Friday, May 08, 2009

Unforgiven

Unforgiven is a 1992 Clint Eastwood western. Also starring are Gene Hackman, Morgan Freeman, Richard Harris, Saul Rubinek (who has a Star Trek connection) and Anthony James (who also has a Star Trek:TNG connection). The film won 4 Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Supporting Actor (Hackman).

trailer:


It's on the list of 30 Great Westerns at Images Journal. Rolling Stone calls it "the most provocative western of Eastwood's career". Roger Ebert has it on his "great movies" list. The New York Times says it's "a most entertaining western". Variety begins with this:
"Unforgiven" is a classic Western for the ages. In his 10th excursion into the genre that made him a star more than 25 years ago, Clint Eastwood has crafted a tense, hard-edged, superbly dramatic yarn that is also an exceedingly intelligent meditation on the West, its myths and its heroes.

4 comments:

  1. Anonymous3:49 AM

    It was good but, like Hot Fuzz, the movie's final act is the keystone to the entire film & the only segment that really survives re-watching.

    My biggest gripe about the film is that you really didn't know the William Munny(sp?) character at all. There's no real character arc (unless you can consider him drinking before the final confrontation) to him.

    Think about it - The whole movie revolves around Munny reviving his mojo one final time to show what a real outlaw could do. That's it, that's the film. For a better-then-average straight-to-DVD film, that'd be enough but for a Best Picture Oscar film?

    I think it would've been MORE effective if BOTH characters (Munny & Hackman's character) went entirely against type in the final scene. Imagine if Hackman had chickened out after all of his boasting & if Munny had completely flopped at enacting revenge? THAT would have displayed the movie's real message of what the "Real" west was more clearly rather then Eastwood picking off people in a saloon.

    Still, I can't fault the film much. It was entertaining for it's time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would have to disagree about the character development of Munny. His core history is revealed from the beginning. Insights into Munny are added through the entire movie until he becomes the old Munny.

    The last scene is the only throw back to old meet them in the street westerns but he is able to carry it off. Mostly because drunk makes you stupid.

    If Munny had failed it would have ruined the theme of the movie. Munny was the hero.

    If you liked the last scene in unforgiven you would enjoy the final shoot out in Open Range.

    It's overcoming the impossible odds that makes you cheer.

    I'm confused about "It was entertaining for it's time.

    No offense but movies are like music if it's good.... it's good no matter what year it's made.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like it. I like it enough to have the DVD. Classic -- timeless.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I saw it as the classic story of the bad man redeemed by the love of a good woman. I admit I probably won't be watching it again soon, but our stack of DVDs to be watched is huge.

    I got such a kick out of seeing Saul Rubinek, who was in one of my favorite ST:TNG episodes.

    ReplyDelete