Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaSierra Nevada Mountains, 1887: William Drayton, once a crack sharpshooter in the Civil War, has lost his wife and home. He has ascended to the high country, wanting never to be heard from ag... Leggi tuttoSierra Nevada Mountains, 1887: William Drayton, once a crack sharpshooter in the Civil War, has lost his wife and home. He has ascended to the high country, wanting never to be heard from again.Sierra Nevada Mountains, 1887: William Drayton, once a crack sharpshooter in the Civil War, has lost his wife and home. He has ascended to the high country, wanting never to be heard from again.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Recensioni in evidenza
Looks like it's shot on video and probably went straight to DVD, a complete waste of both. The acting is sub high school drama class. The script, particularly the dialog, is just plain awful. The scenery is all wrong- the setting is the Sierra Nevada Mountains but there's not a pine tree or snow capped peak to be seen. The time period is mid to late 1800's and books from that time period are already old. The buildings are are also already old. The continuity is a constant problem. Guns change, books change, glasses are moved, empty, full and empty again. I seriously can't believe Michael Madsen agreed to be in this train wreck. I can only assume he owed someone some serious money or this was a close family members Jr. High School film project.
I Give Credit to everyone who cast and crew who used their real names in the CREDITS of this disaster of a film. Anyone with a home movie editor and a keyboard could have cut and mastered this film better. As for effect.. Water tower which could not hold water... See through Fronts.... Train Clips probably found in public domain video with train sound effects recored with a Edison machine. They should of at least used a Lionell Toy train for the wreck instead of a Cardboard cutout moving in a 2 second clip. Horrible plot. Way to many cuts and bad cuts. Music sounded like a child on a old church organ. Worst than BAD.. SO BAD it is worth watching just to see how poor a movie should not be made.
To be honest the film seems like it was made at a high school club, The town is made from brand new wood (every building),The clothes look like they have all just been delivered from the dry cleaners the holsters are all brand new and they have silver guns. Whoever did the props needs to watch a western film not the milky bar kid advert from the sixties.I am an avid watcher of westerns and love a good ole gunfight but this lacked just about everything you like in a western ,Even the guns sounded like they were firing caps i could clap my hands louder
To sum it up it looks like a few people got together and played cowboys I gave it 1 out of 10 and thats because they don't have a 0
To sum it up it looks like a few people got together and played cowboys I gave it 1 out of 10 and thats because they don't have a 0
I love Westerns, so when I saw that a recent film release had Michael Madsen in the lead role of one, I was excited.
Sometimes there are low budget films in which a budding director's talents can be seen and appreciated. Such directors need encouragement and guidance, and when they get it, we are often rewarded with truly inspired film making.
There are also people who, by some miracle or fortune of birth or happenstance get to produce, write and direct a movie, but who we hope will try another occupation for their own sake (and ours).
Try as I might, I could find no scene that wasn't victimized by poor camera angles, horrible writing, and just plain bad acting. We can forgive the cheesy sets and amateurish sound editing -- these are the first things to suffer in low budget films. But the Director Forbes (who is also the DOP) handles the camera like a news reporter (apparently there was only one camera in use, so it is doubly important to use it well, have a longer shot list and apply more energy to filming each shot), with strait-on-face closeups that make you expect a journalist to pop up with microphone in hand. This indicates an impoverished shot list and subsequently is just plain agonizing to sit through.
There is evidence that some of the unknown actors have talent, but the moments one might see this are rare, and they are often victims of a shot that sidelines them to favor the lead or some burdensome, unnecessary background ambiance -- and lack of directing talent has these supporting actors actually diminishing the lead's scenes, rather than actually supporting them. So, as a result, we don't know if Forbes was just too timid to support aggressive retakes and make manifest what might have been a more creative shot list, or he didn't buy enough camera time, or he's just lazy and uninspired.
About 30 minutes into the film, we find ourselves begging Madsen to pull the thing out of it's hole with sheer force of personality, but no dice. If someone told me Madsen was ordered to do this film as some sort of community service penance, I'd be willing to believe them. Still, with such horrific writing, he sometimes manages to deliver his lines as well as any decent actor could, given the awful material he had to work with.
We must heap responsibility on a director for a film's worthiness, because even a director that has been given a horrible script can make at least some of it shine if he/she is talented enough. That's not the case here with Forbes, however, since he is also one of the writers -- making this appear to be exactly what it is -- a vanity project by someone who got/had some money and wanted to do a movie (he also is a producer, writer, DOP, editor and songwriter for the film). What fun! In short, this is a dreadful, annoyingly bad film made by One-Man-Band Forbes who appears to be not so talented in any one of the roles he's assumed here -- even his tedious, predictable soundtrack seems to be garage-band inspired and is consequently weirdly out-of-place. My advice to the director is to attend film school from year one if he insists on pursuing a career as a film maker.
I've vigorously thrown this movie into my "Tragic Waste of Time, Energy, and Money But At Least The Crew Got Paid" file.
Sometimes there are low budget films in which a budding director's talents can be seen and appreciated. Such directors need encouragement and guidance, and when they get it, we are often rewarded with truly inspired film making.
There are also people who, by some miracle or fortune of birth or happenstance get to produce, write and direct a movie, but who we hope will try another occupation for their own sake (and ours).
Try as I might, I could find no scene that wasn't victimized by poor camera angles, horrible writing, and just plain bad acting. We can forgive the cheesy sets and amateurish sound editing -- these are the first things to suffer in low budget films. But the Director Forbes (who is also the DOP) handles the camera like a news reporter (apparently there was only one camera in use, so it is doubly important to use it well, have a longer shot list and apply more energy to filming each shot), with strait-on-face closeups that make you expect a journalist to pop up with microphone in hand. This indicates an impoverished shot list and subsequently is just plain agonizing to sit through.
There is evidence that some of the unknown actors have talent, but the moments one might see this are rare, and they are often victims of a shot that sidelines them to favor the lead or some burdensome, unnecessary background ambiance -- and lack of directing talent has these supporting actors actually diminishing the lead's scenes, rather than actually supporting them. So, as a result, we don't know if Forbes was just too timid to support aggressive retakes and make manifest what might have been a more creative shot list, or he didn't buy enough camera time, or he's just lazy and uninspired.
About 30 minutes into the film, we find ourselves begging Madsen to pull the thing out of it's hole with sheer force of personality, but no dice. If someone told me Madsen was ordered to do this film as some sort of community service penance, I'd be willing to believe them. Still, with such horrific writing, he sometimes manages to deliver his lines as well as any decent actor could, given the awful material he had to work with.
We must heap responsibility on a director for a film's worthiness, because even a director that has been given a horrible script can make at least some of it shine if he/she is talented enough. That's not the case here with Forbes, however, since he is also one of the writers -- making this appear to be exactly what it is -- a vanity project by someone who got/had some money and wanted to do a movie (he also is a producer, writer, DOP, editor and songwriter for the film). What fun! In short, this is a dreadful, annoyingly bad film made by One-Man-Band Forbes who appears to be not so talented in any one of the roles he's assumed here -- even his tedious, predictable soundtrack seems to be garage-band inspired and is consequently weirdly out-of-place. My advice to the director is to attend film school from year one if he insists on pursuing a career as a film maker.
I've vigorously thrown this movie into my "Tragic Waste of Time, Energy, and Money But At Least The Crew Got Paid" file.
I would have given this poorly named movie a ZERO had the option been there, but I suppose IMDb site owners have not factored into their calculations the probability of that ever happening. This movie has done it with style. Had the phrase "3:10 to Yuma RIDES UP TO TRUE GRIT" not screamed out at me to give it a chance, the cover alone was a sufficient tip off that this flick was a flop. I had given up watching the movie at just the exact time when I sensed my intelligence could no longer be insulted, which was just about 35 minutes into it. I was nonetheless mesmerized by its outlandish plot, inept camera work and the "actors" natural rigid performance which is no performance at all. These three ingredients I thought are what make a good comedy.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizTutte le opzioni contengono spoiler
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.500.000 USD (previsto)
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was A Cold Day in Hell (2011) officially released in Canada in English?
Rispondi