The Gundown (2011) Poster


User Reviews

Add a Review
14 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
Attention to quality pays off
cjw_media20 February 2012
It was great to see a lower budget movie produced with attention to quality actors, quality costuming, quality sets, and even quality music. Yes the movie has some issues typical of a lower budget. You see sporadic problems with continuity and editing. And a few boo-boos with stunts and lighting. But those are sporadic. There's nothing so glaring to make you want to turn it off. The vision is clear from the beginning and despite a few oopsies it's a decent movie. I only wish the DVD cover floating around on Facebook had been used instead of the retro-art modern looking outlaw. At least you'd know what kind of western you are going to view (action and romance and morals)instead of a martial arts testosterone action only flick.
10 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Typical western with poor editing.
Pasadenapauly16 July 2011
For a western its the typical bad guys tear up a town and the good guy rides in to save the day. The town seems pretty small with only about 20 people in all but they seem to keep getting bad guys to pop up from everywhere. The editing is terrible, there's parts of the film where the fight scenes speed up and skip frames. The sets are nice and really believable, the one thing that isn't believable is the female "bad girl" named lulca or something like that. She has so much plastic surgery it makes her look out of place in the movie. Her lips are swelled and to big, she constantly looks like shes frowning. All in all it was fun to watch and helped pass the time, would I watch it again? would i recommend it to anyone? probably not.
20 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Cool Indy Western!
HistoryProdADM25 September 2011
Okay, so I love westerns. There aren't enough of them made today. So when I took a chance on this film "The Gundown" (despite the B-Movie Artwork) on the cover, I found myself really glad I did. Now, before I go further, I will admit that this film definitely had a modest budget. Not because of the costumes (great), sets (great), acting quality (great).. but mostly because the town appeared small, and their weren't a lot of wagons, horses etc.. like you saw in films like Tombstone, Wyatt Earp, etc.. (then again who has studio sized money these days). Still, what the film lacked in budget, it made up for in heart. The Director made you care about the characters, who did a good job making you want to like them with their performances. The movie has a gritty quality to it, with a simple story, yet one you wanted to see play out. One of love, and one of redemption. Overall, I think most people will like this film, especially if they like traditional westerns. Don't expect Jon Wu (like the cover may indicate).. Think more Tombstone, or maybe even Deadwood.. (cause there's a lot of language in this film!). I applaud the filmmakers for taking a chance with the western genre. I looked them up after I saw this and saw that they have another one in production.. will be there with bells on. Kudos for keeping the western genre alive... at least for a little longer anyway!
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Action Packed with Great Acting
seg-169-30818725 September 2011
This film was very well done, great acting, lots of action, great story, I love the scenery and that it was filmed in Arizona where much of the old west action actually took place....Great music, directing. Overall the film had a kind of desolate feel to it. If you liked the old Clint Eastwood spaghetti Westerns, then you will probably be very pleased with this film. William Shockley plays a wonderful Villain, while Sheree J. Wilson and the girl playing Cassey May also give solid performances. The Cole Brandt and Hicks actors played well off each other as well. Overall I thought it was just a really good film. The only one person that I felt didn't fit in the movie was Dulce. Few films are made these days that are true westerns, and this film fits the bill. If you want Cowboy's & Aliens this isn't your film, but if you want a good story, characters you can care about, and a movie that beckons back to the days of Wyatt Earp and Tombstone, except a little grittier like the show Deadwood, then this is your movie.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Independent western with all the right stuff.
Abraham Benrubi25 September 2011
I was really impressed with the overall quality of this little gem. It's hard to make a western these days, especially on an independent film budget. Director Dustin Rikert pulls it off with aplomb! Interesting shots and snappy pacing keep your eyes glued to the screen. It really feels hot and dusty like a good western should. Some great sets and production design. Fine performances all around by the cast, and some excellent stunt work. Fans of the genre won't be disappointed. It's a fun story with classic western elements and is well worth your time. Good escapist fare. Makes me want to see more independent film makers take a shot at a truly under represented tradition in modern cinema. Grab a bag of popcorn and enjoy.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Not bad.
jetan14 January 2012
I liked it. Old-fashioned, hokey derring-do. Whore with heart of gold? Check. Impossibly fast gunfighters? Check. Unbelievably bloody climactic gunfight at the end with bodies strewn everywhere? Check, check, check. What's not to like? In the good old days, Audie Murphy would have played the hero who is so straight arrow that one is surprised that he doesn't order a glass of milk in the saloon scenes. Furthermore, I could watch the actress who plays Cassie May for a long time without complaining. I admit that this one is in no way original, but that really isn't the point. If you ever hear yourself complain that they don't make 'em like they used to, then you really ought to give this one some love.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Oh, I'm so conflicted
Gladys_Pym23 June 2011
OK. Let me explain. This was such a good attempt. Some money's been spent, (not on the script, admittedly). It's been spent on some decent sets, a few actors, some (occasionally decent) cinematography.

And in these days, a straightforward Good-v-Evil western is refreshing, or, rather, SHOULD BE refreshing. And this tries hard. And (sadly) fails.

The storyline is OK, derivative, but modernised, and - well - OK, what can I say, it's just alright.

The acting's OK, pretty good, in parts. The hero, well, he's a hero. We are in NO DOUBT that he's a good guy.

The women are - well, women, really. The strong mother is OK, ('til the end bit, where she mainly screams and doesn't shoot anything), but mainly the women are pretty 2 dimensional, apart from the one who has so much plastic in her lips she looks like she has her mouth on upside down, and she disappears from the story in a really unconvincing way.

Oh, I don't know. I wanted to like this. I watched it to the end, (Parenthood meets Mum's Apple Pie), and I'm not left with an AWFUL taste in my mouth, just a bitter disappointment. It should have been better.

OK. To be honest? If the producer had hired a decent director, it would have been better.

And he also should have spent a few dollars on someone to direct his fight scenes. That last one is pretty bad.

But, OK, I gave it a 6 out of 10. Because it wasn't THAT bad. Just it should have, could have, been far better.
19 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Watchable if not Want-able
LeonLouisRicci22 June 2012
If not for the language this looks exactly like a network TV show. The indoor scenes are way over-lit and even the fade to black scene breaks are expectant of a commercial.

The good-guy is cool but a bit over polite and the bad guy is menacing although much of his evil deeds are either verbal or off screen. There is plenty of death by gun, but no squibs or suffering.

Stealing the show is the lovable whore who you can't help but want to help. The supporting cast overall is unremarkable, flat, and uninspiring and most of the drama is delivered "by the book".

The four years later ending is straight out of a weak movie of the week, but despite all this it is watchable if not want-able.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
No where near any good
ray-131-1132789 September 2011
A really strange film, I could not bear to watch it very deeply and had to let it go. The big flaw with it is the pace, the camera, the dialogue, the moments of pregnant pause, sobby moments that go for too long, that were really not worth holding the camera. Its a mess, c'mon. Its crap. Really boring. Sickly cliché, too b grade to even register. No, its rubbish. The lighting and soft lens in the saloons are over done. The scenery does not vary, the set gets stagnant. The camera angles on the lead brunette are unbecoming and the kissing is revolting. There is no voyeur in the sex scene, its mechanical and droll. I hate this film and will erase it from my memory. I hope you guys have learned a lesson, this film looks and feels like a bunch of work mates hung out for a movie weekend on some hired movie set.
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Another western where the plot and idea are better then the actual movie itself. Not bad just very, very slow. I say C-
Tony Heck12 September 2011
"If you had been under my command I'd have had you hung. I will never pay you a cent for protection." Travis McCain (Shockley) has taken over the town of Dead River and the people are living in fear. When Cole Brandt (Walker) comes in to town looking for revenge for the murderer of his wife and child he finds someone that needs to be taken care of. This is a movie where the plot and idea is much better then the movie was. While it had some really good scenes and action, it was just much, much to slow moving and hard to get into. The acting was not bad and it was decently made, it was just really tough to get into. If you are a hardcore western fan this till appeal to you, if you like an occasional one it would be better to go find a different one. Overall, not a bad movie just way to slow to fully keep you interested for the entire time. I give it a C-.

Would I watch again? - I barely made it through once. No
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Ben James21 December 2017
Sometimes I read negative reviews on IMDB and AMAZON and wonder what planet some of the reviewers are on. Not every film can have a budget of millions so it is not always fair to compare smaller indie films like this with the likes of the remake of The Magnificent Seven. But this is a cracking good western and if you like good action and fine performances in the old tradition of the western then this is for you. I can tell you from personal experience that negative reviews without any positivity in them simply shows a lack of understanding. We need more westerns like this to keep the genre alive and kicking!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Bad would be to flatter it !
redx170829 January 2017
And I thought that "The last rites of Ransom Pride" was the worst western I've ever seen. Well, I was wrong. The one star I give is for the first 5 minutes. They looked promising, but that was it. The rest is one big cliché. The acting, (what acting ?) is awful, and they obviously couldn't afford a decent scriptwriter. None of the characters were the least bit interesting, the only one who stood out was the female gunslinger, but only because of a disastrous botox job. We were also treated to the most unsexy sex scene ever made, and i can't help wondering why anybody thought that this rubbish was worth wasting money on. Low budget doesn't necessarily mean bad, but in this case it fits. I can't imagine what possessed people to write those positive reviews, unless they are all close relatives of the director.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Couchpotatoes12 February 2015
WOW, what is wrong with the people reviewing this movie? Are they the actors themselves? This is a terrible movie. A complete waste of time. Do not watch this movie without a bucket next to you because you are going to need it. Those actors are so bad, the story is so cliché that you think a 5 year old wrote it. And then that Allison Gordon... really? Did she do something special to have that role? What a lousy performance was that. This is one of the worst westerns I ever saw in my life. There is absolutely nothing good about it, absolutely nothing! This movie is only good if you have nothing else to do on a Sunday afternoon and you want to fall asleep in your couch. Avoid this movie at all cost! too bad it is impossible to give it a negative score...
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Truly Awful
peter-274923 August 2014
The storyline itself was not bad - although quite a lot of the lead's back story seems to have been lifted straight from the Hell on Wheels series and the script itself was really poor. Two different characters separately wishing him "Godspeed" in the space of a minute for example!

The direction and large parts of the acting however were so clunky that it was verging on spoof - even the worst of the Spaghetti Westerns were not as bad as this and they were made forty years earlier!

In the almost obligatory chase scene near the end of the movie the two protagonists seemed to constantly switch between cantering and trotting on their horses and that's not to mention the fact that bullets took an age to reach their target after being fired!

After watching this I had to check out the director's CV and could not believe that anyone ever sanctioned him to make a second film let alone the couple of dozen that he has done.

Not even a turkey - this was so bad that even "Colonel Sanders" would have rejected it!
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews