4Got10

What drew me into seeing 'The Good, The Bad and the Dead' in the first place? The reasonably likeable cast, a potentially intriguing story and that it was part of my low budget completest quest and popped up in my recommended for you section. Was also a bit apprehensive, with a less than favourable rating and generally reviews that were lukewarm at best and most being very negative.

'The Good, The Bad and the Dead', when checking it out, certainly could have been much worse. There are definitely worse films about, of the genre and overall. Is it a good film let alone a great one? Not even close. Did it use its potential? No. Is it that bad? Not quite. Does it has redeeming qualities? Yes, but not many. To me, while having learnt not to trust ratings and not worry about going against the grain (though am in the minority here who respects critics opinions and tend to be on the same, or slightly above or below, page as them), the rating is about right and do have to agree with the criticisms here. This is coming from someone who did want to sort of like it.

Johnny Messner and Dolph Lundgren fare quite well and give charisma and engagement. Messner gives the better performance of the two and by far and large the best thing about 'The Good, The Bad and the Dead'.

Some of the story intrigued, with a very promising beginning, and the music while not the most memorable is at least listenable.

Unfortunately, Danny Trejo cannot save it in a role that should have been perfect for him and over-compensates from start to finish of his screen time. Natassia Malfe is just weird and not in a good way. None of the characters are developed enough and are very difficult to get behind, in a film with far too many and some not necessary to the story. 'The Good, The Bad and The Dead' looks cheap, especially the badly organised and sometimes incomprehensible editing. The action is both dull and chaotic, there is nothing exciting and it's choreographed with no enthusiasm or finesse.

The script is too talky and has no tautness, the pace is flabby and the story gets far too complicated, again from trying to do too much, with any twist attempts being extremely predictable. The direction seemed indicative of lack of experience or ease.

Overall, not horrendous but severely lacking in many areas. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Ambitious C-movie, which, thanks to a passable look, shoots close to the B category in a crisp 85 minutes.

As expected, the many familiar faces serve every known cliché, which can probably be considered fan service in this sector. Many, perhaps a few too many characters, to bundle a common material from so many threads may be successful for the idols Tarantino and Ritchie, but not for Mr. Woodward. Where else do they steal? Score ala Desperado, shootouts in the spirit of John Woo. But why not, "it does what it's supposed to do".

In most rankings, 4Got10 gets a 4 out 10, with a good mood at the viewing, it could be a 5.

The story, the interiors and the fighting will remind you of something you have already seen or of a bad TV movie.

The acting sometimes is really unconvincing (dialogue too) but there is something in this film that you would never expect: when Michael Paré (the Sheriff) or Dolph Lundgren are on, the movie for a moment starts to work as if it were a normal, enjoyable flick!

It doesn't last long, the two of them could not save the film. But this was something I didn't expect from Ivan Drago and I'm more than glad to have it witnessed and to pay my respects to him with this note.

The film, besides that, was too boring...

Another day and another low budget, straight to Pay TV, sub Tarantino action thriller with B movie actors.

Johnny Messner is Brian Barnes who comes around suffering a bullet wound, surrounded by dead bodies and dynamic titles telling you who all the main characters are.

Brian is a bad boy who has managed to get out alive but he needs to piece back his life together because he really had forgotten who he is and how he got into this mess.

Dolph Lundgren is the smart law agent who is investigating the killings. Micheal Pare is the crooked sheriff who has found a case full of money and is tempted to take it all. Danny Trejo is the ruthless crime lord who has lost a shed load of money and is looking to get it. Worse still his son bizarrely ran away to become a policeman and he was also killed in the incident. Trejo wants his son's death avenged.

Conveniently the various plot strands come together for contrived shoot outs as the bad guys drop one by one. Brian gets his memories back piecemeal and completes the jigsaw and Lundgren tries to stay one step ahead. The audience will have got a better grasp of where it's all heading in this poorly written film.

The film wants to be a hip smart thriller but the plotting is just too convenient. Having Vivicia Fox along with Trejo just reminds us too much of better Tarantino/Robert Rodriguez films.

(2015) 4 Got 10 ACTION

Tarantino-esque similar to the likes of "Pulp Fiction" and "Snatch" with Brian (Johnny Messner) waking up from a gun fight and gets knocked unconscious during the scuffle. By the time he gains consciousness again, he gets amnesia with brief flashbacks. Two sheriffs eventually show up to the scene with one of them shooting the other deputy on the back, when one of them discovers 3 million in cash stashed in a bag. DEA agent, Bob (Dolph Lundgren) shows up at the crime scene with more revelations to follow, including the woman in charge of the case,DEA Imani (Vivica A Fox) who's attempting to nab drug cartel, Mateo Perez (Danny Trejo) who in turn seeking retribution for the death of his brother who we find out later that he used to work as a deputy.

There is just certain characters I liked and the movie chose to kill them off.