A Masterpiece!

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

John Wick meets The Unforgiven directed by Sergio Leone. I have to say I quite enjoyed this film - it was just the thing after a particularly tiring day. Entertaining enough if you switch off at least some of your critical faculties.

Never kill mans dog........................................ and the movie moved way too slow............................................................................

It's intriguing that I found this to be an interesting movie, considering that for the most part I thought it had some difficulty trying to establish what it wanted to be. Certainly it's a western - gunfights and horses and a marshal. It often feels as though it wants to be a comedy. The scenes with the drunken preacher wanting to "save" the town of Denton were humorous, as was a lot of the interplay between the various characters. It's most certainly a revenge story. Paul (Ethan Hawke) is out for blood after the killing of his beloved dog. And don't forget the dog. One of the cutest dogs and most talented dogs you'll ever come across in a movie - it upset me when she was killed partway through. So this is going in a lot of different directions all at once, and yet ... it does work. It's not great. It's not going to win an Oscar. But it works.Hawke was good in his role. He was believable as the lonely drifter seeking revenge after his faithful companion was taken from him for no particular reason. James Ransone as his main adversary Gilly didn't hit home quite as well with me. He was all right. I was more taken with John Travolta as the marshal - who also happened to be Gilly's father. I've seen some criticism of him - suggestions that he was miscast - but I thought he handled the part pretty well, and to be honest I was sympathetic to his character. He didn't do anything. He let Paul off the hook when he could have taken him in after he and Gilly got into a fight to start the whole thing. He told his son and his buddies not to go after Paul - and he wasn't happy when they defied him and did it anyway. He didn't deserve his fate.It's not a lavish movie. The sets are pretty barebones - and the opening credits were bizarre. They reminded me of the opening credits of a 1960's TV show somehow and kind of lowered my expectations from the start of what I should expect. But the movie exceeded those expectations once it got started. I also appreciated that in the end there was no attempt to introduce a romance into the story. Had there been one it surely would have been between Paul and Mary Anne (Taissa Farmiga.) The problem would have been that Mary Anne was supposed to be 16 years old. I suppose in the context of the Old West a romance between them wouldn't have been shocking - but given the current climate in Hollywood, it's probably best that the movie didn't go in that direction. This just turned out to be a pretty decent and interesting movie. (6/10)

This film is ostensibly a "western." But it is more than that.For starters, it isn't a modern version of a western, but instead is more akin to the old spaghetti westerns. The music, the sets, the graphics, etc., are both an homage to spaghetti westerns and a humorous take-off on them.The plot is one you have seen in many westerns. A drifter comes into a small town that is controlled by a psychopath, conflict ensues, and there is a gun battle where the drifter "saves" the town.On one level that is all this is. On another, it is a wry, and dry, take-off on this old, familiar tale because in this film the drifter doesn't go after the town bullies to liberate the town but because they killed his dog.That's right. This is a film where the battle-hardened, killer hero is mush when his dog is killed. He cries.So, right there, you don't have a traditional western or a traditional spaghetti western. In NO OTHER western I have ever seen (hundreds, as I am a die-hard fan) has the hero ever cried. Even Nathan Brittles wasn't crying in She Wore a Yellow Ribbon when he went to his wife's grave.This guy cries and then exacts his revenge.Now, Ethan Hawk is great in this. Just a week earlier we had seen the (dreadful) remake of The Magnificent Seven, which he is also in. However, this film, In a Valley of Violence, is far superior. In Mag 7 II, the town "bully" has hundreds of hired gunmen, all of whom meet their deaths in about 20 minutes. It is so absurd as to be ridiculous.In Valley, there are 4, maybe 5, and none of them are even close to competent, or even scary. There is a bully, his dad, and three guys who just needed a job because they couldn't do anything else.And the gun battle is hilarious. You realize, while watching this film, that you have been had. It starts off to be a standard western, and slowly evolves into rib splitting humor as you watch the gun "battle" unfold. The dialogue is clever. And the humor doesn't beat you over the head. In fact, it is understated, which makes it even better.We enjoyed this film. We will watch it again. Just give it a chance. It will be especially rewarding for people who have a history with old-fashioned westerns, as it is a wry, dry take-off on them that pounds you with subtlety and intelligent humor.Enjoy, pilgrim!