Especially when they’re not seen again later in the film. Good joke.
Yes, but not entirely, because later in the movie that guy Robert Woods made a deal with is killed by someone with big knife and I think Lincoln Tate of the trio carried that knife. 
Jane got a gun
Not good and not bad either. I did not enjoy this one very much. Somehow the different angles and flashback story telling is not my piece of cake, Why did Jane learn to shoot her gun? Also the acting of Joel Edgerton did not fit his part. And the bad guys were predictable in their roles.
Positive point was the lighting during the night conversation. Beautiful blue lit
’South of Heaven West of Hell’ Dir: Dwight Yoakam (2000)
Picked this up yesterday at a charity shop, in a 2 for £1 deal ( my other choice was Rollerball 1975 
)
Hadn’t heard of it before, and despite it having a very interesting cast of Peckinpah veterans and contemporary character actors, I was cautious, and had low expectations. Checked out some very harsh reviews on IMDB, some claiming it the worst waste of time, badly made etc. with many giving it 1 out of 10.
Admittedly it’s a little slow in places and definitely quirky, but I found it to be something of a hidden gem. The sort of film, if made in the 70s, would have undoubtedly become a cult classic by now.
I think one problem is with the DVD packaging which like so many other dud westerns, makes the claim that it’s somewhere between ‘The Wild Bunch’ and ‘Unforgiven’ … same way every shitty gangster movie says it’s the best thing since ‘Goodfellas’ and ‘The Godfather’.
Don’t want to laud it with OTT praise, but it’s a very worthy and genuinely atmospheric movie, which for fans of character actors such as Luke Askew, Matt Clark, Peter Fonda, Bo Hopkins, Scott Wilson and Bud Cort, is a real treat … and those guys in particular really shine.
There’s some pretty raw period detail which is both shocking and very well handled by first time director, Yoakam. The reviewers on IMDB all seem particularly angry with Dwight, whose music they love … but those simple minded shitkickers didn’t understand his movie 
I’d watch it again, happily - 6 out of 10 from me.
Sorry, one of the worst westerns I’ve ever seen. I mean, I laughed through it. I listed it as no. 1 in my Bottom 20. Oh well, if it is no. 1 then it actually means: it is worst of them all.
That’s ok, but trust me there are dozens of much worse western movies out there … which are so bad they’d induce me to throw bricks at the TV.
The majority of non SWs shown on movies4men are of this ilk … films like ‘Age of the Gunslinger’ … ‘The Virginian’ … ‘The Last Rites of Ransom Pride’ etc are all hopelessly inept in every department.
So if ‘South of Heaven’ is your worst viewing experience to date, then you’ve been spared a lot of pain. 
Maybe not, but this Yoakam’s vision of superepic western movie seems to me even more laughable than your average Sorbo western, because it just tries to be in the league to which clearly doesn’t belong. Yoakam direction was completely off.
Poor old Dwight … I wasn’t claiming it as a masterpiece, I was really just surprised by the rough treatment it gets in many reviews, as I found it quite entertaining and slightly off kilter. Wouldn’t have sat through the entire show if I’d found it boring. Anyway, at least the film has one fan in the world. 
Sorbo movies don’t even get 10 minutes of my time, and at least this film had some considerable ambition even if it’s not wholly successful. To say his direction was completely off is nonsense … plus there was a lot subtle humour in many scenes. I will say that the casting of Vince Vaughn didn’t work … and my main enjoyment came from seeing many of the old hands at work.
I never feel obligated to watch an entire movie if I find it boring or badly made, and there are many that get ejected before the 30 minute mark. So either I was feeling very mellow and generous to sit through a 2 hour plus flick, or it does have more to it than the damning reviews suggest. Funny how no one complains about Clint Eastwood’s lousy films and amateurish directing … well to me they’re infinitely worse than this movie.
Just badly made. Didnt find it boring.
yep
I actually do: Pale rider and some of his crime dramas. But he is still better than Dwight. 
I know, hard stuff, almost didn’t make it myself.
I gave South of Heaven West of Hell a 6/10, so it was entertaining and had some quality to offer. I also wondered about the often very negative reviews.
My God … we’re actually in agreement for once! LOL
Yes, but only for once. Don’t worry, it won’t happen again until next year …
1 Like
I should probably rewatch it. I watched it long time ago and since then I’ve been through a lot of SW garbage and now I’m broken man, any shit can impress me, hell, I even gave 3/5 rating to a Fidani spagh lately. 
What have become of me?
2 Likes
The last full Western I watched was Buon Funerale Amigos!..Paga Sartana (Have a Good Funeral My Friend…Sartana Will Pay, which I really enjoyed, and I was just starting Una Nuvola di Polvere…un Grido di Morte…Arriva Sartana (A Cloud of Dust, a Cry of Death, Here’s Sartana/Light the Fuse…Sartana is Coming), but writing projects (for my blog, here, the GCDb, etc) are the priority for the moment. I’ve enjoyed all the Sartana films so far, and can’t wait to watch the 5th one.
1 Like
South Of Heaven, West Of Hell (2000)
Watched this urgently. To know.
We are not even 10 minutes into it and Dwight’s pants are torn off of him by a ravenous woman. And not the last time.
Well, what can I say. The story itself isn’t that bad, but Yoakam’s execution is a bit weird. Cringey, I’d say. First half is at least quite normal, because you can’t fuck up that much directing people talking, or staring at something, while the same fucking tune is repeated over and over. Let’s say soundtrack is a bit of a letdown and can pretty much might get on your nerves after a while. The second half, with more action and showdowns, is quite hilarious and it just shows director’s incompetence. I mean, the final showdown. You just laugh through it with constant “wtf”.
The whole movie has that vibe of pretentious arty crap epic movie with nostalgia evoking soundtrack, probably quite big budget, plenty of famous actors involved and dull and unfocused direction. As said before Vaughn is a miscast, but I’m not sure about Yokam either. I know that not every western hero must be cool looking dude, but I somehow didn’t buy it. Maybe he should grow a beard for a role. 4/10.
I watched it once and the only thing I remember is a guy walking around in a skirt.
Yep. Anyway, I bet the movie had to look quite promising on paper, ambitious, at least thats my theory why so many big stars are in it.
First time watching these…
Those Dirty Dogs
Taste for Killing
Sonny and Jed
Dead Men Ride
Killer Kid
Blazing Saddles
El Topo
Cut Throats Nine
1 Like
3:10 to Yuma (1957) 9/10
Forty Guns (1957) 8/10
Best of the Badmen (1951) 7/10