Review: Unforgiven (dir. by Clint Eastwood)


“It’s a hell of a thing, killing a man. You take away all he’s got and all he’s ever gonna have.” — William Munny

There is a point in Unforgiven when the familiar fantasy of the Western gunfighter finally collapses under the weight of what killing actually means. Clint Eastwood’s 1992 masterpiece is a revenge story, a character study, and an unusually merciless critique of the myths that turned killers into folk heroes. It takes nearly every image associated with the classic Western—the lone rider, the righteous bounty, the corrupt frontier town, the feared gunslinger, the climactic saloon showdown—and asks what those images would look like if the people involved had to suffer the consequences afterward. The answer is bleak, often grimly funny, and far more powerful than a simple “anti-Western” label suggests.

Eastwood stars as William Munny, a former outlaw and murderer trying to survive as a widowed pig farmer in Kansas. He has two young children, a failing farm, and little talent for the peaceful life he has supposedly embraced. At the beginning of the film, Munny is practically the opposite of the cool, razor-sharp gunfighters Eastwood played in his younger years. He falls into mud, cannot shoot straight, and looks exhausted before the real journey even begins. That physical decline matters because Eastwood wants the audience to see the distance between a Western legend and the actual, aging human being beneath it.

Munny’s chance to return to violence arrives when the Schofield Kid, an arrogant young would-be gunslinger, offers him a share of a bounty. In the town of Big Whiskey, Wyoming, two cowboys have viciously cut up a prostitute named Delilah Fitzgerald. The town’s sheriff, Little Bill Daggett, punishes them with a fine paid to the brothel owner rather than giving Delilah anything resembling justice. Furious, the other prostitutes gather money and put out a reward for the men responsible. Munny initially hesitates, but the bounty is enough to draw him out of retirement. He convinces his old partner Ned Logan to ride with him, and the three men head toward Big Whiskey.

On paper, that setup sounds like the start of a traditional revenge Western. The crime is vicious, the local law is corrupt, and armed men set out to punish the guilty. Unforgiven, though, immediately complicates every part of that formula. The women have every reason to be furious, but their bounty does not turn the mission into a clean act of justice. Munny and Ned may be targeting cruel men, but they are still going to kill them for money. The Schofield Kid talks about the bounty like it is an adventure, but he has no real idea what killing another person does to someone. The film keeps refusing the easy emotional release that a more conventional Western would offer.

Eastwood’s direction is particularly sharp whenever violence finally breaks out. There are no elegant shootouts designed to make the viewer cheer. Guns misfire, men miss, people panic, and the victims do not fall over conveniently after being hit. When Munny and Ned shoot one of the cowboys, the sequence is awkward, tense, and almost miserable to watch. The wounded man suffers for a long time, calling out for water while his companions are too frightened to help him. Munny does not suddenly look like an unbeatable hero. He looks like a man who has made a terrible choice and now has to stand there listening to the result.

That approach makes Unforgiven feel much harsher than most Westerns, but it also gives the film its emotional weight. It is not saying that violence is never understandable. The cowboys who attacked Delilah are not treated as innocent victims, and Little Bill’s indifference to her suffering is infuriating. What the movie understands is that a justified act can still be ugly, frightening, and spiritually damaging. Killing someone may solve a practical problem, but it does not automatically restore dignity or erase pain. The movie’s view of revenge is not that it never works; it is that it always costs more than the stories promise.

Eastwood’s performance is one of the reasons the film lands so hard. William Munny is clearly connected to the Eastwood screen persona audiences knew from earlier Westerns, but he is a far sadder and more frightening version of it. Munny’s past is revealed gradually through other characters’ stories. Before he married Claudia, he was drunk, violent, and seemingly capable of killing anyone who got in his way. Claudia helped turn him toward a better life, and after her death he has tried to honor that change. Yet the movie never suggests that redemption has erased who he was. It only suggests that he has managed to keep that part of himself under control.

As the story moves forward, Munny becomes increasingly sick, angry, and emotionally stripped down. His old skills come back, but the return is not triumphant. It is more like watching someone relapse into a destructive part of themselves. Eastwood plays this change with remarkable restraint. He does not overdo the anger or announce the transformation with long speeches. Instead, Munny’s face gets harder, his voice becomes flatter, and his decisions become more final. By the end, he has become the frightening killer people said he was, and the movie makes that feel tragic rather than exhilarating.

Gene Hackman gives one of the film’s best performances as Little Bill Daggett, the sheriff of Big Whiskey. Little Bill is cruel, blunt, and completely convinced that he is the only person keeping the town from falling apart. He sees himself as a realist. In his mind, the cowboys have paid for their crime, the prostitutes are causing unnecessary trouble, and every outside gunman is a threat to the peace he has built. But his “peace” depends on denying Delilah justice and beating anyone who challenges his authority. He is not a noble lawman protecting civilization from barbarism. He is a violent man with a badge who has decided that his version of order matters more than anyone else’s pain.

Hackman makes Little Bill compelling because he never plays him as a cartoon villain. The character can be funny, conversational, and even oddly charming when he is talking about building his house or explaining how a gunfight really works. Those ordinary details make his cruelty more believable. Little Bill is not a monster because he twirls his mustache or enjoys evil for its own sake. He is a monster because he has made violence routine. He can beat a man nearly to death, then return to discussing carpentry as if nothing meaningful has happened.

The movie’s fascination with mythmaking is another reason it remains so great. Unforgiven constantly contrasts what people say about gunfighters with what gunfighters are actually like. Richard Harris appears as English Bob, an aging outlaw who has turned himself into a storybook figure. He travels with W. W. Beauchamp, a writer who records exaggerated tales of duels, bravery, and glamorous frontier violence. English Bob wants to be remembered as the sort of man old Westerns love: a polished, fearless killer who can outdraw anyone in a fair fight.

Little Bill quickly destroys that image, humiliating English Bob and explaining that most gunfights are not won by the fastest hand or the bravest heart. They are won by whoever gets lucky, whoever fires first, or whoever is less scared at the right moment. That speech is one of the clearest examples of what Unforgiven is doing with the genre. It does not merely say that the old stories were exaggerated. It shows why people prefer exaggeration. The truth is messy, cowardly, and often too ugly to make a satisfying legend.

The Schofield Kid represents the danger of believing those legends too completely. He talks big about killing men, insists he is a famous gunfighter, and assumes the bounty will make him rich and important. But when the moment comes, he cannot handle the reality of what he has done. After taking a life, he drinks heavily and admits that he has never killed anyone before. His fantasy collapses almost instantly. Munny’s response is one of the film’s coldest and most honest moments: when you kill a man, you take away everything he has and everything he is ever going to have. There is no speech about courage, justice, or glory. There is only the permanent fact of death.

Morgan Freeman is excellent as Ned Logan, Munny’s old partner and closest friend. Ned has a quiet decency that does not erase his violent past but makes clear that he wants no part of it anymore. His scenes with Munny feel lived-in, as if the two men understand each other without needing to explain their history. Ned knows exactly what Munny used to be, and that knowledge makes him nervous about what his friend may become again. Freeman brings warmth and humor to the movie, which makes the eventual loss of that warmth feel devastating.

Ned is especially important because he shows that a person can decide not to keep living by old violent rules. He has a life with Sally Two Trees, and when the killing becomes real, he chooses to leave rather than continue. That choice separates him from Munny. Both men have done terrible things, but Ned recognizes that he has reached the point where he cannot go back. Munny, on the other hand, is eventually pulled all the way back into the identity he thought he had escaped.

Visually, Unforgiven is one of Eastwood’s most beautiful films, although “beautiful” may not be the first word that comes to mind while watching it. The landscapes are often gray, rainy, muddy, and lonely. Big Whiskey is not a romantic frontier town full of colorful saloons and grand main streets. It is wet, cramped, and miserable. The open country does not feel liberating either. It feels empty and dangerous, a place where a wounded man can die slowly because help is too far away. Cinematographer Jack N. Green gives the film a somber, dusk-like look that fits its mood perfectly.

The final confrontation in the saloon is one of the most famous scenes in Eastwood’s career because it briefly gives viewers the kind of gunfighter moment they have been waiting for. Munny walks into Big Whiskey through the rain, enters the saloon, and becomes the nightmare Little Bill and the others have feared. He kills with shocking speed and delivers lines that sound immediately iconic. For a few minutes, the old Eastwood myth appears to return in full. The silent killer is back, the bad men are terrified, and the audience can feel the raw force of the scene.

But Unforgiven refuses to turn that climax into a victory lap. Munny’s rampage is not heroic liberation. It is grief, rage, alcohol, and guilt exploding through a man who has lost the fragile stability he built after leaving violence behind. He is not reclaiming some glorious identity. He is becoming the worst version of himself again. The scene is undeniably thrilling in a purely cinematic sense, but Eastwood makes sure the thrill feels contaminated. We are watching a legend come alive, but the movie has spent two hours teaching us that legends are usually built on suffering.

That is why Unforgiven became Eastwood’s Western magnum opus. It is not just a great Western made by a star who knew the genre inside out; it is the film where he fully confronted the meaning of his own Western image. Eastwood began deconstructing that image with High Plains Drifter, where the mysterious stranger was less a traditional hero than a ghostly, cruel force of revenge. He continued the process in The Outlaw Josey Wales, a more expansive and emotional film that questioned authority and showed an outlaw finding a kind of community, even while preserving much of the old gunslinger charisma. With Unforgiven, Eastwood completes that deconstruction of the Western film genre.

In Unforgiven, there is no clean heroism left behind the gunfighter’s reputation. The lone rider is exhausted and morally compromised. The sheriff is a bully. The bounty is not justice in any simple sense. The famous gunfighter is often a fraud, a coward, or simply lucky. And the man who really is capable of becoming a legend is also capable of committing horrifying acts. Eastwood does not dismiss the Western’s power; if anything, he understands that power better than almost anyone. He knows why audiences respond to the image of a lone man walking into a saloon to face impossible odds.

What makes the film so enduring is that it asks viewers to look beyond that image. Who dies so the hero can become a legend? Who gets turned into a footnote in someone else’s story? What does the survivor carry afterward? Those questions give Unforgiven a moral weight that few Westerns, revisionist or otherwise, can match. It is a film about violence, but it is also about memory, regret, masculinity, and the lies people tell to make brutality seem noble. By its final fade-out, Unforgiven leaves the Western standing not as a celebration of violence, but as a haunted reckoning with everything violence destroys.

Hero of the Day: Josey Wales (The Outlaw Josey Wales)


In the pantheon of American cinematic heroes, Josey Wales—the stoic, vengeance-driven farmer turned outlaw portrayed by Clint Eastwood in The Outlaw Josey Wales (1976)—stands as a uniquely compelling figure. Unlike the clean-cut, morally unambiguous heroes of classical Westerns, Wales is forged in the crucible of tragic loss. After Union raiders murder his wife and child and destroy his Missouri farm, Josey joins a Confederate guerrilla unit, only to watch his comrades massacred while trying to surrender. This backstory does not simply justify his violence; it transforms him into a melancholic ghost, a man who has already lost everything that once gave his life meaning. What makes him immediately charismatic is not his toughness, but his profound, wounded humanity—a man who rarely smiles, yet whose weary eyes carry the weight of a world that has betrayed him.

A second source of Josey’s charisma is his radical, almost spiritual independence. Throughout the film, he is hunted by Union soldiers, bounty hunters, and carpetbaggers, yet he refuses to bend to any authority. When a Union captain demands he “change his way of thinking,” Josey’s reply—“I reckon so”—is an empty promise spoken with a cigarette in his mouth and a pistol in his hand. He operates according to a private moral code rather than the law of the state. This rebellion against institutional power resonates deeply because Josey is not an anarchist or a nihilist; he is a man who has seen government-sanctioned terror and chooses instead to trust only his own judgment. In an era of disillusionment following Vietnam and Watergate, audiences embraced Wales as a hero who would never again place his faith in flags or orders.

Paradoxically, what makes Josey Wales most interesting is his quiet, reluctant capacity for community. Despite his vow of solitude, he accumulates a ragtag family: a Navajo elder named Lone Watie, a young Kansas woman seeking refuge, and even a grizzled old bear of a man. Josey never seeks followers—they gravitate toward him because they sense his integrity beneath the flinty exterior. In one of the film’s most touching sequences, he teaches a young, traumatized girl how to prepare food, his gruffness softening into something resembling paternal tenderness. This tension—between the lone avenger and the accidental patriarch—gives Josey a dramatic complexity that pure antiheroes lack. He wants to be left alone, but he cannot ignore suffering; he carries death on his hip, yet he plants seeds for the future.

Beyond his immediate charisma, Josey Wales established a template for the unglamorous, psychologically examined gunslinger that would define the next generation of Westerns and beyond. Unlike the mythic, invincible cowboys of John Ford’s era, Wales is tired, grieving, and physically fallible—his violence carries weight and consequence, not spectacle. This raw, de-glamorized portrait directly influenced Eastwood’s own Unforgiven (1992), where William Munny echoes Josey’s haunted past and reluctant violence, and Tombstone (1993), where Kurt Russell’s Wyatt Earp struggles with similar moral weariness beneath the badge. Most notably, the Red Dead Redemption video game series (2010–2018) owes an immense debt to Josey Wales: protagonist John Marston, a former outlaw dragged back into violence to protect his family, and Arthur Morgan, a dying gunslinger questioning his own loyalty and morality, both embody that same melancholic, code-driven solitude. Josey’s influence transformed the Western hero from a cartoon of virtue into a tragic figure wrestling with his own demons.

Josey Wales endures as a charismatic and interesting hero because he embodies a set of contradictions that feel authentically human: he is brutal yet gentle, solitary yet communal, vengeful yet merciful. He does not seek redemption through love or law, but through an unspoken understanding that some wounds can never heal—and yet life must go on. By the film’s end, when he faces his nemesis and chooses not to kill in cold blood, Josey completes an arc that is less about revenge fulfilled than about a man deciding that his future need not be defined by his past. And by rejecting the glamorous myth of the gunslinger, Josey Wales paved the way for a more honest, sorrowful vision of the Old West—one where heroes bleed, doubt, and sometimes simply walk away, leaving their spurs in the dust.

Hero of the Day

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Clint Eastwood Edition


Clint Eastwood in Revenge of the Creature (1955)

4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today is Clint Eastwood’s 95th birthday!

Though Clint famously had to go to Italy to really get his film career going, he’s gone on to become an icon of American film.  While his early films were often criticized as glorifying violence and of being reactionary, his later films have — more often than not — been meditations on aging, moral ambiguity, and what a lifetime of violence does to a person’s soul.  He’s a filmmaker whose legacy will be rediscovered and probably appreciated in the future.

Here are….

4 Shots From 4 Clint Eastwood Films

For A Few Dollars More (1965, dir by Sergio Leone)

Dirty Harry (1971, dir by Don Siegel)

Unforgiven (1992, dir by Clint Eastwood)

Gran Torino (2008, dir by Clint Eastwood)

Lisa Reviews An Oscar Winner: Unforgiven (dir by Clint Eastwood)


The 1992 Best Picture winner, Unforgiven, begins as a story of frontier justice.

In Kansas, a young and cocky cowboy who calls himself the Schofield Kid (Jaimz Woolvett) rides up to an isolated hog farm.  He’s looking for Will Munny (Clint Eastwood), a notorious outlaw with a reputation for being a ruthless killer.  Instead, he just finds a broken down, elderly widower who is trying to raise two young children and who can barely even manage to climb on a horse.  Will Munny, the murderer, has become Will Munny the farmer.  He gave up his former life when he got married.

The Schofield Kid claims to be an experienced gunfighter who has killed a countless number of men.  He explains that a group of sex workers in Wyoming have put a $1,000 bounty on two men, Quick Mike (David Mucci) and his friend, Davey Bunting (Rob Campbell).  Quick Mike cut up one of the women when she laughed at how unimpressively endowed he was.  While Davey didn’t take part in the crime, he was present when it happened and he didn’t do anything to stop it.  The local sheriff, a man named Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman), had Davey give the woman’s employer several horses as compensation.  The Kid wants Munny to help him collect the bounty.

At first, Munny refuses to help the Kid.  But, when he realizes that he’s on the verge of losing his farm, Munny changes his mind.  He and his former partner, Ned Logan (Morgan Freeman), join with the Kid and the three of them head to Wyoming.  Along the way, they discover that the Kid is severely nearsighted and can hardly handle a pistol.

Meanwhile, in the town of Big Whiskey, Wyoming, Little Bill ruthlessly enforces the peace.  He’s a charismatic man who is building a house and bringing what many would consider to be civilization to the Old West. When we first meet Little Bill, he seems like a likable guy.  The town trusts him.  His deputies worship him.  He has a quick smile but he’s willing to stand his ground.  But it soon becomes apparent that, underneath that smile and friendly manner, Bill is a tyrant and a petty authoritarian who treats the town as his own personal kingdom.    Little Bill has a strict rule.  No one outside of law enforcement is allowed to carry a gun in his town.  When another bounty hunter, English Bob (Richard Harris), comes to town to kill the two cowboys, Little Bill humiliates him and sends him on his way but not before recruiting Bob’s traveling companion, writer W.W. Beauchamp (Saul Rubinek), to write Bill’s life story.  Bill’s not that much different from the outlaws that he claims to disdain.  Like them, Bill understands that value of publicity.

Unforgiven starts as a traditional western but it soon becomes something else all together.  As the Schofield Kid discovers, there’s a big difference between talking about killing a man and actually doing it.  Piece-by-piece, Unforgiven deconstructs the legends of the old west.  Gunfights are messy.  Gunfighters are not noble.  Davey Bunting is the only man in town to feel guilty about what happened but, because he’s included in the bounty, he still dies an agonizing death.  Quick Mike is killed not in the town square during a duel but while sitting in an outhouse.  Ned and Munny struggle with the prospect of going back to their old ways, with Munny having to return to drinking before he can once again become the fearsome killer that he was in the past.  And Little Bill, the man who says that he’s all about taming the west and bringing civilization to a lawless land, turns out to be just as ruthless a killer as the rest.  A lot of people are dead by the end of Unforgiven.  Some of them were truly bad.  Some of them were good.  Most of them were in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Everyone’s got it coming, to paraphrase Will Munny.

With its violent storyline, deliberate pacing, and its shots of the desolate yet beautiful western landscape, Clint Eastwood’s film feels like a natural continuation of the Spaghetti westerns that he made with Sergio Leone.  (Unforgiven is dedicated to both Leone and Don Seigel.)  Unforgiven was the first of Eastwood’s directorial efforts to be nominated for Best Picture and also the first to win.  It’s brutal meditation on violence and the truth behind the legends of the American frontier.  Eastwood gives one of his best and ultimately most frightening performances as Will Munny.  Gene Hackman won his second Oscar for playing Little Bill Daggett.

Unforgiven holds up well today.  Hackman’s Little Bill Dagget feels like the 19th century version of many of today’s politicians and unelected bureaucrats, authoritarians who claims that their only concern is the greater good but whose main interest is really just increasing their own power.  Unforgiven remains one Clint Eastwood’s best films and one of the best westerns ever made.  Leone would have been proud.

4 Shots From 4 Best Picture Winners: The 1990s


4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today, I’m using this feature to take a look at the history of the Academy Award for Best Picture.  Decade by decade, I’m going to highlight my picks for best of the winning films.  To start with, here are 4 shots from 4 Films that won Best Picture during the 1990s!  Here are….

4 Shots From 4 Best Picture Winners: The 1990s

The Silence Of The Lambs (1991, dir by Jonathan Demme, DP: Tak Fujimoto)

Unforgiven (1992, dir by Clint Eastwood, DP: Jack N. Green)

Schindler’s List (1993, dir by Steven Spielberg, DP: Janusz Kamiński)

Shakespeare In Love (1998, dir by John Madden, DP: Richard Greatrex)

4 Shots From 4 Films: Special Clint Eastwood Edition


Clint Eastwood in Revenge of the Creature (1955)

4 Shots From 4 Films is just what it says it is, 4 shots from 4 of our favorite films. As opposed to the reviews and recaps that we usually post, 4 Shots From 4 Films lets the visuals do the talking!

Today is Clint Eastwood’s 90th birthday!

Though Clint famously had to go to Italy to really get his film career going, he’s gone on to become an icon of American film.  While his early films were often criticized as glorifying violence and of being reactionary, his later films have — more often than not — been meditations on aging, moral ambiguity, and what a lifetime of violence does to a person’s soul.  Though Eastwood has fallen out-of-favor with a few critics as a result of the speech he gave at the 2012 Republican Convention (Film Twitter, to the shock of no one, had a particularly over-the-top reaction to it as many of them discovered, I guess for the first time, that not every artist is a Leftist), he’s a filmmaker whose legacy will be rediscovered and probably appreciated in the future.

Here are….

4 Shots From 4 Films

For A Few Dollars More (1965, dir by Sergio Leone)

Dirty Harry (1971, dir by Don Siegel)

Unforgiven (1992, dir by Clint Eastwood)

Gran Torino (2008, dir by Clint Eastwood)

Unforgiven Remake to be a Samurai Film


Anyone who complains that all Hollywood does nowadays are sequels and remakes should think before they start to rant. Sequels and remakes are not exclusive to Hollywood (Bollywood anyone) and it’s been a tried-and-true practice both inside and outside the glitzy confines of Hollywood. Sergio Leone took classic Kurosawa samurai films and remade them into the classic spaghetti Westerns which made Clint Eastwood a household name (pre-RNC chair).

Now Japan is looking to take one of the best Westerns of the past quarter-century in Eastwood’s own critically-acclaimed and award-winning Unforgivenand remake it as a samurai film set in 188’s Japan. The film will star Ken Watanabe in the same role Eastwood had in his film with fellow actors Akira Emoto and Koichi Sato rounding out the cast. The remake will have the title of Yurusarezaru-mono and will closely follow the same story of Eastwood’s film with just changes in location and other cultural changes.

The film will be directed by award-winning Korean filmmaker See Sang-il and should see a release date sometime around 2013.

I, for one, am looking forward to see how this remake will turn out. Jidaigeki (samurai period films) have seen a resurgence in Japanese cinema these past couple years and it’s going to be interesting to see how one of Eastwood’s Western masterpieces will turn out as a samurai drama. Fans of both genres have a mutual understanding that the Western and the samurai films share similar themes and character traits so it shouldn’t have been a surprise that Unforgiven will be remade into a samurai. What is a surprise is that Japan took twenty years to decide to do it.

Source: Variety

Review: Open Range (dir. by Kevin Costner)


2003 marked a sort of a small comeback for Kevin Costner both as a director and as an actor. The work in question was the very well-done Western, Open Range. Open Range was a moderately budgeted film which has more in common with Costner’s first directorial work, Dances with Wolves than his last big-budget flop, The Postman.

The film was an adaptation of the Lauran Paine novel, The Open Range Men, and it captures much of the themes found in the novel. This was probably due to the fact that screenwriter Craig Storper didn’t deviate from the novel’s basic story. There were no superfluous action sequences and gunfights to ratchet up the action. Everything about Open Range was about the gradual and inevitable final confrontation between the “free-grazers” and the “barbed-wire” men. The free-grazers were played by Kevin Costner and Robert Duvall as Charles Waite and Boss Spearman, respectively. On the other side of the conflict was Michael Gambon playing Denton Baxter, the ruthless land-baron whose attempt to keep the free-grazers from grazing on his land also hides another agenda. Caught in-between these two strong-willed groups were the people in the town Baxter pretty much controls through his “town marshal” (played with fake bravado by James Russo) and the herd helpers under Boss Spearman’s employ.

The theme of freedom to roam the open country versus the rights of a landowner echoes throughout the film. Set in the latter end of the 19th-century, Open Range shows the clash of the more natural ways of the Old West slowly eroding to be replaced by the more industrial, monopolistic practices that became prevalent during the 1880’s, also known in US History as the Gilded Age. Even the personalities of the conflicting characters mirror this theme as the free-grazers only want to use the land as it has been used for years upon years and thats sharing between all men of the West. The land-baron has other ideas in mind and everything boils down to him owning everything around him, even if it means using ruthless tactics to gather even more property.

Open Range also has a bit of modernism in its subplot of Charley Waite’s growing attraction to the sister of the town doctor and the same sister’s well-rounded characterization. It’s not often that a traditional Western shows women in a very positive light instead of the usual submissive and stay-at-home characters of Western’s past. This could also be attributed to the wonderful, underrated performance by Annette Bening who plays Sue Barlow, the doctor’s sister and Charley Waite’s love interest. Bening doesn’t play Sue as the traditional Western female. She also doesn’t go overboard and turn Sue into a 20th-century feminist. She instead plays the character as someone who knows her place in the world, but also one who is strong-willed and willing to stand for what is right.

Open Range was a wonderful throwback to what made such modern Westerns like Unforgiven and Tombstone such a success both for traditionalists and new fans. Kevin Costner’s direction was very low-key. Allowing the story to tell itself at its own pace until the final confrontation. The final gunfight in the end gets a lot of well-earned attention from critics and fans. The entire sequence takes at least 10-15 minutes from start to finish. The fight itself was done in a realistic fashion. There was no sharpshooter dead-eyes in this film, but individuals who had skill but still missed. It was a fight where it wasn’t who was the fastest, but who was the calmest under fire. There’s also a suddenness to the brutality in the final gunfight that demystifies the old-style Western shootouts of past. Some complained that the film was very slow and took too long to get to the “good stuff”, but I actually thought the gradual pacing of most of the film’s length gave the final confrontation even more impact. Costner seem to have learned the lesson all good directors know: less means more.

Open Range won’t go down as a great piece of film making. It surely won’t go down as one of the best in history. What Open Range did accomplish was putting the Western back to its epic and majestic roots, but at the same time keeping the intimacy of a character-driven story. In time, Open Range would probably go down as one of the underrated gems of the last decade and find a place next to its closest comparison, Unforgiven, as one of the best Westerns of the new era.