O Cavaleiro Solitário

Eastwood takes us back to the Wild West in this beautifully filmed Western action adventure. The script is that of a typical Western flick: The villain is a bad guy in power (LaHood) terrorizing the helpless (in this case a group of 'squatters'). Desperate LaHood uses violent measures to drive them away until suddenly an enigmatic preacher shows up.

Eastwood definitely adds his signature touch. He humanizes the story and the characters which is what makes his films different from the usual Western flicks that were popular when the genre was at its peaks. The women aren't cast as showpieces or mere damsels in distress and the men aren't all evil or all good. Even a despicable person like LaHood shows a human side and Stockburn's expressions leak fear and vulnerability.

Then there are the strong good-guy characters: Hull, his girlfriend and her daughter. All three are drawn to the Preacher. Hull admires him and maybe even sees him as a role model as a result of which he gathers courage and learns to fend for himself and what he believes in. Sarah has fallen in love and she knows that they have no future but she begins to appreciate what she has. Megan has her first crush and even though The Preacher respectfully rejects her advances, she takes her first step towards adulthood and responsibility. The Preacher is mysterious, generous, quiet and a loner. He may be the good samaritan but he isn't without his share of faults and secrets.

The breathtaking landscape is captured beautifully with stunning cinematography. The editing is also solid as the pace is quite steady. The art direction and costumes are brilliant. Sound effect is decent and the score works well. The horses are awesome.

Eastwood is excellent as the mysterious brooding but likable Preacher. Of course he's used to playing such characters and he does them so remarkably. Michael Moriarty, Carrie Snodgress and Sydney Penny are equally great. Richard Dysart makes for an entertaining villain.

In my opinion, Eastwood's Weaterns have stood the test of time. I can enjoy them today just as I did years ago. 'Pale Rider' is no exception.

The opening to Pale Rider is just excellent, at first all is calm and serene, but then the peace is shattered by the thundering of hooves. A group of men employed by Coy LaHood, tear thru a small mining community, shooting guns and trampling over all in their way. During this callous act of bullying, one of the men shoots and kills young Megan's dog. When Megan buries her beloved pet, she calls to god to send someone to help them against the greedy LaHood, because LaHood is intent on stripping the locals of their claims, and he literally will stop at nothing to get them. Later on Megan is reading from the bible, she reads aloud to her mother about "beholding a pale horse and that the man who sat on it was death", we then see a lone horseman riding towards this under fire place...

Behold the pale horse because the man that sat on him was Clint Eastwood! And that's all you really want to know as regards what drives the film on. It had been quite some time since the movie watching world had witnessed a damn good Western, so it is obvious that Eastwood, knowing the genre inside out, felt it time to remind all and sundry about this engrossing genre and all its little peccadilloes. Riffing on his own High Plains Drifter from 1973 and homaging Shane in the process, Eastwood again uses supernatural leanings to play out this intriguing tale. Pale Rider works well because Eastwood cares for the genre so much, no frame is wasted and the acting on show delivers the necessary amount of quality to enhance the picture's impact. From the thundering opening to the gorgeous final shot, Pale Rider is an expertly crafted Western that still holds up today as a great entry on Eastwoods CV. Pale Rider. 8/10

The Westerns is what gained Eastwood mainstream recognition, and he returns to prosperous grounds with this movie. Much like his character, he returns the Western from the dead and avenges their loss of appeal at the box office. A few years later, he was to strike gold with ‘Unforgiven' and although this story is not as gripping as ‘Unforgiven', it is well crafted with minor flaws.

The similarities between this movie and his well-known Spaghetti Westerns are vast, but the difference lies with the superior quality. Once again he is the ‘Man With No Name' defending the weak and settling an old score. Where this one differs from his earlier work is that the characters and dialogue are realistic surpassing the one – dimension norm for the genre. The characters are credible in the sense that each has believable motivations for their actions. The Hood are motivated by their greed and the gold miners are motivated by their dreams. The credibility is thus intact with regards to the characters drives meaning that we now do not have to rely on suspension of disbelief as we witness the action unfold. The dialogue is in sync with each character. The Hood speaks with an educated tongue, but his desperation is apparent as the Preacher stands his ground. The miners speak with little sophistication thus reflecting their social status of the times. The Preacher speaks as we would expect ‘The Man With No Name' to speak. He is cool and rational and what little is said carries a lot of weight. The dialogue thus enhances the rich diversity of characters.

Of special note is the casting. All the actors are well suited to their roles. Stockburn and his deputies are particularly memorable. The deputies look like they are all recruits from Hollywood B type action movies. This by no means understates their significance. Instead of playing their usual outlandish bad guys, they relied on their natural ability to exude devilish intent. They look cold, dark and menacing. There was no dialogue which accentuated their malevolence - talk did not interest them. They were there to do a job and small talk was meaningless. Their movements were slow and methodical thus adding to their character's coldness and creating tension as the harbinger's of death prepared to deal out their own brand of justice – the kind of justice that only dollars can buy. Although the screen time dedicated to these characters was limited, their impact was far greater.

The casting of Stockburn as a Lee van Cleef look – alike was also very good. This could be construed as a lack of originality, but it was ideal for the story. He looks like a weathered, tough baddie, much in line with the impression we have of those times as provided by Hollywood, who had dealt with many situations such as these with a cool, ruthless hand. His dialogue, with assistance from a menacing voice, mirrors his appearance – hard and to the point.

Eastwood is the archetypal ‘Man With No Name'. His natural coolness forms the basis for the character. He has the ability to limit his dialogue and communicate to the audience with the assistance of minimal body language the emotions of his character. The sharpening of a glare was all he needed to show that he was a man with a past who could be dangerous. This was vital to the character since it helped create the enigmatic figure that the Preacher was supposed to be.

An indication of the craft of the movie is the scene where the Preacher starts to help his freind break the rock. The rock became an obstacle that they would have to overcome and they began to realise that if they pulled together, not only could they beat the rock, but the Hood as well. Scenes such as this elevated this movie beyond the Spaghetti Western. Attention had been paid to the story and gratuitous action was obviously never the intention. This is not to say that the movie lacked action, it means that action scenes were an integral part of the story and not as eye – candy offerings for a hormone charged audience.

As well crafted as it is, it is not without flaws. The first is the scenes within the town. It is easy to tell that the town is a small set for the movie due to the camera angles. This became particularly evident when the Hood is trying to bribe the Preacher with an offer of a church in a rich town. This immediately draws attention to the shots within the town which thus highlights the flaw. I have not checked to see whether this is a consequence of a low budget, which would be feasible since Westerns were not as bankable at that time as they were in the past. Even with due consideration of this fact, the cinematographer could still have made more creative use of camera angles to negate this limiting factor.

A more minor flaw is the how the character of Megan is used in the movie. The book has her name in the title which is indicative of the fact that the story is told through her eyes. The telling of a story through the eyes of a young innocent can add various dimensions to the story. The adventures that unfolds before her would have a greater impact on the audience since the struggles of a child will touch the audience more than that of an adults. People always sympathise for the young. It can add complexity to the story since a child's emotions and pre – conceptions will create more opportunity for conflict. There was effort made in this direction, but I feel that if Megan had been given more opportunity to tell the story from her perspective, the story would have been more emotive appeal.

Westerns will always have an audience, although their popularity may fluctuate over time. The lawlessness of the times set the stage for good storytelling and unfortunately also poor storytelling. In the past, they concentrated on a Hollywood B style movie with characters existing as an excuse to pull a trigger in the outlawed West. This formula worked for a while, but the stories lacked the substance to withstand the test of time. This has led to the present situation where the few that have now been on offer have shown an increase in quality. This is probably due to the fact that the limitation in audience appeal has meant that the story has to be of solid value in order to attract the investors. As with all genres, they have actors that are naturally adept to the role. Eastwood was such a man for the Westerns. We now wait for his successor to carry on the legacy of ‘The Man With No Name'.

I don't know if this is the best Western of the 1980's, it wouldn't be too hard I suppose as there wasn't really that many made in that decade, or now unfortunately. Its the best Western of that decade that I have seen, the only other good one I can recall is Silverado and Young Guns was pretty good though the sequel was even better. The 1990's was a much better decade for Western fans, Dances with Wolves, Unforgiven, Tombstone, Wyatt Earp, Young Guns 2, The Quick and the Dead and of course Bad Girls (Only joking!). Anyway Pale Rider seen Clint Eastwood return to the Western after quite a few years doing other types of movies and luckily Pale Rider is a great film. As has been mentioned in numerous other user comments it does borrow very heavily from the Classic Western Shane and Clint's own High Plains Drifter but it never tries to hide this fact and its a great film in its own right. Very moody and beautifully shot with great performances all round. Clint was on top of his game on this one and produced a top notch Western that ranks amongst one of his best below The Good the Bad and the Ugly, Unforgiven and The Outlaw Josey Whales. I would love to see Eastwood make another Western but find it highly unlikely as he couldn't possibly top his last one Unforgiven but at least Kevin Costner has got one coming out later this year. Look out for Richard Kiel in this one he played Jaws in a couple of Bond films and Sean Penns brother Chris, who was a lot thinner in those days! Highly recommended ***8/10***

"Pale Rider" is Producer/Director/Star Clint Eastwood's unofficial remake of George Stevens' "Shane" (1953). I've never heard that he's acknowledged it as such but the two stories are more than a little similar. The film also presents Eastwood in another variation of his "man with no name" character, similar to the one he portrayed in "High Plains Drifter" (1973).

The story begins with a raid on a small mining community by rival miners trying to drive the residents off of their claims and take them over. Among the miners are Hull Barret (Michael Moriarity), his intended Sarah Wheller (Carrie Snodgrass) and her budding teenage daughter Megan (Sydney Penny). When Megan's dog is killed during the raid, she prays for someone to help her against the oppressors.

Out of the mist comes a mysterious stranger (Eastwood), whom the scriptural passage Megan is reading describes him as "death riding a pale horse". The stranger saves Barret from a beating at the hands of the town bullies and comes home with him wherein he reveals himself to be a preacher. We learn that mining magnate Coy La Hood (Richard Dysart) and his son Josh (Christopher Penn) are behind all of the troubles.

When LaHood's men including McGill (Charles Hallahan and the gigantic Club (Richard Kiel) are unable to handle this preacher, he sends for gunslinging Marshal Stockburn (John Russell) and his six deputies. Meanwhile, one of the miners, Spider Conway (Doug McGrath) goes into town alone after striking it rich and is goaded into a gunfight with Stockburn & Co. Conway is brutally gunned down in front of his two young sons after which Stockburn tells the boys to tell the preacher to meet him on the street the following morning.

The preacher then goes to retrieve a strong box containing his hardware and into which he tosses his preacher's collar. He and Barret then start for town where............

Eastwood's character as in "High Plains Drifter" appears to embody elements of the supernatural. We see the scars of several bullet holes in his back and at one point is recognized by Stockburn as someone he had killed years before. The teen-aged Megan throws herself at the preacher (she's only 14 in the story) but he wisely (for the sake of the censors) let's her down easy while having an eye for her mother.

The comparison between this film and "Shane" is inevitable. In "Shane we have the squatters versus the cattlemen; here its between the powerful miner and the "tin panners". There's the solitary gunfighter who helps out the underdogs, the vicious hired gun, the loner who gets gunned down in the street, the bad guy who turns good and the hero who rides off into the sunset all common to both films.

Though not Eastwood's best western it is nevertheless good enough to wish that he had made more of them.