Unforgiven

[rauldc14]

I searched for a thread on this movie but found nothing.

This movie in my opinion is completely exceptional. The directing and the acting are top notch in my book. 4 actors giving great performances: Eastwood, Freeman, Harris, and of course Hackman.

What does everyone else think of this movie?

[genesis_pig]

Loved it too.. But one of these days I hope to watch it again.

Love the ending.

[rauldc14]

Yeah I just watched it for the second time now and it really seems to be even better than the first time I watched it.

[Michael_10]

In my top 5. The ending was brilliant, it gave me goose bumps. No one can do pure intimidation like Clint! :)

[honeykid]

One of the, very few, Westerns I really like. Brilliant film.

[Powdered Water]

It's overrated and over hyped.

[rauldc14]

It's overrated and over hyped.

How did I know that's what you were going to say?

[Powdered Water]

Perhaps you're related to Psychic Isaac.

[Holden Pike]

http://mdurisotti.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/unforgiven2.jpg

Damn near perfect, and undoubtedly Eastwood's masterpiece. Check out the Eastwood-as-director thread HERE (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=12292)

[Powdered Water]

I second that. That is a terrific thread Holden has there. I actually just watched this flick again a few weeks back and I continue to think it is the best western I have seen, even though I need to really get caught up in the western department. I also saw Eastwood's Pale Rider and High Plains Drifter again. Eastwood is the *****.

[Brother Blue]

One of the all time greats.

[rufnek]

I searched for a thread on this movie but found nothing.

This movie in my opinion is completely exceptional. The directing and the acting are top notch in my book. 4 actors giving great performances: Eastwood, Freeman, Harris, and of course Hackman.

What does everyone else think of this movie?

Liked Hackman's performance. And the Jewish guy playing the writer. But I was less impressed with the film than most, even though it was more realistic than most Westerns in that in the real west, they never gave an opponent an even break if they could shoot him in the outhouse.

Guess I've just seen Eastwood play too many tough, silent cowboys. Didn't think Freeman had much to do, but oddly enough enjoyed Harris's small bit.

[rauldc14]

Either way, this movie is in my top 3 for Eastwood movies acting, and top 5 for directing

[mark f]

I'd be interested to know which Clint Eastwood films you've watched.

[Sedai]

I agree that this flick is just about as close to a perfect film as you'll find. I like The Outlaw Josey Wales almost as much, even though it's not on the same level of craftsmanship as Unforgiven.

[The Prestige]

Fantastic film. Not more you can say really. Eastwood peaked with Unforgiven imo. The ending is epic and the dialogue flows beautifully. I really like the scene where The Kid breaks down and Eastwood tells him you know what.

[mark f]

I actually prefer Josey Wales, even though Clint had to sub as director, and it's probably not as personal or as "important". I just think it's a "better time at the movies". However, I give Unforgiven 4, and anybody who knows me understands that's closer to a 5 for most people, so I think it's damn fine.

[tramp]

I need to see this again. I saw it only once in the theatre, and I remember being very unimpressed. Hmmm... I wonder if I was having a bad night? :eek:

[mrtylerdurden]

Dark, brooding, and very well made.

Unforgiven is the story of Bill Munny (Clint Eastwood), an old man with two kids and a deceased wife. Munny is a family man at the time we meet him, but he was also a ruthless outlaw at one time. His wife straightened him out and set him on the right path, making him a good man with a family. He's given up all the ways of his troubled past. His wife passed away, but he stays true to her, mostly. One day, a young man named the "Schofield Kid" (Jaimz Woolvett) tells Bill about 2 men who cut up a prostitute and have a bounty set on them. Bill is hesitant at first, but eventually decides to go, so he has more money to support his children. Bill finds his old friend Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman) and has him come along with him to help. The three of them go to collect this bounty and a number of different events ensue. Now that I've talked about the main story, let's discuss acting.

Clint Eastwood was good in this role. I wouldn't say phenomenal, but he was good. The character at times didn't seem to have much purpose except to move the story along. His character did not necessarily have any qualities that made him particularly interesting, other than his constant devotion to his wife. The final scenes with him are bone chilling though, and you really see a huge character change.

Morgan Freeman was also good. He is very rarely bad in a role, he's just a good actor. I also wish his character had more development and qualities that deem the character memorable. But for the part he was given, Freeman did a good job.

I didn't mention this before but Gene Hackman plays Little Bill Dagget, the town sheriff. His performance was great. In some scenes he is calm and charismatic and comes off as a good guy. But then we see him in other scenes, where he is ruthless and brutal. The constant change between these two makes his character particularly scary. You don't know what to expect of him, even with his friendly demeanor. Hackman was great, and even won an Oscar for his role.

I found the Schofield Kid character to be rather annoying. Constantly talking and asking questions, and often times trying to be better than the other characters. Plus, he kind of has a high pitched voice. I didn't like this character all that much, even though I can see why they chose to make his character like that, so they can show how nieve he is.

The camera work and lighting was good in this film, especially in the end. The lighting really helps to set the mood and make the story much darker.

Other than some problems with characters, there were some other issues in the film. Strong language doesn't offend me in films, but there are times when it feels out of place. Unforgiven is one such time that strong language is out of place. For a western, theses characters sure do cuss a lot and talk like modern day people. It really took me out of the moment sometimes and I found it distracting and unnecessary. Also, some of the dialogue is not too well written at times. I felt that some of the conversations and lines in the movie felt stiff and not real. And there's one time that someone walks out of a house and yells "Assassins!" and it just seemed cartoony to me. Not all of the dialogue was bad, just certain parts of it.

Overall, Unforgiven is an interesting western. Most of the performances were good, but Gene Hackman's performance stands out. The final scene is brilliant and dark and I think it really threw the audience for a loop. It is rather unexpected and it changes how you look at the movie. I loved the cynical message at the end, it fits really well with the overall tone of the film. Other than some characters that weren't written too well and some stiff dialogue, Unforgiven is a good film. Well made and an interesting ending. I reccomend it for any Eastwood fans or fans of Westerns.

rating_3_5

[cricket]

Nice review and I'm glad you at least enjoyed it, even though I don't particularly agree with it. I consider Unforgiven to be a rare masterpiece; perfect in just about every way. And when mentioning the acting in Unforgiven, don't leave out Richard Harris and his small, but spectacular role.

[Gideon58]

Never been big on westerns and have never seen this one but your review has definitely piqued my curiosity.

[doubledenim]

Once again, I feel like I missed the boat. It's a well put together film and has some good acting, but there isn't really any magic there.

I can honestly say the only great part is him taking that drink. Everything seemed to have been done before. The finale in the saloon is kinda bothersome when there are 15 vs. 1 and no one shoots? Everyone has heard the legend and they are all scared to shot? Nobody is gonna take a potshot at him from the shadows when he is leaving Greely's?
It's a really good movie, but I don't get all the praise. I guess westerns aren't my thing. The first thing I thought after watching this, "it must have been a bad year for movies in 92' ".

[Camo]

Once again, I feel like I missed the boat. It's a well put together film and has some good acting, but there isn't really any magic there.

I can honestly say the only great part is him taking that drink. Everything seemed to have been done before. The finale in the saloon is kinda bothersome when there are 15 vs. 1 and no one shoots? Everyone has heard the legend and they are all scared to shot? Nobody is gonna take a potshot at him from the shadows when he is leaving Greely's?
It's a really good movie, but I don't get all the praise. I guess westerns aren't my thing. The first thing I thought after watching this, "it must have been a bad year for movies in 92' ".


That's taking everything incredibly literally, it's a deconstruction of the western genre featuring and directed by the biggest star of the western genre post-john wayne. All of the badass shootouts in the best western films are ridiculous as good as they are not one of them logically make sense. Clint has placed himself as a vile POS character into the middle of a conflict he doesn't want to be involved in, Clint absolutely doesn't approve of Munny at any time yet he knows he'll be remembered for the bad-as-s last scene. He rides off into the dark and rain rather than the day and sun like say every John Wayne character ever, as an old man with no prospects rather than a strapping young man that could easily be the sheriff in the next town.

[doubledenim]

Once again, I feel like I missed the boat. It's a well put together film and has some good acting, but there isn't really any magic there.

I can honestly say the only great part is him taking that drink. Everything seemed to have been done before. The finale in the saloon is kinda bothersome when there are 15 vs. 1 and no one shoots? Everyone has heard the legend and they are all scared to shot? Nobody is gonna take a potshot at him from the shadows when he is leaving Greely's?
It's a really good movie, but I don't get all the praise. I guess westerns aren't my thing. The first thing I thought after watching this, "it must have been a bad year for movies in 92' ".


That's taking everything incredibly literally, it's a deconstruction of the western genre featuring and directed by the biggest star of the western genre post-john wayne. All of the badass shootouts in the best western films are ridiculous as good as they are not one of them logically make sense.

I figured there was a lot of analysis and meaning I missed.

I'm lost on what that finale meant, because it was almost cartoonish. Most of the stuff until then was believable and then a bunch of armed men roll over and die. :confused:

I didn't have an emotional connection with anyone but Morgan Freeman. The abundant praise build-up and not being a big western fan probably hurt me the most.

[Camo]

I figured there was a lot of analysis and meaning I missed.

I'm lost on what that finale meant, because it was almost cartoonish. Most of the stuff until then was believable and then a bunch of armed men roll over and die. :confused:



He comes in behind them pointing a shotgun at them all, one of them could make a move and he'd die if any of them did but why would they? Who are the guys beneath the big boss in all of the big westerns? They are disposable we never think of them, here they are presented with the choice of blind loyalty or self preservation and they take the latter on droves just like real life.

[Camo]

A bunch of armed men is being disingenous for the record. Someone with a gun that's discharge can spread across the room already drawn and cocked and ready to blast at a moments notice is something each individual in that room is going to have to consider before deciding they're going to be the big man in that situation.

[doubledenim]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmhGYB4NdYc


It's open to debate. To me that is a bunch.

You make a lot of good points above, but that's a lot of qualifiers that I would have to consider to make those conclusions. I didn't, so I don't think I would ever come up with that stuff of my own accord.

[Camo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmhGYB4NdYc


It's open to debate. To me that is a bunch.

You make a lot of good points above, but that's a lot of qualifiers that I would have to consider to make those conclusions. I didn't, so I don't think I would ever come up with that stuff of my own accord.




As i said it's a response to Classic Westerns, it make no less sense than most of the shootouts in those. You are trying to think of it as a straightforward shootout, trying to decide if it has logic on its side which isn't the point. Even then it makes enough sense for the reasons i said above. At the very least it shines a light on the people other than the 'good' and 'bad' guy, it gives them some sense of purpose which is the main reason it's hard to take.

Someone corners you with a loaded and readied shotgun in a small, crowded room has the upper hand particularly if there's alot of you and if he's angry and willing to die like Munny. "A bunch" is an irrelevant distinction at that point. At that point you've got to decide if you are thinking of yourself or the boss, the former is how they overwhelmingly go which isn't surprising, self preservation trumps the vast majority of stuff in life even if you tell yourself otherwise, Stalker tackles the same thing with the brother/money thing.