Gunfight at Rio Bravo

Im a big Western fan so I indulge in some of the low budget films. This one is better then most. Very basic story but one that has worked well over the years. A good pace with lots of action - no big special effects but some enjoyable action scenes. There was decent acting and characters you bond with. All this packed into 80 minutes. Very enjoyable if you go in with an open mind and view it for what it is. If you under some delusion that this low budget TUBI movie is going to be a classic - well of course you will be disappointed. All in all for me it was an enjoyable experience and would recommend this to any Western fan.

"Gunfight at Rio Bravo" is a forgettable western flick that fails to deliver on any level. The plot is stale and predictable. The characters are poorly developed and lack any depth or complexity, making it impossible to care about their fates.

The acting is wooden and uninspired, with lead actor giving a lackluster performance that feels like he's just going through the motions. The supporting cast is forgettable and interchangeable, with no one standing out as memorable or interesting.

The action sequences are poorly choreographed and lack any real tension or excitement. The gunfights are unremarkable and lack any sense of danger or risk, making them feel like a cheap imitation of better westerns.

The dialogue is clichéd and uninspired, filled with tired one-liners and predictable exchanges. The attempts at humor fall flat and feel forced, adding nothing to the overall experience.

The production values are low, with cheap sets and uninspired cinematography. The music is forgettable and fails to add anything to the film.

Overall, "Gunfight at Rio Bravo" is a dull and forgettable western that fails to deliver on any level. It's a movie that you'll forget as soon as it's over, and one that's not worth your time or money.

This is a comedy Western.....isn't it? Surely it's not meant to be serious. The dialogue and acting are indeed laughable but the writers forgot to add the intentional jokes and left in the unintentional ones. Every cliche, every plot point, every character, every attempt at conveying emotion.....all been done before and better.

The multi-lingual cast may be fantastic actors in their natural language. But if they have learnt this dialogue phonetically, as appears to have happened with this movie, it really doesn't help the action or the story.

You know the phrase "so bad it's good"? Doesn't apply- it's so bad, it's worse.

East Texas is piney woods. The topography in this movie is more desert southwest. Could be west Texas, but no way is that east Texas.

That aside, I was expecting this movie to be a kind of a reboot of the John Wayne classic "Rio Bravo". It wasn't. Not really. The 2 movies do have similarities, but I don't think it could be considered a reboot.

I'm not a huge fan of westerns, but did like a few of the classics with The Duke and a few other classic western actors as well.

This movie was ok, I guess.

Now I'm just filling space in my review. I mean, who requires a minimum number of characters for a review. The administrator must be a high school English teacher.

OMG... Are you kidding me???? This is the worst western I've ever seen in my life!!!!! I really don't understand where come all these 10-ratings from, are you people blind and deaf? It seems to me that all the reviews were written by professionals and sent by e-mail to all the friends of Nevsky, in purpose to copy-paste them and post on IMDB.

Pathetic and helpless acting and directing, bad costumes, lack of any interesting film editing, empty lines and dialogues - this movie feels like laundering the black money for Russian mafia (kidding, still want to live) :)) The only actor that did some good work on set was Matthias Hues (still looking good low budget movies actor), all the rest of cast, including Nevsky, was terrible. They didn't even have enough material to make this failure a bit longer...

I didn't see any "outstanding performances", any "really good bunch of talented actors", any "thoroughly depicted historical scenes", any "fantastic landscapes"... I didn't hear any of "Quentin Tarantino-style dialogues", any "fantastic music", any good work of sound department, any interesting intonation at all... Ilya Naishuler was mentioned in one of the reviews, but I'm sure he would cry upon this movie and amount of money Nevsky spilled on it. And I wonder what it would be if Tarantino was reading these reviews he was mentioned in.

I know what is the category called B-movie. And I love those movies! But this so called western isn't even close to this category!

It's just bad bad bad movie...