I have read the reviews on both ends, and it appears that many who call this too slow a burn are either unfamiliar with what made many revisionist westerns great, or they're too used to today's faster pace, "shoot em up for two hours" approach to filmmaking.
Yes, it's a slow burn-a snail's pace build-up, but what that does is serve to give the viewer a ton of insight into the characters, the backstory, and ultimately makes the final act super powerful.
The casting doesn't miss a beat in this flick. Seeing the Sutherlands together is worth a watch alone, but add a solid (albeit unambiguous) story, some wonderful special effects, splendid cinematography, and a terrific score together and you've got a movie that is well worth a viewing.
Where I will agree with some who've been critical is in that some of the plot points and scenes could have been condensed. It's also fair to say that this basic plot / premise has been worked to death. That aside, the film is still well done, and is surely worth a viewing for any western movie buff.
Yes, it's a slow burn-a snail's pace build-up, but what that does is serve to give the viewer a ton of insight into the characters, the backstory, and ultimately makes the final act super powerful.
The casting doesn't miss a beat in this flick. Seeing the Sutherlands together is worth a watch alone, but add a solid (albeit unambiguous) story, some wonderful special effects, splendid cinematography, and a terrific score together and you've got a movie that is well worth a viewing.
Where I will agree with some who've been critical is in that some of the plot points and scenes could have been condensed. It's also fair to say that this basic plot / premise has been worked to death. That aside, the film is still well done, and is surely worth a viewing for any western movie buff.