Disturbing yet enthralling

What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

With a title that was later reused for another movie, one would expect that this western would show at least one gun fight, you know like the one at the OK corral, but this movie hasn't one. What the title is referring to is a mystery and that is probably the key word for this western.Now the first mystery is the mysterious stranger played by Sam Elliott. Sam Elliot? Yep, the same. I am probably like many other people who instantly respect a man like Sam Elliott without actually knowing why. Sam Eliott is known, but if you ask me to tell you what from I have a hard time to tell you. Sam Elliott is a decent actor, but apparently not considered to be able to carry a leading part in a major movie. Or at least.. I can't recall one. But never mind about that. Here Sam has a leading role. Now the mysterious part about the mysterious stranger points to an overarching mystery. The question to ask is: why? Why does Sam Elliot help this family that is riding out, all alone, into the wilds? Why is this family braving the wilds on there own? The reason supplied is that they go to some place to breed cattle on the invitation of a family member, but still.. is traveling on your own such a good idea? Why are the bad guys sitting around in some forlorn village, consisting of 4 houses, lacking any inhabitants? Were they waiting for this single family to happen along so they could rob them, kill the men (a man and his son) and rape the woman? It remains a mystery.Another mystery: there is an half breed Indian helping them.. why? He just happens along, gets a drink and he is the best of mates with these bad dudes. Again we don't know why.So these bad dudes steal the horses of the family.. and thus the story kicks in. The husband of the family gets the horses back, covered by the mysterious stranger who shoots one of the bad dudes. And the bad guys then want revenge. While the family treks through the wild hoping to outrun the bad dudes, the bad dudes try to catch up with them. Several times they do catch up, which results in some fighting which whittles down the group of bad dudes.. who thus thirst even more for blood. The story then follows a rather linear plot and ends in a predictable way. It is nothing to write home about. And again another mystery rises: the family went out in the wilds to do some cattle raising. Where is the cattle? They didn't bring any along.. and the hut they end up in seems to be in some valley in between mountains. Not the kind of country one would associate with cattle raising.The whole story is like that: a mystery as to why people do what they do. But the greater mystery is just the failure to make more of this story. The mysterious stranger confesses himself to be a half breed, just like the half breed Indian who helps the bad guys. One would expect something to result from this. They could have been brothers. They could have been anything more than adversaries, but nothing develops. There is a potential conflict between the mysterious stranger and the husband in the family, but even that sizzles out to nothing.The story is bland. It is not the acting that makes this movie mediocre on it's own. It is the lackluster plot that is pretty linear and shies away from anything interesting.This movie is a forgettable movie.

RELEASED IN 1987 and directed by Robert Day, "The Quick and the Dead" is a made-for-HBO Western starring Sam Elliott as Con Vallian, a mysterious stranger who helps a family heading West with their conflict with a group of ne'er-do-wells. Vallian's desire is piqued by the wife (Kate Capshaw) and the interest seems mutual. Will the family make it to the Bighorn Mountains alive-and-well or will violence and adultery destroy them? If you don't remember Kate Capshaw, she was the blond in 1984's "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" and later married director Steven Spielberg.In any event, I was impressed with this little-known Western. Although made for cable, it's based on a Louis L'Armour book and is actually better than some theatrically released Westerns. There are some flaws, like the kid's questionable acting skills and the fact that the film was noticeably shot in Northern Arizona rather than Eastern Wyoming, but -- all things considered -- this is a solid realistic Western in the tradition of "Shane" and "Will Penny." Don't expect the mythic spaghetti tone of 1995's big-budget Western of the same name. Highlights include the breathtaking cinematography, a believable and mature tone, Kate's beauty, a hackneyed plot redeemed by quality characters (like Tom Conti as the settler husband/father), insightful drama & plot surprises and, of course, Sam Elliott as the quintessential Westerner. Really, Elliott is as good or – more likely – better than any Western icon you care to name (Wayne, Eastwood, Cooper, Scott, Stewart, Costner, etc.).There are mature and insightful themes, like the undeniable connection of Vallian and Susanna. Most of us can relate: You stumble across someone of the opposite sex and instinctively sense a palpable connection, some kind of profound mutual fascination, yet—for whatever reason—pursuing an intimate relationship is not an option. In an entire lifetime you will only experience a handful such 'connections,' or less. These exchanges are permanent because they are so potent they are forever burned into one's psyche."The Quick and the Dead" may not be a top-notch Western like "Dances With Wolves" or "The Outlaw Josey Wales," but it's certainly a quality Western and well worth your time.THE MOVIE RUNS 91 minutes.GRADE: B

I'm amazed that no one really disliked this movie here, in the "user reviews" and the "message board." (Though the two external reviews are tepid.) I was bored out of my mind. The production values were good (scenery, etc.). The actors were notable. The big killer is the story and dialog. Everything is drained out -- from the beginning you see where the story is going, and it never deviates, no surprises or depth.Eight bad guys are after a pioneer settler family (husband, wife, son) making their way west alone on their covered wagon. They follow and menace the family, but peculiarly never really ever catch up. The family is protected by the mysterious stranger (Sam Elliott) who pops up now and then to sprout advice, sage remarks, insults and leers at the wife, Kate Capshaw, who might be a beauty on the lone prairie, but here looks pretty haggard.Avoid this unless you are a fan of the actors and film makers.

1876, Wyoming. Niave newly arrived settlers Duncan (well played by Tom Conti) and Susanna McKaskel (a fine performance by Kate Capshaw, who looks positively ravishing) require the assistance of rugged frontiersman Con Vallian (a superb and convincing performance by Sam Elliott) in order to protect them from a group of outlaws led by the weaselly Doc Shabitt (veteran character actor Matt Clark in top slimy form). Director Robert Day, working from a smart and engrossing script by James Lee Barrett, relates the absorbing story at a steady pace, presents a flavorsome, yet unsentimental evocation of the old west, and stages the gunfights in a realistic and exciting manner. Con makes for a strong and interesting flawed hero who isn't entirely noble; he has lustful feelings for Susanna and keeps embarrassing Duncan every chance he gets. Moreover, the bad guys are a memorably scurvy lot, with especially memorable turns by Patrick Kilpatrick as fearsome half-breed tracker The Ute and Jerry Potter as the foul and lecherous Red Hayle. Kenny Morrison registers nicely as Duncan's loyal son Tom. Dick Bush's polished cinematography makes elegant occasional use of fades and dissolves. Steven Dorff's harmonic score does the tuneful trick. A worthwhile sagebrush saga.