the kill ratio seems to be about 100:1 in the film....as he and his men seem more like Terminators due to their abilities to defeat other hardened criminals with apparent ease! But still, it is entertaining and well done....and you get a chance to see Susan Hayward in her final film, as cancer would claim her only a bit after doing this movie.

A homesteader's family are wiped out by a renegade Injun party and he vows his revenge

" Wow Theo . That sounds like so many other dire generic Westerns . Tell us why you gave it seven out of ten "

Easily explained . It's an old fashioned premise done in the New Hollywood style . Hollywood had done way with the dichotomy of good and bad and decided to paint everything in grey . Some people have mentioned both THE WILD BUNCH and THE DIRTY DOZEN in their comments and you can see some very obvious parallels as the protagonist hires some cut throat prisoners as a posse and you're left with a feeling this might simply backfire on him

Another aspect is the rather bloodthirsty element . New Hollywood had torn up the Hays Code rulebook and consigned it to history a few years earlier and THE WILD BUNCH was responsible for this more than any other film and whilst it doesn't have the same directorial style as Peckinpah would have brought to the movie it's enjoyably mean enough to appeal to audience members who aren't keen on the genre

The Revengers borrows the idea of a bunch of unsavoury convicts being sent on a deadly mission that was used so marvellously in The Dirty Dozen, and transports it to the unlikely setting of a western. The convicts are a rough and ready bunch indeed, and their mission is nothing so grand as the saving of the world from the Nazis.... just a humble quest for revenge.

William Holden is a relatively peaceful rancher whose entire family is massacred by brigands. He swears revenge and helps a bunch of Mexican convicts to bust out of jail in order to enlist them as his "hit squad". However, they are such an unpredictable group that even Holden is not safe from their bouts of violence and aggression. By the time he finds his prey, he has witnessed so much carnage that he ponders whether it is truly worthwhile to kill the brigands just to gratify his thirst for revenge.

This movie is OK, but aside from the bouts of post Wild Bunch viciousness, there is little that hasn't been done before. The westerns were getting tired by '72 and it's no exaggeration to say that this one is more tired than most. It also contains a self-defeating wrap-up which renders the previous two hours all but pointless. However, the acting and the action are pretty good, the scenery is ruggedly beautiful, and for fans of the genre it passes the time efficiently. If you're expecting a classic, then you'd be better sticking to The Wild Bunch, in which the same two leading stars find themselves in a much better movie.

The Revengers is directed by Daniel Mann and written by Wendell Mayes and Steven W. Carabatsos. It stars William Holden, Ernest Borgnine, Woody Strode, Roger Hanin, Reinhard Kolldehoff, Jorge Luke, Jorge Martínez de Hoyos, Susan Hayward and Arthur Hunnicutt. A De Luxe Color/Panavision production, music is by Pino Calvi and cinematography by Gabriel Torres.

Colorado rancher John Benedict (Holden) hires six chain-gang convicts to find the white comancheros who led an Indian raid that massacred his family and friends.

It is pretty much a Western Dirty Half Dozen, with Holden getting to play the Lee Marvin role and Borgnine, stripped of the weight he was carrying when The Dirty Dozen was made in 1967, getting the chance to be one of the crims on a mission instead of the cameo role of General Worden in Robert Aldrich's macho magnificence.

Nicely filmed out of various Mexican locations, film is essentially dealing with a man so hell bent on revenge he comes to resemble the criminals he now rides with. But even crims have codes and ethics as well! Director Daniel Mann never really gets to grips with the character dynamics, leaving hanging the themes of surrogate fatherhood and slave stoicism, while an interim part of the play that sees Hayward nurse Holden back to health actually bogs down the picture, coming off as an excuse to pitch the two great actors together again.

Oh the performances of the cast are enjoyable, especially Borgnine who is having fun as a sly old grizzler, and Holden is as stoic and sternly professional as always, but nothing ever advances beyond being a bunch of blokes traversing the landscapes in readiness for a siege. Is the anticipated siege worth the wait? Actually yes it is, and it goes some way to explaining why the film hasn't fallen into the trough of stinky waters never to be used to quench the Western lovers thirst. But then! Something happens to make you think the Production Code was back in boorish operation. Pah! I imagine Peckinpah and Aldrich shed a frustrated tear at this point... 6/10

At first glance this would seem to be just another violent western of the same class as "The Wild Bunch". Look more deeply into the characters and you will find several interesting changes over the course of the movie. Each character shows a human and sometimes frail side that belies the hard person that they have become.

As others here and elsewhere have noted, "The Revengers" is an obvious attempt to emulate "The Wild Bunch" and "The Dirty Dozen", from its casting William Holden and Ernest Borgnine, to the idea of hiring criminals to go on a dangerous mission. Though as derivative this movie is, it could all the same been a lot of fun in the right hands, but the movie ends up being kind of flat. One of the biggest problems with the movie is the direction by Daniel Mann. The movie is lacking grit and the necessary hard edge a revenge western really needs. Even the times when the bullets start to fly, the action mostly has a been there, done that feeling. (Though the climatic sequence does have some excitement.) But there are problems with the script as well. It doesn't script that many action moments, for one thing (it takes almost half the movie before the first true action scene comes.) The story also plods along with a lot of filler, such as the whole unnecessary sequence with Susan Hayward. While the movie never gets to the point of being boring, it is definitely lacking sufficient punch to entertain more than just die hard western fans. It's no surprise that it was a box office disappointment, though the then declining popularity of the western genre as a whole probably played a part as well.

I can't believe I spent all this time watching this movie for the first time. Hoping it was a fun old movie to watch. I put iup with so many hockey scenes, ridiculous situations, Just to get to an end that was completely unsatisfying and didn't make any sense at all. Watch your own risk

Take William Holden, Ernest Borgnine, Susan Hayward and others strong actors, put them in the Wild West with a story of revenge and anger... With any director you should have a good western. But not with Daniel Mann: the poor soul handles his camera like if it was nine pound hammer, the script goes absolutely nowhere, trying to follow all the usual western movies tracks, including an appalling eyebrow to spaghetti western and Holden seems so tired and uninterested that you will be taking very hard not to close your eyes and take a good nap. The only bright (and moving) but very short scenes are when Holden and Hayward met together. Susan we miss you!

I first watched this film more than thirty years ago, and I hated it. I must say that I discovered THE WILD BUNCH only a couple of days before...How the hell can any one compare this piece of crap to Sam Peckinpah's masterpiece? Because there are William Holden and Ernest Borgnine in it?

I waited more than thirty years to see it again; maybe sometimes you can expect a different point of view, you may be more mature, you may watch in a more accurate way and, why not...

But no, this feature seems even more dull and useless to me as a camel would be in the North Pole. I don't know if it is because of the director - Daniel Mann - who has never been an action films one. But Blake Edwards was not a western nor action movies director either, and he gave us the tremendous WILD ROVERS one year before, also starring William Holden. The actors direction seems OK, but it is the story which is dumb at the most. Poor Susan Hayward who gives here,as far as I know, her last performance. She deserved better. Far better.

Early seventies westerns were usually bloody, gritty, gloomy movies, unless the Andrew Mac Laglen or Burt Kennedy's ones, and I expected far far more from this one, i repeat.

Forget it, a total waste.

(1972) The Revengers WESTERN

Rancher, John Benedict (William Holden) entire family massacred by Comancheroes stealing his horses and he seeks retribution to the person Tarp (Warren Vanders). He does by attending to a Mexican prison camp, and employs the services of some unflattering possible killers and outlaws who broke the law but at the same time good at what they do. He does this with the help of an interpreter, Cholo (Jorge Martinez de Hoyos) and his knowledge of who's who. An African American, Job (Woody Strode); a climber, Quiberon (Roger Hanin); a German, Zweig (Rene Koldehoff); an assassin named El Chamaco (Jorge Luke) an American who knows John Benedict is looking for, by the name of William P Hoop or Bill for short played by Ernest Borgnine third movie both starred together.

Reminiscent to "The Magnificent Seven", and "The Dirty Dozen" to "The Comancheroes" with an unexpected ending.

As other reviewers have pointed out, THE REVENGERS brings to mind the events in a number of other movies that had recently come out, notably Sam Peckinpah's THE WILD BUNCH (in which Holden and Borgnine had already collaborated), Robert Aldrich's THE DIRTY DOZEN, John Sturges' THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, Richard Brooks' THE PROFESSIONALS.

Sadly, THE REVENGERS falls somewhat beneath the quality of those four films, though Holden posts yet another honest, unflinching performance as a man whose family has been wiped out by Indians led by a white man called Tarp, played by Vanders with a lens over his left eye, and nothing more memorably evil than that.

Good acting from Hanin as the Frenchman who loves women and climbs prison walls, Susan Hayward (toward whom Holden seems to head at the end), and a rather flamboyant Borgnine, rolling eyes et al, who likes to frisk dead man's clothes and keep their valuables.

THE REVENGERS suffers from overlength. After an attention-grabbing first half, at about 88' Director Daniel Mann had the opportunity to wrap up with the same ending, which would have made it considerably tighter and far improved the product. Alas, that did not happen, and the final 20+ minutes are a waste. The Indian attack with all the dynamite exploding goes on much longer than necessary.

Competent photography. 7/10.

The scenery in The Revengers rivals anything put on the big screen.

The cast features William Holden and Ernest Borgnine at the top. Holden is solid, as always. But Borgnine steals the show as the comic relief. As the moral centre of the movie, this might be Woody Strode's finest 90 minutes.

Comanchees ride into Holden's idyllic wh1te ranch and pointlessly slaughter his entire family. His buddy also catches a couple of fatal bullets, but before he dies he conveniently describes one of two white men who were riding with the Comanchees, a dude with one pale eye.

Holden sets out for revenge. First stop, some prison camp. He recruits some reallky bad dudes. They go on a killing spree across Texas while pursuing the dude with the pale eye.

That's as complicated as it gets.

Susan Hayward shows up at the end of Act 2 with a terribly fake Irish accent to nurse Holden back to heatlh after he catches a bullet. Her scenes are pointless padding.

It all leads to an unsatisfying ending. Did they run out of budget?

I could see this being entertaining as the ABC Wednesday Night Movie of the Week in 1974. Grampa always enjoyed seeing the white guys killing Ind1ans.

William Holden, my candidate for the perfect American born leading Man with a series of hit films such as Sunset Blvd, Golden Boy, Love Is A Many Splendored Thing, Picnic, Bridges of Toko Ri, The Bridge On The River Kwai, The Horse Soldiers, Suzie Wong, made this film at the near end of his fabled career. Directed by Daniel Mann, the film was shot in Mexico, and some of the scenes and photography to me seemed a bit murky, but it could have been the print I saw. Released by Cinema Center Films which tried to become a major studio, the action is fast paced. The film features 3 Oscar winners Holden, Ernest Borgnine and in a small cameo Susan Hayward. The Producers should have enlarged the role Ms. Hayward played. After all the tough lady we all know and love would have been part of the posse.

A fine film that could have been better.

William Holden is devastated when Apaches butcher his family in the western The Revengers. He plans his revenge and forms his own posse of convicted felons, and sets out to find the Indians responsible.

I'm not a William Holden fan, and I don't usually like westerns, so this wasn't my favorite movie. I watched it because of Susan Hayward, but she had a pretty small part, so it was hardly worth the wait. There have been many "take revenge against the murdering Indians" movies, and this one isn't really the best. I can't think of one in that genre that is "the best" because it's usually a pretty tired, one-dimensional genre: white man good; Indian bad. Unless you absolutely loved playing Cowboys vs. Indians when you were a little boy, there isn't really a good reason to watch this movie.

This appears to be a severely watered down remake of "The Wild Bunch", primarily due to William Holden and Ernest Borgnine being cast. Unfortunately, it is not close to that film. There are no remotely original plot elements, either. Still, it's worth a watch, primarily if you're a fan of Holden and/or Borgnine. I gave it a 5/10 simply because of their presence.

Rancher John Benedict's wife and four children are killed one day by Comanche Indians.He needs to revenge for their deaths.He gathers up a posse formed of six prisoners.Their job is to find a man named Tarp, who led the slaughter.The Revengers (1972) is directed by Daniel Mann.There's a great ensemble in this movie.The legendary William Holden plays John Benedict.A legend is also Ernest Borgnine, a living legend, I might add.He plays Hoop.Today this man celebrates his 95th birthday.That's quite an achievement.And he's done about 200 movies in his career.And he's still not thinking of retirement.Way to go, Ernie! The terrific Woody Strode portrays Job.Roger Hanin plays the part of Quiberon.Susan Hayward returned from her voluntary retirement to play Elizabeth Reilly.Arthur Hunnicutt is Free State.Warren Vanders plays Tarp.Larry Pennell is Arny.James Daughton is Morgan.Holden's late son, Scott Holden, plays Lieutenant.I'd say as a western this is underrated.It may not reach the level of The Wild Bunch, but there still are some likable qualities in this movie.It's a manly movie, but those moments between Bill Holden and Susan Hayward are filled with sweetness and tenderness.And those manly scenes also work, the bloody battle scenes.Watch this movie and have your own opinion of it.But I liked it pretty much.

Very good film, liked very much watching it. William Holden does a very good job in the role a ranchers whose family was massacred by savages and an outlaw. The film was released in 1972, commercially re-released in 1979 on NBC's Tuesday Night at the Movies. The film was shot in New Mexico in 1971, and had Susan Hayward's return from voluntary retirement. This western was an attempt to return audiences to the dark territory of The Wild Bunch with a dash of The Dirty Dozen. The two best are certainly Ernest Borgnine and Woody Strode"... noting further that this was "probably Borgnine's best performance since Marty.