Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974) User Reviews

Cimino first triumphant debut

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 7 September 2005]

The very first shot of "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" – a faultless composition, fifty per cent wispy Idaho sky, fifty per cent cornfield – establishes an elegant style which Cimino maintains throughout the film… The second scene – Clint Eastwood as we have never seen him before, wearing spectacles, his hair slicked back and dressed as a vicar delivering a sermon in a crowded country church – immediately makes one realize that the film may be quite different from any of Eastwood's previous ones… But the third scene, in which the vicar is chased across a seemingly endless cornfield by an irate gun-firing George Kennedy establishes that all is not as it seems to be…

Eastwood is rescued by Lightfoot (Jeff Bridges), who has just relieved a car salesman of $3000 dollars' worth of automobile, and a partnership is quickly created, with the veteran Thunderbolt asserting his experience and virility over the inexperienced Lightfoot... Casting off his vicar's clothes Thunderbolt then takes his belt and endures agonizing pain as he uses it to pull his dislocated shoulder into place…

Thunderbolt is being pursued by Red Leary (George Kennedy) and Eddie Goody (Geoffrey Lewis) who are former partners of his in crime and who believe he has the half million dollar takings from their last bank raid… They mean business… While Thunderbolt and Lightfoot enjoy themselves with two young ladies named Gloria and Melody, Leary and Goody wait outside. 'Are you sure that's their car?' wonders Goody. 'That's their hearse,' says Leary…

The film was a triumphant debut for Cimino… His script combined wit and the naive philosophy of the motorized cowboys… 'Leary, I had a dream about you last night." "About what?" "I dreamt you said hello to me.'

At the beginning of the film when Eastwood recites his sermon for the benefit of his felonious friend, 'and the lion shall lie down with the leopard' (Cimino used it purposely to indicate the liaison between Lightfoot the lion and Thunderbolt the leopard), the younger man asks 'What's that – a poem?' 'No,' replies Thunderbolt, 'a prayer'. At the end of the film the younger man is still seeking answers from his senior partner… 'Where you heading?' 'See what's over the next mountain! We won, didn't we?' 'I guess we did – for the time being.'

Cimino created the part for Eastwood and in doing so drew greatly on his actual personality… For those people who know the real Clint Eastwood, no film part better conveys the style, the warmth, and the dry delivery of the man himself

A Fun And Unique Ride

[TheAnimalMother · 7/10 · 5 January 2022]

The film has a fairly leisurely pace to it, it's a bit of a slow burn for sure, but a very welcome one. There are so many interesting and enjoyable things in this film. It's part road movie and part heist film really. It's a fun film with Jeff Bridges playing a fairly eccentric and irreverent young character and Clint playing the more experienced and relaxed tough guy role. George Kennedy is also very good, and the film definitely finds it's share of funny moments. Michael Cimino was an interesting writer/director who in fact credits Clint Eastwood with giving him his directorial start with this film. Eastwood was apparently given the right by the studio to fire Cimino early on in the filming of this, but obviously never chose to do so. He co-wrote a couple of the earlier Dirty Harry scripts and then wrote and directed this film entirely. Cimino preferred to take his time in delivering his films, especially his early ones where he was given more control over them. In doing so, he really created a few films with some very interesting, well developed and not so standard characters. This is a very strong directorial debut. It really is too bad that Heaven's Gate was later considered a failure for him to some degree, as it seems after that film and he has talked about this, that he was no longer given the same kind of control over his filmmaking that he had previously enjoyed. I would've liked to see a lot more of his cinematic visions in full. Cimino was definitely an interesting, somewhat unique and patient artist. Hollywood studios on the other hand, sadly have rarely been patient with many artistic filmmakers.

7.5/10.

Old Movie that still kicks

[mm-39 · 7/10 · 11 April 2002]

This film has a few weak spots in the script, but I sure like it. A heist movie, with a mean Kennedy in it. Jeff and Clent never made another movie, and they could be like Redford and Newman; they have movie chemistry. TBS edits this film too much, its recomended watching on video. Worth renting 7/10.

"Where do I go from here?"

[LewisJForce · 12 January 2004]

Michael Cimino's first film is an arresting fusion of early 70's road movie, 'Buddy' picture and 'planning a heist' action-thriller. That it manages to incorporate these elements into a poetic study of male friendship and the unquenchable restlessness at the heart of the great American pioneer/drifter mentality makes it a remarkable piece of work.

Cimino avoids the 'arty' distance of Terence Malick's 'Badlands' or the po-faced existentialism of Monte Hellman's 'Two Lane Black-top', but entertains the same thematic concerns within the framework of an accessible genre piece. From it's opening vista of a deserted wheat field, accompanied by the haunting strains of a single acoustic guitar, the film resonates with loneliness and loss. "Tell me where, Where does a fool go", sings Paul Williams, "when there's no-one left to listen, to a story without meaning, that no-body wants to hear?"

It is also funny and tender in it's observation of male camaraderie. Eastwood has never been more effective and affecting on-screen than in his interplay here with Jeff Bridges. We get a real sense of his character's connection to Bridges which makes the 'Midnight Cowboy'-ish ending genuinely moving.

Like all the great 70's movies, it has some wonderfully memorable scenes and dialogue: Dub Taylor ranting about the imminent collapse of the American economy at a nocturnal gas station; Bill Mckinney as a crazed speed-freak with a trunk full of white rabbits; Bridges encountering a hammer-wielding female motorcyclist, etc, etc.

Throw in some breath-taking scenic photography of Montana by Frank Stanley (prefiguring the use and role of landscape in relation to character later explored by Cimino in 'The Deer Hunter') and some beautifully understated character work in the smaller roles, and you have a fondly remembered minor classic ripe for some serious re-appraisal.

A male Thelma And Louise!

[jessewillis · 7/10 · 16 October 2003]

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot (1974) isn't perfect, but it has a lot going for it. The pairing Eastwood and Bridges is great, these aren't the same kinds of actors, and yet their on-screen relationship works well. Supporting character actors George Kennedy and Geoffrey Lewis round out rest of the heisters, and Gary Busey makes an early appearance in a small role. Also of note is the striking Montana scenery, quite unseen on film, this movie does an admirable job showcasing it. What I'm really surprised about is how no one else seems to have noticed a couple of things about this film.

First: The title of this film, and its two main characters are an homage to a pair of famous 19th century highwaymen who called themselves respectively `Captain Thunderbolt' and `Captain Lightfoot'. This isn't the last time Hollywood film criminals would be named after real life bandits. In the film `The Way Of The Gun' the characters are called `Mr. Parker and Mr. Longbaugh' which of course were the real names of Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid! Also of interest is the fact that Geoffrey Lewis appears in The Way Of The Gun!

Second: Those interested in a companion piece to this film might consider watching `Thelma and Louise' which mirrors the on-the-road relationship of this film very closely. Though the plot is different, the relationship with the landscape and the emphasis on two characters is strikingly similar. In short a good film, worth watching!

An unusual heist film.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 20 January 2018]

One of the more enjoyable and bankable genres are heist films. And, if you think about it, there have been some truly memorable and amazing films in the genre as well, such as "Rififi", "Dog Day Afternoon", "Grand Slam" and the original "Oceans Eleven". However, "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" has some things going for it that make it different...in good ways as well as bad. As for the good, there's more story and it's not just about a robbery....so you see more character development. But on the bad, no one is anyone you can like or really care about...something you really NEED in order to make a great caper flick.

The biggest reason I wanted to see the film is because I'd only seen one tiny portion...the bunny scene. It's amazing...it's awful...and it's kinda funny...but in a sick way! See the movie...you'll see what I mean!

Also, according to IMDB Clint Eastwood felt he deserved an Oscar nomination since his co-star, Jeff Bridges, received one. I would beg to differ. Eastwood is fine but essentially plays his usual tight-lipped character and isn't much of a stretch. I am not saying he is not capable of great performances...this just isn't one of the better ones (like "Grand Torino").

US version censured ?

[hayula · 7/10 · 17 March 2005]

I remember watching this movie for the first time in the early eighties. I was still in elementary school but I still vaguely recall a scene where a young woman on a bicycle gets ambushed by Red Leary and gets away by clawing his cheek. Exciting stuff when u see a breast pop out on screen for the first time! If i'm not mistaken this would have been right before the scene where Jeff Bridge's character meets up with Red to go pick up the large caliber weapon. Where's the scene in the US DVD release? Other than the missing scene the movie was fun to watch again 30 years later. The cars and the print shirts, Jeff Bridges is simply awesome as a hippie drifting in the 70s. Clint Eastwood moves through the movie with a shattered shin and bad shoulder and still able to kick everyones ass when he has to. Awesome!

Eastwood and Bridges

[littlemartinarocena · 10/10 · 20 August 2011]

Two misfits and a love story between two loners. That in itself it's an intriguing premise but if you add to that mix, Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges as the two loners, then we'll have something we've never seen before. Lightfoot (a superlative Jeff Bridges) has a crush on Thunderbolt (an astonishing Clint Eastwood) at first sight. Thunderbolt seems to be aware of it, if only subconsciously but eventually surrenders to the kind of feeling he, probably, never experienced. A father with a son who hero worships him. Tragically romantic. Brutal and deeply felt, Michael Cimino's debut as a director is a feast for the senses. Highly recommended.

Somewhere between "The Man With No Name" and "Dirty Harry"....

[merklekranz · 7/10 · 1 March 2008]

"Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" is somewhat of a puzzle. It is an uneasy mixture of comedy, buddy road movie, and action film. While Eastwood's "spaghetti western" anti-hero was a "good" bad guy, "Thunderbolt" fails to elicit the same reaction. He plots a heist with bad guys, and were it not for Eastwood's support of the highly likable "Lightfoot", his character would be difficult to embrace as anything but just another criminal. In fact, Eastwood's "Thunderbolt" is completely overshadowed by Jeff Bridges endearing performance. The movie benefits from terrific supporting characters, great on location photography, and surprising comic moments. It is weakened by uneven transitions from comedy to drama, and about 10 minutes of car chases that could have been trimmed. - MERK

Eastwood & Bridges & Lewis & Cimino = sheer delight !

[wmjahn · 10/10 · 31 August 2007]

I have to admit, I am a sucker for 70ies movies, this was the last golden age in Hollywood and compared to those days, we're now already on a 25 year trip through the desert with now light ahead.

Of course, since I just plain simply love this movie, I might not be objective in my praise, but IMHO this movie does offer a lot to praise. When I read through some other favorable reviews of T&L I found - here and there - lines indicating some apology that they consider this a great movie, but I don'think there is any reason to apology for any praise regarding this little gem.

Made in the heydays of "New Hollywood" (5 years later the party was over anyway) T&L might have been considered as a "throwaway"-picture by the studio, but it certainly was not one for the people involved. In those days there was abundant talent available and it was much easier for young cinema-lovers and professionals to get "the foot into the door". One of them was Michael CIMINO (aged 35 then), who was trusted enough by Eastwood and the studio to be allowed - with a mere two screenplays on his belt (Silent running + Magnum Force) - to direct his first feature (I think his later pictures and the stories behind them are known well enough). And what a marvelous job he did ! Like so many other directors of the 70ies Cimino proves the point that most of them made their best pictures at the very start of their careers. Cimino is one of them, whose first 2 pictures are his best 2 as well (as opposed to "Old Hollywood", when directors made their best work in their later careers, because they first had to free themselves from the rigid studio-system prevailing then).

Considered by some as a highly entertaining, but minor Eastwood-outing, this view has to be corrected. At this time Eastwood was already a seasoned veteran, who had worked with some of the best directors available these days (Leone, Siegel, to name the 2 most important) and had already successfully directed two features (so it can well be assumed he also lent his hand at this or that scene). Compared to that, Cimino was a complete "nobody".

T&L is also the first one, in which Eastwood gives a completely unexperienced director his first chance and - after a string of superb action/western-flicks - one of his first efforts to break the tendency to by typecast. Insofar his role in T&L is a step away from the Man with no name, be it western or cop, but of course - always knowing his limits - not a too far away step from his usual roles (a loner, here with more humor than usual). If wanted, one can consider this little gem as one of his first steps at "auteurism" (I know, this theory is aged, but not completely wrong).

Eastwood certainly did take this movie serious as did Bridges, whose fifth important picture this is (after Last Picture Show, Fat City, Bad Company and Last American Hero). Bridges was of course the perfect choice for this movie and Eastwood/Cimino certainly knew, whom they picked. The same goes for Eastwood-extra Geoff Lewis (still active today in US TV) and Gary Busey, who spends his time today in grade E action-schlock.

In addition to this perfect cast and the direction, which I would describe as one full of "lazy assurance" (although by a newcomer) we have a well balanced, highly entertaining story with superbly drawn characters (the movie is evenly balanced and to equal parts plot- and character-driven). The characters are not the usual cartoon-type cliché's, but believable slackers, living the day and planning a heist.

The whole movie has a superb aura of laid-back laziness and coolness, and this all comes completely unforced. In fact I'd even go so far as to say that it is maybe this special aura, which lifts this above all other road- and heist-movies I can think of (some come near, but not many). Right from the start, when we see Eastwood running through a corn-filed until the twisted end, this movie is full of small stories, vignettes and subplots, but without forgetting it's main story. With so much happening it is more than surprising, that it can keep up it's leisured pace, it's laziness, although there's in fact more happening in it than in many other faster-driven movies.

Also the ending - ATTENTION: SPOILERS AHEAD !! - is untypical for a Hollywood movie of the "old(er) era" = pre-70ies. Actually, when Eastwood and Bridges have found - more less by accident - the building, where they had hidden the money, hardly any viewer would actually expect the loot to still be there. But then, after this has been accomplished, everybody would wish and expect them to get away with it and drive off into the sunset happily. Both assumptions are not fulfilled. They do find the money, but they do not get away happily. The ending is bitter, but highly realistic. Contrary to some comments here, the given ending is not owed to the old morale "crime does not pay", in no way at all. First, Bridges going to petty-criminals heaven has absolutely nothing to do with the heist, it is just the result of bad circumstances resulting from a fist-fight (ironically, that's what the novelist behind Outlaw Josey Wales died of later). Insofar it has no morale at all, it just happens, because things like this also do happen in the real world (unfortunately). Eastwood and Cimino are clearly playing with expectations here. ...

./. unfortunately I only have 1000 words available here, but did need more, so please check the discussion board for the complete comment ... sorry, sometimes there's more to say than fits into 1000 words. :-)

Entertaining and Low Key

[pc95 · 7/10 · 9 February 2009]

There was a relaxing and down-to-earth feel for "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot", several decades old, but pretty well done on the whole. It had an excellent beginning and chance happening for the leads. There's a very good dynamic between Bridges and Eastwood as the energetic young mixes with the experienced old. The story is a mix of cops and robbers with treasure hunt and mystery thrown in. It plays well for a 30+ year old movie as most of the scenes aren't too 70s cultured save for some rambling folksy music in a few scenes. (spoiler)The ending was pretty gratifying and well put together. Storytellers could've sugar-coated it but instead you get an in-your-face real downer. Thought the supporting cast Geoffrey Lewis and George Kennedy as goons helped round out the cast well. Well shot in the wild west too.

In The Same Stylish Manner

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 26 March 2008]

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot casts Clint Eastwood as a former bank robber now turned preacher who is trying to escape from his former gang who think he sold them out. While escaping one of them he gets an unexpected assist by drifter Jeff Bridges and the film is their bittersweet odyssey.

Eastwood turns out to be the legendary Thunderbolt, a man who was part of a gang that robbed an Idaho bank by using an army mortar to break into the vault. The money was hidden and then disappeared and was never recovered or found by any of the gang. But the rest of the gang remaining which is now George Kennedy and Geoffrey Lewis think Eastwood took it.

After a couple of escapes Kennedy and Lewis do catch up with Eastwood and Bridges and Clint finally convinces the other two he didn't keep the loot for himself. What to do, but rob the place again and do it in the same stylish manner.

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot garnered one Academy Award nomination, for Jeff Bridges for Best Supporting Actor. Bridges was up against some stiff competition that year. Fred Astaire was the sentimental favorite for The Towering Inferno and the other three nominees all came from The Godfather: Part II, Lee Strasberg, Michael V. Gazzo, and Robert DeNiro. It was DeNiro who beat all odds with two other nominees from his film in the same field and won.

Bridges was probably rounding out the field here, but that's not to take away from his performance. He's an amiable, cynical young drifter who has a very tender side to him that Eastwood brings out. The audience likes him even though he's up to no good.

There are more than gay undertones in Thunderbolt and Lightfoot which any number of critics have commented. In fact the only reason that the scene with Catherine Bach and her friend who Bridges picks up for himself and Eastwood is in the film at all is to mainstream it for Middle America. Otherwise Eastwood and Kennedy act like a pair of middle aged gay men fighting over a young hustler. And Bridges with those black leather pants he wears in half the film certainly gives that impression. Bridges also gets to do drag as part of the robbery plan and I've seen a lot worse. Eastwood himself says to Bridges that he came along about ten years too late in his life.

Michael Cimino was acclaimed for his first film as both director and writer. Four years later Cimino won all kinds of awards and praise including the Oscar for Best Picture for his second film, The Deer Hunter. After that though came the elephantine disaster Heaven's Gate and what the god's gave they took back with a vengeance.

The only criticism I have of the film is we never do learn how our gang got a hold of a mortar for the job. For that matter how did Eastwood get one the first time? This really is carrying the right to bear arms way too far. Cimino's script doesn't explain and I don't think it's on the cutting room floor because the film as a whole is well and tightly edited.

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot is one of Clint Eastwood's best films, certainly one of my favorites. And the ending is an interesting one to say the least.

A buddy and caper film with two greatest actors : Eastwood, Bridges , who along with a nice support cast , all of them give fine interpretations

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 14 November 2020]

This was Cimino's preparation to great epic and Oscarized "Deer Hunter" . Here Eastwood is a thief called Thunderbolt , he is on the run from his previous partners : George Kennedy, Geoffrey Lewis . Thunderbolt then joins joins up with a drifter nicknamed Lightfoot : Jeff Bridges . As Thunderbolt attempts to carry out a last job . Later on, Thunderbolt is captured by his former colleagues but he arranges to convince them he does not know where the money is from a prior hold-up . Lightfoot : Jeff Bridges, manages to convince them they should plan the same heist and rob the same government vault. Thunderbolt ..the man with the reputation. Lightfoot ...the kid who's about to make one ¡ . He has exactly seven minutes to get rich quick !

An amusing and fun film with likeable result and full of noisy action , pursuits , shootouts , car chases , humor , and a spectacular heist . Having written the script Cimino was given opportunity to direct it thanks to Clint Eastwood for whom he had formerly collaborated with John Milius in "Magnum Force" . All around give fine performances from Clint Eastwood as the expert robber believes he's made off with the loot from his last job and exceptional James Bridges as the good-natured colleague , as he steals the show by striking most of the sparks , being notable his scenes dressed in drag . Although Eastwood and Bridges are the central roles, here also appears George Kennedy and Geoffrey Lewis who fill their characters impressively , collectively overshadowing the stars , at times. As Clint Eastwod and Jeff Bridges are well accompanied by a top-notch support cast , such as : George Kennedy, Geoffrey Lewis , Roy Jenson, Bill McKinney , Dub Taylor , Vic Tayback , Gregory Walcott ,Catherine Bach and Gary Busey .

It contains colorful and adequate cinematography by Frank Stanley. As well as thrilling and atmospheric musical score by Dee Barton. The motion picture was well directed by Michael Cimino. This filmmaker wa a good craftsman who made few but very nice films with successes and flops, such as : Heaven's Gate , Year of the Dragon, The Sicilian , Desperate Hours , The Sunchaser and , of course , his biggest hit : The Deer Hunter . Rating : 7/10 . The flick will appeal to Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges fans .

The heist aspect that we see in the second half is serviceable, but it's the poor first half that really lets this down

[jimbo-53-186511 · 4/10 · 23 November 2015]

Here is the IMDb summary for Thunderbolt and Lightning - "With the help of an irreverent young sidekick, a bank robber gets his old gang back together to organize a daring new heist". Sounds like it's the sort of film that would be exciting and lots of fun doesn't it? Yeah well I'm sorry, but this really didn't do a lot for me I'm afraid.

For a start the actual plot doesn't really get any focus at all until we're close to the hour mark which isn't necessarily a problem in itself if the first half of the film does anything of interest, but unfortunately that isn't the case here.

Even if we overlook the rather contrived set-up to the story it's a really hard film to become involved with. The first hour consists of Thunderbolt and Lightfoot picking up prostitutes, stealing a car and being pursued by Leary (George Kennedy) who has a score to settle with Thunderbolt (Clint Eastwood) as he believes that Thunderbolt set him up on a previous job. I haven't got a problem with silliness in films but it has to feel as though there is some sort of point to any of it. The first half is a rather dumb and random sequences of events serving no real purpose and the second half involves the planning and execution of the heist. For me, the two aspects don't mesh very well together and made the film feel uneven.

I also found it a little bit convenient that Leary would suddenly drop everything and decide to join Thunderbolt for one last job - given how angry he was with him previously. If I'm honest I just found many elements of the story to be a little hokey.

Another problem in this film is that it suffers from notably weak chemistry amongst its characters. Eastwood and Bridges are OK individually, but share few sparks when they're on screen together. Although to be fair to Bridges he did at least try and inject some fun into the film and managed to be both annoying and funny in equal measure. Kennedy and Lewis fared worse and seemed to add very little to the film.

Things improve slightly in the second half of the film when we're actually seeing the 'heist' itself. I thought that the planning and thought that went into the heist was clever, but again it wasn't exciting and once the heist is executed it was rather workmanlike and run of the mill and again just didn't do a lot for me.

Simply put, Thunderbolt and Lightfoot is a mixture of bad and mediocre and a film that doesn't deliver upon its rather exciting sounding premise.

Beyond buddies.

[pdagnillo · 9 March 2004]

I think this movie gets lost in all the commercial Clint Eastwood vehicles,it far surpasses most of his 70's attempts. This is mostly due to Cimino's script and Bridges acting and honest words.This is far more than a buddy picture,rather one of the greatest love stories on film(all homosexual connotations aside),taking the male relationship in film to new levels because of the contrast of characters and there immediate like for one another.Skipped is most of the bickering used in lessor buddy flicks instead great interaction between the two and Clint still gets to shine as one of the coolest tough guys of the 70's.Great cinematography coupled with beautiful backdrops and a fine supporting cast make this a must see.

A winner of a film.

[alexanderdavies-99382 · 7/10 · 27 June 2017]

Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges made a good film with "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot." Both actors compliment each other as the personalities of their respective characters are totally different but are united in the pursuit of crime. Neither man is exactly evil or sadistic but they are both thoroughly dishonest. Geoffrey Lewis and George Kennedy are brilliant as the hoods who are recruited by Eastwood and Bridges in their criminal masterplan. There is some humour in this film which works well. There is some action but the ending proves to be slightly downbeat. A very worthy film all round.

Proto-bromance in big sky country

[shakercoola · 7/10 · 2 June 2018]

An American comedy drama; A story about a retired bank robber who escapes a gunman with the aid of a young car thief. T ogether they go in search of the loot from the former crook's last job but someone is on their tail. Michael Cimino's screenplay and debut as a director is a back-road road movie and heist caper underpinned by a light-hearted relationship of bonding and joshing between two men. Eastwood and Bridges have good onscreen chemistry and the film in the first act is light of foot in the chase. The tone turns darker when an eleborate bank robbery plan is hatched which brings a convincingly brutal George Kennedy into the fray. Although the build up is dynamic it is arguably too long even when the dialogue is amusingly vulgar at times. Bridges' fun-loving grifter pitched against the more world-wise criminality of Eastwood and an unforgiving Kennedy makes for good contrast.

Different kind of heist movie

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 17 December 2018]

While Clint Eastwood was best known for his iconic westerns made during the 1970s, he also made more unusual contemporary thrillers, of which THUNDERBOLT AND LIGHTFOOT is a good example. Eastwood plays the leader of a bunch of robbers who are desperate to pull off the ultimate heist with the aid of some unusual weaponry. This is a film which is heavy on the character work and the humour, with oddball but likeable performances from the likes of Jeff Bridges, Geoffrey Lewis, Gary Busey and George Kennedy. Eastwood takes a back seat here, willing to let the younger talent shine, and at times this feels all over the place, treading water and unwilling to hurry itself to get on with the story. However, things seriously pick up for the climax, which goes into unexpectedly dark and moving territory, building to one heck of an ending.

clint and jeff

[kairingler · 10/10 · 16 June 2010]

most people remember Michael Cimino for his classic masterpiece the DeerHunter,, this film while not quite that is very close i think to a cult classic,, Clint Eastwood and Jeff Bridges work so well together,, add in Geoffrey Lewis,, George Kennedy,, small parts for Catherine Bach Vic Tayback , and Gary Busey, plus a great story,, and music, you have a wonderful film to behold,, Johnny is on the run from Red,, from a job he pulled 10 years ago,, Red tries to kill him but with Lightfoot's help Johnny lives another day,, he then convinces Johnny to pull the exact same job as 10 years ago, because they would never expect it.. the job involves blowing a safe, and high tailing it out of town,, Red gets greedy decides he wants all the cash,,,, but alas our heroes have something close to them Red does not,,, the wherabouts of the original 500,000 ,,, great movie,, i'd watch it over and over again,, Hollywood needs to make these kinds of movies,,

Fun

[Tweetienator · 7/10 · 3 June 2021]

I just had the notion to watch some movie with Clint that I did not know and stumbled upon Thunderbolt and Lightfoot - and was very pleased. A nice buddy and on the road movie with some fine moments of comedy in the beginning and the mid part and after that the movie takes a turn into tragedy. Fine performances by the cast (Jeff Bridges, George Kennedy, Geoffrey Lewis and Mr. Eastwood of course) and some fun ideas plus the last part with some heist action and drama make this one just a good way to kill some spare time.

Michael Cimino's first is carried by Jeff Bridges

[Ram_Bowen · 8/10 · 29 October 2008]

I really liked this movie. Cimino keeps the story simple, funny and pretty involving: A young hotshot (Bridges) inspires a has-been bank robber (Eastwood) to take another crack at the bank which nearly brought him down the last time he hit it, and along the way they are both sabotaged and helped by Eastwood's former buddies (Kennedy and Lewis).

In my humble opinion, Jeff Bridges is ace as "Lightfoot" in this movie. There simply would be no movie without him, or, well, it might, but it would've been boring as hell. Eastwood plays Eastwood, maybe a bit softer around the edges than Harry Callahan, and does his part well. Still, he is kind of drowned by Bridges, Kennedy and Lewis. They do other stuff besides just being tough and professional, and God bless the script and them for it. Bridges is so incredibly good in this, he jumps around, he tries to wind up Kennedy and tries to lure some enthusiasm out of Eastwood; I can not imagine anyone else but Bridges as Lightfoot. He steals the movie away (he's also does some drag-stuff here, classic). The scenes with the lady in the house, the tussles with Kennedy, the brunette and her friend, the lady on a bike with a hammer. You have a lot to look forward to here.

Cimino's picture is about a criminal who is tired and who just wants to take it easy, but a young dude, full of romantic ideas, tempts him back into the game. Along the way, the violence and mayhem that made Eastwood leave it all back then catches up with them and they have to fight for their lives.

The movie is a must-see for fans of Eastwood, Cimino, Kennedy and Lewis - but it belongs to Jeff Bridges.

Slow and sad

[cpmtg6 · 7/10 · 21 May 2020]

From a modern perspective it's a very slow film and I did find it a bit of a struggle to get through but that ending really did feel like a punch to the gut.

"Stop you FREAK - I love you"

[godamndevil1977 · 10/10 · 8 March 2006]

Thunderbolt & Lightfoot might just be the second best film in both Eastwood & Bridge's career. For Eastwood, I can't see anything excelling The Good, the Bad & the Ugly. As for Bridges, I think his pinnacle was in The Big Lebowski. But whatever - today we're discussing Thunderbolt & Lightfoot and it is a great great film. Doherty (Eastwood), an ex con / bank robber is by fate, recklessly aided by Lightfoot (Bridges) helping Doherty make a sharp exit from his former criminal associates (played by G Kennedy & G Busey). All four characters are forced to overlook their pasts and differences, we see a transformation and are strung a long a brilliant story of classic-buddies-plotting-to-beat-the-impossible-odds. Michael Cimino (Director) immediately throws the story and the characters into quick pace. He litters the film with good looking sets, sweet colour and oddly placed obstacles - for instance, a deranged hick driving by with a boot full of white rabbits. Maybe it was unintentional, but I think Cimino created one of the first films to really stage what we know as black-humour. 2 hours of tragic events, lined up one after the other underlined by stupidity and smart wit, of course we can not forget George Kennedy & Gary Busey's super assistance in supporting roles. Jeff Bridges is a remarkable and funny actor in this film, his part reveals a warm and naïve handsome young fella, yet somehow edged with that wise-fool-20-something vision that provides infectious viewing, especially the line to Clint "I don't know want your money man. I want your friendship". Clint Eastwood, is as you expect - laidback, dry and completely handy. Nothing new, but nothing you'd want to take away from that screen presence or enigma he's carefully carved over the years. Thunderbolt & Lightfoot was overlooked back in the day, United Artists must have been insane not to push, or help sparkle such a strong piece of golden nugget that was laid amongst so many other rough pebbles. ~Paul Browne.

Bromance,Road film crosses centre lane to heist

[dieseldemon85 · 7/10 · 26 December 2023]

This film is a unique blend of never seen Bromance road film, which leads into a heist. There is action, some comedy in which Jeff Bridges steals the show as the very likable "Lightfoot" who first meets Eastwood"Thunderbolt" after stealing a 73 Trans am and picks up a fleeing Clint from a gun man, the two develop a type of Bromance, they meet Eastwood's former partners, and a crazy guy with a jacked up Fury with a truckload of rabbits( the scene has no real bearing on story but helps the meandering part). They plan a heist at the same bank they hit years earlier. The second half is finly tuned and is character driven with an effective and emotional ending. Bridges is in drag near the end and doesn't look half bad, the other three are effective in their roles. It's a good watch, but I liked the pairing of Eastwood,Kennedy in Eiger Sanction better. 3.5/ 5.

Incomprehensible Mess

[Mr Blue-4 · 3/10 · 10 February 2011]

I was in grade school when this came out, and I remembered it as a crime/caper film. It later became known as Michael Cimino's directorial debut. Of course, his next film would be "The Deer Hunter" (one that I am not a fan of). Watching this movie in 2011, it's clear why his career floundered after "The Deer Hunter." Here is a movie with no sense of story or even character. We move from scene to scene and the film's ongoing motivation seems to be to stage something that looks "neat".

"Thunderbolt" never recovers from its opening sequence. Clint Eastwood is seen as the preacher of a small Idaho church. Jeff Bridges, at the same time, is a leather pants-wearing huckster that makes off with a used car. The character we later learn to be Dunlap enters Eastwood's church and shoots at him in the middle of a sermon. Clint runs off into the field behind the church and is picked up by Bridges in the stolen used car, who runs over Dunlap for good measure. And just like that, Bridges and Eastwood are a team.

This may be good enough for some people, who are quick to label the merely absurd as "poetic", but try another adjective: nonsense. From the get-go "Thunderbolt" lets us know that it really has no interest in being coherent or grounded in some kind of reality where people behave with any reason. Let's just make a movie where "neat" stuff happens, irregardless of what's happened 10 minutes before or after.

Case in point- later on, Clint and Jeff are hitchhiking. They are picked up by a guy who appears to be drunk and has a raccoon in his front seat. As soon as they are in the car he proceeds to drive all over the road until they nearly crash. Upon getting out of the car, and decking the driver, the duo finds the trunk of the car full of rabbits. The whole sequence stands apart from the movie, adding neither humor or insight. But I guess it seemed "cool" to Cimino and company.

BTW, save the "70s filmmaking sensibility" arguments. As if every complaint about incoherent storytelling (which this is) is coming from someone too programmed by super-obvious narratives like old TV shows to "appreciate" something that is "diffent". Er, try again. I'm not expecting "Hawaii Five O", and there are plenty of 70s films that hold up by simply adhering to basic conventions of movie-making while still being "different" (i.e. "The Last Detail").

Kudos to the photography, which is also aided by stunning locations (perhaps inspiring Cimino to return to the area for "Heaven's Gate" later). However, while this is certainly a "guy's film", did it have to be so incredibly sexist? If a woman appears in the film and she's under 25, she's probably in the shortest skirt possible, and/or flaunting cleavage. Not that some women don't dress this way some of the time, but all of them? And it's hard to imagine a more gratuitous nude shot than the one of the suburban wife who merely stands completely naked in her window for Bridges to see. Other than solidify the R rating and give a few guys in pre-cable/video 1974 a thrill, what's the point of that?