IMDb on iPhone and iPod touch Learn more Learn more Download from the App Store
IMDb > Unforgiven (1992) > IMDb user reviews
Unforgiven
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv schedule
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotes
Fun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

IMDb user comments for
Unforgiven (1992) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 38:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 378 reviews in total 

156 out of 178 people found the following review useful:
Eastwood & Hackman shine, 30 January 1999
9/10
Author: Kaserynofthegyre from Adelaide

Unforgiven is about as far from the fantasy mythos of A Fistful of Dollars as Clint Eastwood could get. No pin-point accuracy with 19th century technology, no desire to 'play fair' and face the enemy on even terms. If you can shoot him in the back...then do it.

Eastwood puts in an astonishing performance as the retired killer Muny, saved from his life of thievery and murder by his late wife. Now, desperately trying to support his children with no income, he is tempted back to his killing ways by the bounty offered by the women of a brothel, one of whom's number has been savagely beaten and disfigured by a drunken ranch-hand.

The film follows Eastwood as he wrestles with his desire to honour his wife's memory and his need to feed his children by returning to the killer that, he fears, is his true nature. Meanwhile word of the bounty has spread and the events spiral out of control as the sheriff (Gene Hackman) deals with the guns for hire that ride into town.

While all the supporting cast are excellent Gene Hackman's Oscar winning performance even manages to eclipse Eastwoods as the brutal Sheriff. He beats one of the bounty hunters, English Bob (Richard Harris) almost to death and then explains to a journalist, in one of the film's stand out scenes, how men like he and Muny are so successful at killing. The mood moves from light banter to life threatening seriousness...and back again, with just one move of his head.

One of the greatest Westerns ever made? Certainly. Although the fact it's a western is really secondary. In truth it's a tale of the nature of evil and the nature of man. Eastwood uses the gap between the western myth and reality as an arena to play out his story and does so with consummate style.

Was the above comment useful to you?

109 out of 132 people found the following review useful:
Eastwood's Western Swansong, 27 September 2005
Author: JoeytheBrit from www.moviemoviesite.com

Clint Eastwood's last western to date is a near-perfect attempt to debunk the mythology built around both the actual west and the western as a film genre. It tells the tale of William Munney, retired hellraiser, killer of women and children, who has spent the last ten years of his life living peacefully as a pig farmer. Following the death of his wife, the woman who tamed him, the pig farm has faltered and Munney is tempted back into his old ways when The Schofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett) offers him a half-share in the reward offered by a group of prostitutes for the scarring of one of their own by a cowboy in the town of Big Whiskey. The town's sheriff is Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman), a man whose sense of right and wrong is cast in stone but whose methods of dispensing justice are brutal in the extreme. He determines to give no leeway to any gunmen attempting to claim the prostitute's reward, thus setting the scene for an explosive showdown.

Eastwood said he wanted to bury the western with this film, the script for which had apparently been knocking around Hollywood for the best part of 20 years, and he couldn't have found a better film with which to achieve his aim. There are no heroes in this film, and the differences between good and bad are deliberately blurred. Munney is ostensibly a good man, a pig farmer struggling to bring up his children following the death of his beloved wife. In the first half of the film he repeatedly insists that he is a changed man, that he is like normal people – but there's always that sense of a man trying to convince himself of the fact, and that he's not entirely sure that what he says is true. Hackman is a rigid upholder of the law, but by anyone's standards he is a harsh and brutal man, inflicting unnecessary punishment on those he considers to have broken a law designed to protect the innocent. But the true downtrodden innocents here aren't the honest townsfolk – they're the town whores, usually depicted as representatives of debauchery or comedy figures. Murder isn't a quick and spectacular event – it's a long, drawn-out panicky suffering, or it's a couple of bullets in the chest when you're sitting on the loo. All the genre staples are turned on their head here and, in doing so, writer David Webb Peoples fashions a tale that delivers an unremittingly bleak and depressing message that is never anything less than totally absorbing.

Eastwood delivers a nicely measured performance as William Munney. There are traces of his former western characters in the laid-back delivery and gruff impatience. Eastwood looks like a man who has lived on the plains of the old west, he appears to have allowed himself to grow old naturally, and thus possesses the weathered features necessary for the part, as does Morgan Freeman in another convincing performance as Eastwood's old partner who finds that retirement has changed him in ways that it hasn't changed Munney. Gene Hackman gives a performance worthy of the Oscar it won him; every scene in which he appears is filled with tension as we are given glimpses of the touch of madness that lurks beneath the surface. Daggett is as crooked as the house he is building – looks reasonably OK from the outside but on the inside all manner of stuff has leaked in.

It will be a great shame if Eastwood truly has hung up his spurs when it comes to making Westerns. He has an instinctive nose for a good story and is one of the few actors with the clout to get westerns made in an age when they are out of vogue. We can only wonder at how many good westerns have failed to be made because of his decision to turn his back on them.

Was the above comment useful to you?

105 out of 127 people found the following review useful:
Requiem for a Western, 17 April 2005
9/10
Author: murrayjp from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Unforgiven will always be the last Western. No matter what comes after it, Tombstone, The Missing, or Wyatt Erp, Unforgiven has the final word. Not that I wouldn't characterize those films as Westerns, but the spirit of Unforgiven, from the opening shot of the house with the scrawny tree and lonely grave, to the end which returns there, is imbued with the finality of a spent genre. The feelings evoked are ambivalent and distant, much like the characters within Unforgiven itself. Perhaps Clint Eastwood's genius lies partially in that he doesn't allow for us to mourn. It wouldn't be western to cry because a story-form is over, it wouldn't be leather to empathize for a broken man who doesn't want your sympathy, it wouldn't be spurs to despair about the implacable and corrupt forces of life which turn men like William Munny into killers.

Clint Eastwood presents to the audience the most distorted configuration of the western; the most disfigured example of a genre whose classical conventions were untouchable and sacrosanct. We have no heroes and no villains, only a protagonist and a puffed up sheriff who thinks he's doing the right thing (and does in fact have more moral vision than the dried out killer) The movie itself is riddled with identity crises, the killer has turned into a farmer and a father, the young gunslinger is a virgin to bloodletting, the sheriff shows signs of being a slave master, and the innocent one gets it first and gets it dirty. Gone are the days of the Magnificent 7 where one rode into town, rallied the brave cowpokes with shiny silver pistols, and dispatched an easily recognizable enemy. Gone even are the days of Bonnie and Clyde where gunslingers were attractive and fascinating to the audience, exuding flair, charisma, and sparking the imagination. They were legends; William Munny is a sad bit of history. He is presented with deadpan honesty, not as a caricatured Tarantino assassin, or a misunderstood old man who has atoned for past wrongs. He is a broken human person, so lost along the moral frontier that the only compass he can grasp is more killing.

Throughout the movie, we are reminded again and again of the stark contrast Unforgiven stands in to most other Westerns, by the obsequious scribe W. W. Beauchamp. He was the one who wrote the John Wayne stories, (the ones with ethical clarity at least). He was the one who coined phrases like "high-noon" and "hot lead". In Unforgiven, Clint Eastwood, takes apart the classical western narrative piece by piece allowing the audience to inspect the illusion. Characters like English Bob are unscrupulous frauds, ladies in distress are revenge bent whores, and old men really don't ever change for the better. They become that way when sensationalized by hack storytellers like Beauchamp. And when the only character materializes who seems to at least fit the description of gunslinger, Munny is so empty and hopelessly unheroic that we begin to reconcile ourselves to the end of the Western. Where else is there to go? We understand how the old stories were crafted thanks to the insider's view provided by Beauchamp, and what's left is a craggy faced cadaver with a dead wife, a dead friend, and two forgotten children.

Every character within Unforgiven inhabits a gray zone that clouds the audiences's ability to easily categorize them as good or evil. We are forced to come to a more nuanced understanding of each as a human being with redeeming as well as corrupt qualities. The two cowboys committed a horrendous crime by knifing the prostitute, but did they deserve death, especially the young one, who didn't do the knifing, clearly felt remorse, and tried to make a peace offering? The whores are right to demand justice, but do they ever take into account the wishes of the victim, who if anything seems to strike some romantic sparks with the young cowboy. By the film's end, they are bloodthirsty sirens screaming at the body of the dead young cowboy. The sheriff Little Bill, compounds the opening crime by allowing it to go unpunished, but later exposes English Bob and tries to keep people from getting killed--(is he protecting unrepentant criminals, or is he allowing old wounds to heal?) And of course there's Munny himself, who won't pay to touch a woman but will kill prolifically for a purpose that is murky at best.

By Unforgiven's end, the audience feels alienated from characters and message. The conclusion of William Munny's life is narrated by a cold, impersonal voice that labels him a scoundrel, but doesn't care enough to waste much breath condemning him. We are left with the image of the homestead, the center and heart of the Western film, where man attempted to master the wildness within his environment and himself. This house is empty and abandoned, its only companion the forlorn grave memorializing a genre which has passed away.

Was the above comment useful to you?

80 out of 93 people found the following review useful:
Unforgettable, 6 June 2000
9/10
Author: Cathy Young (cathyyoung63@aol.com) from Middletown, NJ

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"Unforgiven" may well be Clint Eastwood's greatest triumph as an actor and director. In this grim, dark, and yet strangely beautiful story of former gunslinger William Munny (Eastwood), who comes out of retirement for one last job, Eastwood deliberately sets out to demystify the old West. This is evident in the conversations between Munny and the Schofield Kid (Jaimze Wolvett), who has a romanticized image of the old-time gunfighters, and between sheriff Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman) and hack journalist W.W. Beauchamp (Saul Rubinek). Yet the "demythologizing" message doesn't feel forced; it is woven effortlessly into a gripping story that powerfully conveys the human cost of violence.

Moral ambiguity pervades the film, which has no easy resolutions and no customary clear lines between good and evil. Will and his friend Ned (Morgan Freeman), nominally the heroes, have clearly done many bad things in their lives. When they come to Big Whiskey as hired killers, it is ostensibly for a just cause -- to punish two no-good cowboys who slashed the face of a prostitute. Yet, as we know from the beginning, the version of the attack that is reported to Will and Ned is highly and grotesquely exaggerated. While the cowboys certainly should have been punished, we may legitimately wonder if death is a punishment that fits the crime. The agonizing death of the younger of the two cowboys, who didn't do the slashing and clearly felt bad about what his partner had done, certainly doesn't look like justice.

The ostensible villain, Little Bill, is not just a villain. He is a sheriff determined to preserve law and order in the town. One can't blame him for wanting to keep paid assassins out. In a violent society, there's no way he can do his job without using violence. Unfortunately, he also takes a sadistic pleasure in his brutality -- even though he also seems to want a peaceful, quiet life in the house he's building.

One might say that Munny's heroics in the guns-blazing climax undercut the film's purpose of dismantling the mystique of the Old West and its gunfighters. But the truth is, "Unforgiven" is both an homage to and a deconstruction of that mystique. While Munny acquires almost mythic stature in that scene, his actions are still morally shady, and his exchange with the nerdy Beauchamp quickly dispels the romantic aura. What's more, his "rise" to heroism can also be seen as a fall from grace and a reversion to his old ways.

The film may be just a tad slow at times, but at 2 hrs 10 minutes, it remains nearly always gripping. (As for those IMDB reviewers who've knocked the movie because there are too many scenes where Eastwood's character is weak and pathetic, falling off his horse or getting beat up -- why don't you just go see some Arnold Schwarzenegger flick!) Not only are the principal characters well-developed, but even minor characters come across as real people with individual traits; the credit is due both to the excellent screenplay and to the superb cast. The scenes between Will Munny and Delilah, the prostitute who was slashed, are very touching without being at all "sappy." Eastwood is simply superb as the tortured and self-loathing Munny; Gene Hackman fully matches him as Little Bill; Morgan Freeman exudes a quiet dignity as Ned; Wolvett acquits himself well as "the Kid." Add to this a scene-stealing performance by Richard Harris as the elegant, vicious gunslinger English Bob, and terrific work by Saul Rubinek, Frances Fisher as the prostitute Strawberry Alice, and Anna Levine as Delilah.

"Unforgiven" is a modern classic, a must-see for those who appreciate intelligent, high-quality filmmaking.

Was the above comment useful to you?

78 out of 105 people found the following review useful:
A deeply melancholy and complex farewell to the west, 14 August 2004
Author: ed_zeppelin from United Kingdom

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"You just shot an unarmed man!" "Well, he should have armed himself..."

Plenty of films have tried to examine the human side of violence. This is especially appropriate for westerns, where very often rows of men are gunned down without a thought. 'Unforgiven' does better than most, but where this differs from other films is that at the end this whole theme is flipped around as the outlaw William Munny (Clint Eastwood) pulls of a truly legendary piece of shooting. This scene though only emphasises a great sense of failure for the characters, which for me is the most prominent theme of the film. For most characters, their failures are obvious, but I won't give too many examples for fear of spoiling it.

Look at the way the trio of Munny, Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman) and the Schofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett) are slowly whittled down to just Munny, as the others realise that they just don't have what it takes to kill people anymore. Munny, although carrying out his task to the full, has equally failed in his attempt to reform himself as he proves to himself that he is not a pig farmer after all, but still the legendarily cold blooded killer from years ago.

Westerns have had different ways of looking at violence. Leone looked at the build up. Peckinpah looked at the violence itself. Eastwood here looks at the moment after the violence and shows the heartbreaking consequences. Given this it is all the more shocking to see just how merciless and devastating Munny's furious assault on the saloon really is, with him shooting unarmed and wounded men just for the sake of completeness. There is a question of motivations though-before he was in it for the money, but when a personal element is added to the mix the results are volcanic. But this is no blaze of glory for Munny, but something that has to be done, and although treated in a callous way there is a sense that this will have consequences as far reaching as before. Munny has failed in his attempt to reform himself, and the purpose of his life is defeated. There is a suggestion that Munny is damned-there is a moment in the carnage where Munny stops for a drink. The scene is shot so that Eastwood appears to have no reflection the large mirror placed above the bar. More obvious is the following exchange between Munny and Sheriff Dagget (Gene Hackman):

"See you in Hell, William Munny" "Yeah."

The way the climax is presented would be perhaps more appropriate for a more lurid western, with most shots going wild-far more shots are fired than are strictly necessary, in true action film tradition. This is just the point though, as the end is supposed to be at odds with the grittily realistic nature of the rest of the film. The end result is a powerful message powerfully put across.

That is not to say that other westerns that do not necessarily share this sentiment (at least to this level) are less powerful-the theme of 'Once Upon A Time In The West' is equally strong and affecting, but the message is different and presented in a different way. 'Unforgiven' proves though, both to the writer W.W. Beauchamp (Saul Rubinek) and to the audience, that there is a flip side to every story and a dark side to every man.

Was the above comment useful to you?

73 out of 101 people found the following review useful:
An old man reconnects with his wicked past, 10 December 2004
9/10
Author: whstrock from Southeast Georgia

I enjoy the transformation of Clint Eastwood's character throughout the movie. In the beginning he reluctantly becomes a gunfighter but as the movie progresses you see how he slides down the slippery slope of wickedness to become the cold-blooded killer needed for the task. Morgan Freeman's reaction to the transformation is well played also. Richard Harris' character is colorful as is his sidekick. Gene Hackman's sheriff is pleasantly atypical of the role. All these actors and their characters effectively leave the viewer with a myriad of directions from which the movie expertly entertains. If you are expecting anything like Clint's "spaghetti westerns" you will be disappointed. If you are looking for an excellent story with characters that all have varying degrees of wickedness, you will be satisfied when its all said and done.

Was the above comment useful to you?

94 out of 144 people found the following review useful:
'A Man With No Name' Becomes 'A Man With A Real Story'., 12 November 2004
8/10
Author: Stephen West (steve70za@yahoo.com) from London, England

Clint Eastwood's storytelling gives the western genre one of its most sublime story's. Gone is the trademark mysterious hero and in its place is an ex gunman who made his peace when he met his wife. Eastwood has transcended traditional entertainment to storytelling craftsmanship. He delivers rich characters with deep rooted problems inextricably linked to the villains of the story. Refusing to wither and die away, style has been perfectly adapted with age thus ensuring his maturation into a true Hollywood legend.

Besides his now distinctive storytelling, there are numerous factors that make this a landmark Western. The ensemble cast could not have been stronger and there were no weak performances. The soundtrack accentuates the intended atmosphere of the director. A single detracting factor I could find only just qualifies as such. Munny's whimsical lines seemed a little contrived at times. They droned on like pale attempts to capture the Western era. But this is a consequence of the fact that they were more to do with the character of William Munny. He is after all a reformed killer with a now passive approach to people. Given this fact and also that it may have been distracting since it was so out of sync with what we are used to seeing from Eastwood, I still have to list it as a demerit on the account it slightly jerked me out of the story.

Hollywood producers have to satisfy audience preferences if investments are going to accrue profits. It is the nature of the beast. The action and more specifically the Western genre will stick to tried and tested formulas in order to guarantee audience acceptance. But every so often you get people who as a natural consequence of their unique character appeal are able to deliver a story that is outside these understandably restrictive boundaries. Eastwood is a cool individualist who normally plays characters who are not team players and do it their own way. His own way this time is to give the western genre a real story oozing characterization. A sort of ballad for the bad guy.

The ballads tune provides the story with a sad, introspective mood, within the opening and closing scenes. The opening scene depicts Munny in his new found life. He is cured of his wicked ways, helped by his dear, departed wife. But men are not willing to forgive or forget his monstrous deeds and in the final scenes he is who he has to be. Such is the sorrowful life of William Munny.

Westerns are typified by clearly defined goodies and baddies, but this is definitely not the case here. Eastwood and Freeman play reformed killers who find circumstances drawing them once again to their evil ways. But the older and wiser men now realize the value of life and come face to face with their troubled consciences. This is unlike their naïve, young partner who is attracted to the bravado image of the killer and relishes taking a man's life. This moral issue is virtually taboo for the classic western which glamorizes the lawlessness and the hero attraction of the gunslinger. This is also why in my view no-one besides Eastwood should have handled this movie.

Then we have the juiciest character of the movie superbly played by Gene Hackman worthy of the weight of every micro granule of his Oscar. He is the epitome of every hard-line lawman that ever was. The misguidance of the so called righteously empowered, swinging the hammer against evil for good. Hackman must have salivated when he read the script since there was obvious relish in his performance. All the better for the movie, and of course for Eastwood at the Oscars. By far the best performance and the others were good further underlining the talent of the man.

The antagonist of the movie is almost always the most complex and thus most interesting to analyze. His vain attempts at carpentry are his way of trying to appear to be a good man. There is purity in building ones own home and it is this wholesomeness that he wishes to capture. In that way his fellow citizens will see him as a simple man only wanting to lead a righteous life. But his inability as a carpenter is indicative of his depravity. He cannot be a good man. The source of his drive is anger and hatred. It is through this failing that we realize he cannot escape who he is.

Indeed it was not only the power of the script that gave the audience a spellbinding climax, but the talents of the actors. The actors' characterizations deliver the audience a spellbinding climax. It is only through Hackman's performance that we not only acknowledge his ending as inevitable, but also as deserving. We saw him as a man who virtually thought that he was righteously empowered to rid the earth of Munny and his kind What he thought was an honorable task was one rather of abuse and suppression. He became the baddie in the eyes of the audience and it is he who the audience wants to see justice served upon.

Munny was so weak throughout the movie that the eruption of his evil ways captured the interest of the audience. He transformed into the Eastwood of old – the anti hero with a far more malevolent presence. Never could we have sensed this hatred and evil that we now see in William Munny. It is now that the frivolity of his mannerisms that I touched on in the beginning adds to the story as it helps to accentuate the turn in character. He is now only a killer, in it neither for money or fame as the writer nearly finds out to his tragic detriment.

Those who have only seen his Westerns of old or the 'Dirty Harry' movies may enter the cinema with expectations of such like will either be disappointed or pleasantly surprised. It is the atypical western and an unfamiliar portrayal by Eastwood. But I believe that most people will have the latter reaction. The differences are their strengths helped by the fact that it was a superbly crafted movie with a meaningful story and thought provoking lessons for our heroes and villains. Eastwood was directly suited to the roles that we identify him with, but it is exactly because of this suitability that he eases into the role of Munny. No mellowing with age, no identification with the mainstream, he has always done it his way, and he is so good that any way could be his way.

Was the above comment useful to you?

52 out of 70 people found the following review useful:
How the west was, 19 January 2006
10/10
Author: (tjcbs@yahoo.com) from San Fracisco, CA

This film was a revelation, a western that DOESN'T LIE. The whole theme stripping away the mythology our culture has built around the west, scraping it away like the finish on a mirror and reveling the ugliness AND the humanity beneath. I was utterly convinced, both by the portrayal of the period and the reality of the characters. A large focus was its treatment of the subject of killing. The movie SHOWS US what it is like to kill a man, a stark stark contrast to the casual attitude taken by so many other westerns. We see what we already know, wild west or no, that killing is something that most people just aren't capable of. And yet the character of William Munny shows us that in spite of the mundanity he embodies in his later life, true evil still existed then as now, and every now and then, true heroism.

Was the above comment useful to you?

30 out of 36 people found the following review useful:
Masterpiece, 19 February 2007
10/10
Author: José Luis Rivera Mendoza (jluis1984) from Mexico

Ford, Hawks, Leone, Peckinpah, all of them big names who have defined the Western genre in one way or another across the history of cinema, transforming what started as low-budget action films into an art itself where the American Old West served as setting for tales of mythical heroism, classic tragedies, and legendary adventures. Actor and Director Clint Eastwood is probably one of the most knowledgeable artists about the Western genre, as his acting career began as the legendary "Man With No Name" in the Sergio Leone's Spaghetti Westerns of the 60s. As a director, he somewhat continued this legacy through movies like "High Plains Drifter" and "Pale Rider", but finally in 1992, Eastwood released what many consider his final ode to the Western, and his ultimate masterpiece of the genre: "Unforgiven", an epic saga about the deconstruction of the Western myths.

Clint Eastwood himself plays William Munny, a former gunslinger who is now living a peaceful life as a farmer with his two children. However, life is very difficult for Munny's family, as since the death of his wife the family has been facing financial problems. One day a young man calling himself "The Schofield Kid" (Jaimz Woolvett) appears looking for Munny. The Kid tells Munny about a bounty offered in the town of Big Whisky, and offers him the chance to join him as hired gun and split the reward between them. While Munny's days as a murderer are in the past, he decides to join him after thinking about the farm's problems, but not without calling his old friend Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman) to join them. However, Munny's past as a notorious thief and murderer will return to haunt him in this last mission, as the Kid shows a true and honest admiration for Munny's fame as a gunslinger, even when Munny himself considers his past as villainous.

While better known for his work in science fiction, David Webb Peoples' screenplay proves to be a very accurate description of life in the American west, particularly concerning the aspects of the uses and abuses of violence in that era. It is in fact the use of violence what comes as the main theme of the story, as Munny is escaping from his past's violence while the Kid is eagerly awaiting the next chance to prove his masculinity by the use of violence. The duality between man and myth is explored not only via the relationship between the Kid and Munny, but also in the shape of a character who writes novels about the wild west, and sees the figure of the gunslinger as an idolized modern hero. Peoples' screenplay is remarkably well written, as the many characters and their relationships are exhaustively explored, resulting in a character driven revisionism of the western, that in many ways criticizes the genre's origins as violent "Shoot 'em up" films.

Peoples' script is definitely the movie's backbone, but it is Eastwood's masterful direction what transforms this meditation of violence into a unique revision of the Western. With a gritty and realistic approach very in tone with the script, Eastwood portraits the Wild West without romanticism and leaving out the mythic aspects of the genre, taking the revisionism of the Western one step beyond. Using Peoples' script, Eastwood takes a critic view on the figure of the "hero" in Westerns, focusing on the image of the gunslinger and the use of violence to solve problems. Visually, Eastwood has crafted his most impressive movie since "Bird", with an extensive use of shadows and light in the excellent work of cinematography by Jack N. Green. Eastwood's style, originated by the influence of Sergio Leone and Don Siegel, and developed through many stages seems to finally have spawned its masterpiece in this film.

As William Munny, Clint Eastwood is simply perfect in what at first sight looks like an extension of his earlier "Man with no name" persona. William Munny has a name, and a past he wants to escape from, and Estwood captures the image of guilt and regret to the letter. This is easily one of his best roles to date. Morgan Freeman is also very good as Ned Logan, although like Jaimz Woolvett (who plays The Schofield Kid), gets easily overshadowed by Gene Hackman's powerful performance as Little Bill Daggett. Hackman completely owns every scene he is in, showcasing his enormous talent in a very dramatic role. The legendary Richard Harris has a small appearance as another aging gunslinger, English Bob, in very memorable scenes where he demonstrates why he is considered one of the best actors of his generation.

After starting his career playing a mythical hero in Leone's "Dollars" trilogy, it is actually fitting that is Eastwood who explores the figure of hero in his many movies. Ever since his first directed western, Eastwood showed an interest in the duality of the hero, taking a special interest in the archetype of hero portrayed in the classic 1953 Western, "Shane". Eastwood has explored this theme in many ways in the past: first as a true antihero ("High Plains Drifter"), then as a man becoming legend ("The Outlaw Josey Wales") and later as a true mythic hero ("Pale Rider"); all this culminates in "Unforgiven" as the ultimate demythologization of the concept, and his final ode to the Western genre. While the movie indeed feels a bit "preachy" at times, the story is devised in such a way that it never feels too heavy handed, as it unfolds nicely as a classic epic tale of the West.

Personally, I can't praise this movie enough, as it is easily one of the best Westerns done since Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch", and required viewing not only for fans of the genre. While some consider it an "anti-Western", I think that with this movie, Eastwood's name can proudly stand along those of Ford, Hawks, Leone and Peckinpah as a master of the Western. "Unforgiven" is definitely Clint's masterpiece. 10/10

Was the above comment useful to you?

26 out of 29 people found the following review useful:
A classic feel of Western with the added brilliance of Clint Eastwood and an equally strong cast, 29 November 2005
8/10
Author: Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I have heard quite a bit for "Unforgiven", also I want to seen all the best pictures from the 90's. I was also excited to see Morgan Freeman in the cast, so I know now that "Million Dollar Baby" was not Clint and Morgan's first experience together. They work so well as a team and bring nothing but sheer entertainment and charm to movies.

"Unforgiven" is a very good picture that has a real story and isn't just about "cops and robbers" or "cowboys and Indians". How far would you go for a friend? I loved Will and Ned's friendship so much because you could tell how much they had been through together and Will went back to his old ways in the blink of an eye for his dear friend. I loved watching Will's story through the movie, the first time you see him, he's just so charming and you would never had suspected of his former life of crime, alcohol, and bloodshed. Through the film, you have a lot of doubt for his character if he could go back to his old life despite his promises to his deceased wife. He, the Kid, and Ned go on a trip to kill two cowboys who cut up a prostitute's face for $1,000.00. Together, they learn that this isn't going to be such an easy task when the boys they're hunting down belong to a town where guns and all arms are banned that could lead to a punishment as far as death. But Will gets sick and the Kid and Ned give a lot of talk in killing these cowboys themselves, when Will is just half himself he does the deed himself in killing one of the cowboys. He tells Ned to go back home and he'll take care of the other cowboy, he does so but gets caught and beat to death by the sheriff.

The Kid and Clint do the rest of the job by killing the other cowboy and receive their reward by the prostitutes, but Will learns of Ned and goes back into his old habits. What happens next? You'll have to watch yourself.

Something that I learned that was interesting, Clint dedicated Unforgiven to Don Siegal and Sergio Leone, two directors who believed in him as a young actor. Unforgive is a remarkable film: methodical, deeply felt, with a devastating emotional and moral impact. It is easily one of the best Western movies. Like I said, it just has such a classic feel to it and you can't help but enjoy it. It seems like Clint might just own Hollywood one day. :)

8/10

Was the above comment useful to you?


Page 1 of 38:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Amazon.com summary
Ratings Awards Newsgroup reviews
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history