High Plains Drifter (1973)

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

From my favorite movies..

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

If I didn't see the director's name, I'd think this is another Sergio Leone movie, but after having starred in quite a few of them, no wonder C. Eastwood's first directing project is heavily influenced by his master's style. I write this review after seeing this movie maybe the fourth or fifth time. Not that I like it a lot but I stumble upon it on tv channels and not having anything better to do I sit and ask myself what the heck this is about every time. The movie opens with a stranger riding into a sleepy western town. After the usual scuffle with the local troublemakers, he kills three of them with indemnity and rapes a woman who harasses him on the street for no apparent reason. Then, the story drags on in a similar irrational fashion.One thing is clear that the movie is all about hate and vengeance. There's not a single likable character including the would-be protagonist. Indeed there's no real character at all but all caricatures of evil. The plot is ludicrously unrealistic. Almost everything goes against the logic and nothing makes sense. The raped women hug the aggressor with lust after a few seconds (apparently, Eastwood thinks he has an irresistible charm even as a raper); the whole town shakes in terror against three men, etc. The whole project looks more like Eastwood tried to parody the previous spaghetti westerns but without humor. Indeed, there are some attempts for humor, like the midget's appointment as a sheriff, the three villains being fed with their horses in prison, etc. but they are all bland. To top it all, the pace is crawling and the whole story is plain boring.Perhaps, the worst comes at the end, when the anti-hero explains why he acted so obnoxiously throughout the story. Apparently, he thinks his reasoning is enough to vindicate his rape and murders; and expects a belated blessing for his actions. What a puerile finale...

Oh yeah for sure that's fun! Great directing, funny jokes, everything is great with this handsome cowboy. So great that when he rapes women they love it and want more. This movie is not about rape or revenge but manhood. And that's my problem. I had a great time watching this movie. And that's my problem. Not Clint Eastwood fault it was a time where no meant yes. A time where men were supposed to stand for themselves protect their property. But in 21th watching this kind of movie seems dangerous. So despite the great pleasure I had watching this remarkable western, I keep a despicable aftertaste.

'High Plains Drifter (1973)' has got some dodgy sexual politics that can't go unmentioned. Aside from that, this is an enjoyable western that takes a revisionist stance and doesn't pull any punches. It doesn't try to reinvent or even comment on the genre - it's actually pretty standard aside from an interestingly ambiguous supernatural element - but still provides some fun sequences especially when Eastwood starts squinting and the bullets start flying. It may be showing its age more than others in the genre, but its dark approach makes it a worthwhile watch. 7/10

High Plains Drifter is Eastwood's second effort in the director's chair which effectively is a cross between the Magnificent Seven and High Noon. Whilst it starts out well, it sadly doesn't keep this up throughout its running time...Here are the many problems with this film;EASTWOOD'S CHARACTER; he's the stranger with no name in this film and he was also known as the man with no name in Sergio Leone's A Fistful Of Dollars (which I'm sure isn't a coincidence). It's clear that at this point in his career that Eastwood had a fondness of Sergio Leone (and why wouldn't he as Leone clearly made Eastwood a huge star). Whilst this film has the feel of many a Sergio Leone western it certain doesn't have the enjoyment value of many of his Westerns. The truth here is that Eastwood has made his own character far too unlikeable and cruel for me to really care about him; he rapes women and then seemingly has them falling at his feet - Eastwood seems to turn this into some chauvinistic ego-trip; why would these women like him let alone want to sleep with him??? His cruelty to the townsfolk is potentially explained in the context of the story, but a lot of what we see here is quite extreme and doesn't make for a particularly pleasant viewing experience. The issue here is that you want to cheer on Eastwood and the gang and hope that they overcome the returning villains but the problem here is that you can't; why would you want to root for a mean-spirited rapist?? THE STORY; OK; so the gunfighters that the townsfolk originally hired get killed by Eastwood's character so the townsfolk have to rely on Eastwood to protect their town. This bit I was OK with, but then things start to get ridiculous... The townsfolk offer Eastwood a free reign on the town on the assumption that he will defeat the 3 returning villains... although Eastwood's return possibly has supernatural connections to it I still found a lot of the plotting to be rather preposterous and far-fetched. What exactly was the significance of painting the town red? Maybe I missed something here...The female characters are poorly used and seem to exist as little more than play things for Eastwood and pretty much all the acting from the male cast is horrible (with the exception of Eastwood whose tough talking performance through gritted teeth is just about enough to carry the picture)Other than that this is a horrible film where Eastwood seems to use the narrative to set himself up as some kind of supernatural god (albeit of chauvinism and pig-headedness). It's an arrogant, smug and self-indulgent film that lacks much of the likability of many of Eastwood's other westerns.