Unforgiven (1 Viewer)

[KGB]

Hell of a thing killin a man. Take away all he's got and all he's ever going to have

 

[wildbill]

Can't believe I've never seen this movie. Excellent.

I liked Unforgiven also, but it is basically a remake of the movie "Shane". Shane is considered by some as the greatest westerns ever made.

I've never heard this, can you unpack it for us?

 

[Smack Tripper]

This movie was almost great but Clint and the stars got in the way. Frankly Morgan Freeman is distractingly anachronistic as a black guy in the old west, and hackman's tone seems off. The concept as an end to the man with no name character is great but Clint always seemed to wrestle with the nuances of leone. I would have LOVED if he lived to direct this film.

As an aside, is road house a western?

 

[flapgreen]

Can't believe I've never seen this movie. Excellent.

I liked Unforgiven also, but it is basically a remake of the movie "Shane". Shane is considered by some as the greatest westerns ever made.

Shane who?

 

[flapgreen]

This movie was almost great but Clint and the stars got in the way. Frankly Morgan Freeman is distractingly anachronistic as a black guy in the old west, and hackman's tone seems off. The concept as an end to the man with no name character is great but Clint always seemed to wrestle with the nuances of leone. I would have LOVED if he lived to direct this film.

As an aside, is road house a western?

Yes, but not Roadhouse 2. That movie sucks.

 

[Kevrunner]

Can't believe I've never seen this movie. Excellent.

I liked Unforgiven also, but it is basically a remake of the movie "Shane". Shane is considered by some as the greatest westerns ever made.

Shane who?

My bad, sorry guys, I was confusing "Unforgiven" with "Pale Rider"

 

[flapgreen]

Caught it on AMC tonight. Never gets old.

 

[tri-man 47]

Caught it on AMC tonight. Never gets old.

When he's in the pigpen, stumbling around and acting frazzled, I keep expecting to hear "Josie ..."

 

[William Munny]

We all got it comin kid

 

[flapgreen]

We all got it comin kid

That's a great line.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

On the list of movies worth owning.

 

[T Bell]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

 

[Bourbon Cowboy]

Check out The Long Riders. The James-Younger Gang. David Carradine is great as Cole Younger.

 

[Fariq]

I like the Duck of Death

 

[zed2283]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Got to see this on the big screen a couple times, once when it opened 20 years back and then in SoCal they had this on the big screen at a theater, you see this a lot in LA/Hollywood where great films will get a 2 week run at an independent theater out there.

It's an amazing Western, Gene Hackman's performance as Little Bill is the real glue of the film IMO and Eastwood show up almost as a cameo or blend of every other character he has played in Westerns going back to the 60s.

Morgan Freeman is amazing in this film as well and was in the middle of a great run for him that included Driving Miss Daisy, Glory, Shawshank, Se7en, Lean on Me, all those were in a 5 year span that included Unforgiven.

Great film including the cinematography and the wide open shots they filmed, Eastwood did some of the music as well.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

Yeah, that's always been my thought.

That moment when they tell him his friend's been killed and he silently picks up the bottle and you don't even notice it at first.

Awesome stuff.

 

[zed2283]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

Yeah, that's always been my thought.

That moment when they tell him his friend's been killed and he silently picks up the bottle and you don't even notice it at first.

Awesome stuff.

And yet that's one of the loudest moments in the film.

 

[Redwes25]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B5lFuTUhso

 

[zed2283]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wGiJcq95Ug

 

[flapgreen]

I never get tired of this movie.

 

[The General]

Will Munny: Who's the fellow owns this ####hole?

[pause]

Will Munny: You, fat man. Speak up.

Skinny Dubois: Uh, I... I own this establishment. I bought the place from Greeley for a thousand dollars.

[Will levels the shotgun, and speaks to someone standing behind Skinny]

Will Munny: You better clear outta there.

Man: Yes, sir.

[scampers out of the way]

Little Bill Daggett: Just hold it right there. Hold it...!

[Will shoots Skinny. Screaming, the women scatter upstairs]

Little Bill Daggett: Well, sir, you are a cowardly son of a #####! You just shot an unarmed man!

Will Munny: Well, he should have armed himself if he's going to decorate his saloon with my friend.

 

[The General]

Little Bill Daggett: I don't deserve this... to die like this. I was building a house.

Will Munny: Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

[aims gun]

Little Bill Daggett: I'll see you in hell, William Munny.

Will Munny: Yeah.

[fires]

Could put 20 more exchanges from the movie in here easy. Such a great movie.

 

[flapgreen]

Great

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Bronco Billy...Eastwood`s best western EVAAAA

 

[flapgreen]

On right now. We all have it coming, kid...

 

[flapgreen]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

Yeah, that's always been my thought.

That moment when they tell him his friend's been killed and he silently picks up the bottle and you don't even notice it at first.

Awesome stuff.

And yet that's one of the loudest moments in the film.

Pretty epic how he he starts drinking while she's talking about all of the stuff he did in the past.

 

[T Bell]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

You're right - the other scene defines the central themes in the story.

I think the end in the bar completes Munny's character, however. For that brief moment he's no longer this bumbling, improbable baddie with an undeservedly inflated reputation from the old days but is a frightening reincarnation of the alcohol-fueled demon he once was. Only now can you appreciate his transformation as a man and the depth of his reverence for his deceased wife, who inspired him to change.

 

[zed2283]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

You're right - the other scene defines the central themes in the story.

I think the end in the bar completes Munny's character, however. For that brief moment he's no longer this bumbling, improbable baddie with an undeservedly inflated reputation from the old days but is a frightening reincarnation of the alcohol-fueled demon he once was. Only now can you appreciate his transformation as a man and the depth of his reverence for his deceased wife, who inspired him to change.

Maybe it's because it's a Clint Eastwood movie, but I never doubted that it was all true and that he would kick everyone's ### in the end.

So for me, I've always seen the final scene a bit differently than you do. Throughout the movie, Munny insists that "he ain't like that no more." But I've always felt like he was trying to convince himself of that fact at least as much as he was trying to convince anyone else. I think Eastwood plays that out perfectly in his portrayal. And yes, it is obvious the reverence he has for his wife and the struggles and efforts he has made to transform himself as a man. But in the end, it turns out that he hasn't changed. At least, you can say that part of him is still there. I actually think that's one of the major threads of the film.

 

[Jayrod]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Yes, very interesting how the movie wouldn't work without THE CLIMAX! No other movie in history could probably say that.

 

[Bull Dozier]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

You're right - the other scene defines the central themes in the story.

I think the end in the bar completes Munny's character, however. For that brief moment he's no longer this bumbling, improbable baddie with an undeservedly inflated reputation from the old days but is a frightening reincarnation of the alcohol-fueled demon he once was. Only now can you appreciate his transformation as a man and the depth of his reverence for his deceased wife, who inspired him to change.

Maybe it's because it's a Clint Eastwood movie, but I never doubted that it was all true and that he would kick everyone's ### in the end.

So for me, I've always seen the final scene a bit differently than you do. Throughout the movie, Munny insists that "he ain't like that no more." But I've always felt like he was trying to convince himself of that fact at least as much as he was trying to convince anyone else. I think Eastwood plays that out perfectly in his portrayal. And yes, it is obvious the reverence he has for his wife and the struggles and efforts he has made to transform himself as a man. But in the end, it turns out that he hasn't changed. At least, you can say that part of him is still there. I actually think that's one of the major threads of the film.

I tend to agree with this. If it was someone other than Eastwood playing this character, it would be easier to buy the "I don't know if he was ever that bad ###" angle. But, with Eastwood, I always felt he was just playing an older character of his older films, sort of like a "the man with no name in old age."

 

[NCCommish]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

You're right - the other scene defines the central themes in the story.

I think the end in the bar completes Munny's character, however. For that brief moment he's no longer this bumbling, improbable baddie with an undeservedly inflated reputation from the old days but is a frightening reincarnation of the alcohol-fueled demon he once was. Only now can you appreciate his transformation as a man and the depth of his reverence for his deceased wife, who inspired him to change.

Maybe it's because it's a Clint Eastwood movie, but I never doubted that it was all true and that he would kick everyone's ### in the end.

So for me, I've always seen the final scene a bit differently than you do. Throughout the movie, Munny insists that "he ain't like that no more." But I've always felt like he was trying to convince himself of that fact at least as much as he was trying to convince anyone else. I think Eastwood plays that out perfectly in his portrayal. And yes, it is obvious the reverence he has for his wife and the struggles and efforts he has made to transform himself as a man. But in the end, it turns out that he hasn't changed. At least, you can say that part of him is still there. I actually think that's one of the major threads of the film.

I tend to agree with this. If it was someone other than Eastwood playing this character, it would be easier to buy the "I don't know if he was ever that bad ###" angle. But, with Eastwood, I always felt he was just playing an older character of his older films, sort of like a "the man with no name in old age."

Well he was. This movie is meant to bring the characters he played in the westerns full circle and really the violent western itself for that matter. In the end this is where a life of violence and revenge brought him. To some podunk town to kill some half ### cowboy even though he is now a farmer well past his prime and nothing to show for everything else that went on. There are some powerful statements being made and not just in the last scene.

 

[Dark Matter]

I like the Duck of Death

"I guess you think I'm kicking you Bob...."

Some great scenes in this movie. I don't think it's overrated or under rated just a solid Eastwood film.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Will Munny: Who's the fellow owns this ####hole?

[pause]

Will Munny: You, fat man. Speak up.

Skinny Dubois: Uh, I... I own this establishment. I bought the place from Greeley for a thousand dollars.

[Will levels the shotgun, and speaks to someone standing behind Skinny]

Will Munny: You better clear outta there.

Man: Yes, sir.

[scampers out of the way]

Little Bill Daggett: Just hold it right there. Hold it...!

[Will shoots Skinny. Screaming, the women scatter upstairs]

Little Bill Daggett: Well, sir, you are a cowardly son of a #####! You just shot an unarmed man!

Will Munny: Well, he should have armed himself if he's going to decorate his saloon with my friend.

Awesome scene and dialogue.

 

[Otis]

Such an awesome movie. Probably my favorite western ever.

 

[RBM]

Such an awesome movie. Probably my favorite western ever.

I think I would definitely put this in my all time top 5.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

It's a great movie but this is not Eastwood's best role. He is doing the role as I posted earlier, sort of all his roles rolled into one. Almost like DiNero doing a mob guy at this point. Good-Bad-Ugly, Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, all better Eastwood roles. Don't get me wrong, Unforgiven is one of the very best movie he has ever been in but it's not the absolute best Eastwood role in a Western IMHO.

 

[Otis]

It's a great movie but this is not Eastwood's best role. He is doing the role as I posted earlier, sort of all his roles rolled into one. Almost like DiNero doing a mob guy at this point. Good-Bad-Ugly, Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, all better Eastwood roles. Don't get me wrong, Unforgiven is one of the very best movie he has ever been in but it's not the absolute best Eastwood role in a Western IMHO.

You're so wrong. This role was so much less the standard western gunslinger than he played in those other movies.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

It's a great movie but this is not Eastwood's best role. He is doing the role as I posted earlier, sort of all his roles rolled into one. Almost like DiNero doing a mob guy at this point. Good-Bad-Ugly, Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, all better Eastwood roles. Don't get me wrong, Unforgiven is one of the very best movie he has ever been in but it's not the absolute best Eastwood role in a Western IMHO.

You're so wrong. This role was so much less the standard western gunslinger than he played in those other movies.

I'm not wrong, I have a differing opinion than you. I love Unforgiven, have watched it many times but there are equal great things going on in the movie such as Gene Hackman who I think won the Oscar for this movie IIRC. Eastwood directed this, wrote some of the music as memory serves me, I have no issue with people that think this is the best Western he did. I just feel as good as it is, this role is somewhat easy for him to play. He was tailor made to do this because it relies on someone who was once a legend in the West.

William Munny is retired, put out to pasture, he doesn't really want any of this. He is lured by money out of desperation and then rides on his laurels all the way to his eventual showdown at the saloon with Little Bill(Hackman). Otis, how many actual Clint Eastwood Westerns have you watched that were done before Unforgiven? Have you seen Two Mules for Sister Sara(I doubt it)? You're not ancient so you would have had to go back and seek them out, and no offense but you don't exactly lead the pack around here for film reviews and recommendations.

Unforgiven is well written, it's one of the best Westerns of all time, I'm not arguing any of that but I think when you look at the whole body of work here you'll find folks that feel Eastwood had stronger roles and was required to put more into roles prior to this one.

 

[NCCommish]

It's a great movie but this is not Eastwood's best role. He is doing the role as I posted earlier, sort of all his roles rolled into one. Almost like DiNero doing a mob guy at this point. Good-Bad-Ugly, Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, all better Eastwood roles. Don't get me wrong, Unforgiven is one of the very best movie he has ever been in but it's not the absolute best Eastwood role in a Western IMHO.

You're so wrong. This role was so much less the standard western gunslinger than he played in those other movies.

I'm not wrong, I have a differing opinion than you. I love Unforgiven, have watched it many times but there are equal great things going on in the movie such as Gene Hackman who I think won the Oscar for this movie IIRC. Eastwood directed this, wrote some of the music as memory serves me, I have no issue with people that think this is the best Western he did. I just feel as good as it is, this role is somewhat easy for him to play. He was tailor made to do this because it relies on someone who was once a legend in the West.

William Munny is retired, put out to pasture, he doesn't really want any of this. He is lured by money out of desperation and then rides on his laurels all the way to his eventual showdown at the saloon with Little Bill(Hackman). Otis, how many actual Clint Eastwood Westerns have you watched that were done before Unforgiven? Have you seen Two Mules for Sister Sara(I doubt it)? You're not ancient so you would have had to go back and seek them out, and no offense but you don't exactly lead the pack around here for film reviews and recommendations.

Unforgiven is well written, it's one of the best Westerns of all time, I'm not arguing any of that but I think when you look at the whole body of work here you'll find folks that feel Eastwood had stronger roles and was required to put more into roles prior to this one.

Well I am ancient and I did see Two Mules. Munny is the logical end of those characters who made their way by the gun. He is not those characters per se. He is far more 3 dimensional. As much as I liked Blondie, Josey and all the rest Munny is the character with most thought put into it. The rest are just standard anti-heroes.

 

[Flying V]

The biggest difference between Munny and all the other previous Eastwood characters is how the audience is asked to stretch their imagination. We are expected to believe that all the other gun hands Clint played could shoot twice as good as the best of the competition. With Munny, we're expected to believe that up to now he's been careful enough to avoid getting killed despite being a killer, yet suddenly he's decided to team up with a partner with no experience that can barely see the broad side of a barn, much less shoot it. When I first saw Unforgiven, I thought it was an attempt at comedy, but the rest of the movie is so serious that I'm not really sure what to make of that.

 

[NCCommish]

The biggest difference between Munny and all the other previous Eastwood characters is how the audience is asked to stretch their imagination. We are expected to believe that all the other gun hands Clint played could shoot twice as good as the best of the competition. With Munny, we're expected to believe that up to now he's been careful enough to avoid getting killed despite being a killer, yet suddenly he's decided to team up with a partner with no experience that can barely see the broad side of a barn, much less shoot it. When I first saw Unforgiven, I thought it was an attempt at comedy, but the rest of the movie is so serious that I'm not really sure what to make of that.

No Munny got old. He lost his edge. That's why we see him dig up the shotgun. It's supposed to be a simple killing of one guy and they had 3 guys Including his old partner. Munny was one of those guys and time took it away.

 

[Otis]

It's a great movie but this is not Eastwood's best role. He is doing the role as I posted earlier, sort of all his roles rolled into one. Almost like DiNero doing a mob guy at this point. Good-Bad-Ugly, Outlaw Josey Wales, High Plains Drifter, all better Eastwood roles. Don't get me wrong, Unforgiven is one of the very best movie he has ever been in but it's not the absolute best Eastwood role in a Western IMHO.

You're so wrong. This role was so much less the standard western gunslinger than he played in those other movies.

I'm not wrong, I have a differing opinion than you. I love Unforgiven, have watched it many times but there are equal great things going on in the movie such as Gene Hackman who I think won the Oscar for this movie IIRC. Eastwood directed this, wrote some of the music as memory serves me, I have no issue with people that think this is the best Western he did. I just feel as good as it is, this role is somewhat easy for him to play. He was tailor made to do this because it relies on someone who was once a legend in the West. William Munny is retired, put out to pasture, he doesn't really want any of this. He is lured by money out of desperation and then rides on his laurels all the way to his eventual showdown at the saloon with Little Bill(Hackman). Otis, how many actual Clint Eastwood Westerns have you watched that were done before Unforgiven? Have you seen Two Mules for Sister Sara(I doubt it)? You're not ancient so you would have had to go back and seek them out, and no offense but you don't exactly lead the pack around here for film reviews and recommendations.

Unforgiven is well written, it's one of the best Westerns of all time, I'm not arguing any of that but I think when you look at the whole body of work here you'll find folks that feel Eastwood had stronger roles and was required to put more into roles prior to this one.

Well I am ancient and I did see Two Mules. Munny is the logical end of those characters who made their way by the gun. He is not those characters per se. He is far more 3 dimensional. As much as I liked Blondie, Josey and all the rest Munny is the character with most thought put into it. The rest are just standard anti-heroes.

This.

 

[T Bell]

I was just reading some comments on a top 10 western movie list and I came across this, which I felt was an interesting way of looking at the movie:

For me, Unforgiven falls into a very special category of movie. Just occasionally it seems as though the entire point of a film, the entire reason that it exists at all, are contained in one scene, one moment or even one look.

For the majority of Unforgiven, Eastwood's character (William Munny) is spoken of as being the world's biggest badass, but all we see of him for most of the film is a tired old man who is crap with a rifle, can't stay on his horse and then gets pneumonia followed by an ###-kicking.

We're told that Munny had been changed by his wife, that he had turned away from violence and drink, but we start to wonder if any of the stories about him could be true.

He's a loser, and now a nobody.

But the shoot-out in the saloon at the end of the film brings redemption for Munny. It's not the sort of redemption that would usually work in a film. After all, his wife had made him a better man, and she certainly wouldn't have approved of him leaving the kids and going off to kill a stranger.

But Munny prevailing (so dramatically) in that single gun-fight allows us to see what kind of man he really had been. And we can only understand the change that his wife had brought about in him by learning first-hand what a badass killer he once had been.

All of that comes out only because of a long and steady set-up that leads to an all-important moment in a single scene. And if that scene wasn't in the movie then there wouldn't have been a movie at all.

Sure, that scene is needed from the movie standpoint. But the scene that sums up the entire point of the film is when Munny and the Kid are waiting by the tree for the money.

You're right - the other scene defines the central themes in the story.

I think the end in the bar completes Munny's character, however. For that brief moment he's no longer this bumbling, improbable baddie with an undeservedly inflated reputation from the old days but is a frightening reincarnation of the alcohol-fueled demon he once was. Only now can you appreciate his transformation as a man and the depth of his reverence for his deceased wife, who inspired him to change.

Maybe it's because it's a Clint Eastwood movie, but I never doubted that it was all true and that he would kick everyone's ### in the end.

So for me, I've always seen the final scene a bit differently than you do. Throughout the movie, Munny insists that "he ain't like that no more." But I've always felt like he was trying to convince himself of that fact at least as much as he was trying to convince anyone else. I think Eastwood plays that out perfectly in his portrayal. And yes, it is obvious the reverence he has for his wife and the struggles and efforts he has made to transform himself as a man. But in the end, it turns out that he hasn't changed. At least, you can say that part of him is still there. I actually think that's one of the major threads of the film.

I tend to agree with this. If it was someone other than Eastwood playing this character, it would be easier to buy the "I don't know if he was ever that bad ###" angle. But, with Eastwood, I always felt he was just playing an older character of his older films, sort of like a "the man with no name in old age."

Well he was. This movie is meant to bring the characters he played in the westerns full circle and really the violent western itself for that matter. In the end this is where a life of violence and revenge brought him. To some podunk town to kill some half ### cowboy even though he is now a farmer well past his prime and nothing to show for everything else that went on. There are some powerful statements being made and not just in the last scene.

This.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I watched this movie yet again the other day.

It struck me this time that one core question is why the woman (who was much younger) who would become his wife would love him and marry him, though it is alluded to that she was a good woman and that she came from a good family, and he was such a despicable monster.

One clue that "why" he kills matters to him is that he accepts the mission in the first place, as does Ned, because it is explained that the deed they are revenging was a foul deed of the worst kind, a woman was cut up, disfigured, mutilated. But even then his mission seems muddled, morally ambiguous, especially because it's clear he has failed as a farmer and he needs the money for his children. - The telling thing for me is that Munny has no taste any longer for killing, it had gone out of him even until almost the end of the movie. Until the townsfolk killed his friend, Ned. Then the light switches on, he goes to the bottle which drives his hate, his fury, his lust for killing, which he is just plain good at, better than anything else he does and better than almost any human in the world. He is in short a killing machine and they have messed with the wrong man. And they are all guilty, and he is vengeance, justice where there was none. Because after all this all started when the prostitutes were not given their justice from Day 1. Munny gave them that, the lowest of the low in the old west, he gave them justice.

At the very end it is explained he has used his gains to create a new life for his family in the grocer business, he fulfilled his promise to his wife and his friend. That is why she loved him, she saw and gave him redemption, which he fulfilled.

In the background there is the explanation that the west was myth. You have men like English Bob and even Lil' Bill who were killers themselves but those who wrote the history created guys in white hats and those in black hats, but in reality there was little to any difference between any of them.

 

[NCCommish]

I watched this movie yet again the other day.

It struck me this time that one core question is why the woman (who was much younger) who would become his wife would love him and marry him, though it is alluded to that she was a good woman and that she came from a good family, and he was such a despicable monster.

One clue that "why" he kills matters to him is that he accepts the mission in the first place, as does Ned, because it is explained that the deed they are revenging was a foul deed of the worst kind, a woman was cut up, disfigured, mutilated. But even then his mission seems muddled, morally ambiguous, especially because it's clear he has failed as a farmer and he needs the money for his children. - The telling thing for me is that Munny has no taste any longer for killing, it had gone out of him even until almost the end of the movie. Until the townsfolk killed his friend, Ned. Then the light switches on, he goes to the bottle which drives his hate, his fury, his lust for killing, which he is just plain good at, better than anything else he does and better than almost any human in the world. He is in short a killing machine and they have messed with the wrong man. And they are all guilty, and he is vengeance, justice where there was none. Because after all this all started when the prostitutes were not given their justice from Day 1. Munny gave them that, the lowest of the low in the old west, he gave them justice.

At the very end it is explained he has used his gains to create a new life for his family in the grocer business, he fulfilled his promise to his wife and his friend. That is why she loved him, she saw and gave him redemption, which he fulfilled.

In the background there is the explanation that the west was myth. You have men like English Bob and even Lil' Bill who were killers themselves but those who wrote the history created guys in white hats and those in black hats, but in reality there was little to any difference between any of them.

Nice post

 

[flapgreen]

Maybe the best movie I've ever seen.

 

[flapgreen]

Such an awesome movie. Probably my favorite western ever.

I've seen all of the Eastwood Westerns and love every one of them, but Unforgiven is probably my favorite, followed very closely by The Outlaw Josey Wales and The Good, the bad, and the ugly.

 

[flapgreen]

Just finished it on HBO. Never gets old. Still as good as the first time I watched it.