• Dave

    ★★★

    Middle of the road mid-80's Western. Entirely forgettable.

    View

  • James

    ★★★★

    Sacramento ain't worth moose tits!

    View

  • moviemicrorw

    ★★★★

    #moviemicroreview® Il Cavaliere Pallido
    Eastwood omaggia il classicismo del genere in un western di solida sintesi ed efficacia.

    twitter.com/moviemicrorw/status/443398284066193408

    View

  • Benny Kohzer

    ★½

    Hatte in diesem Jahr "Two Mules for Sister Sara" gesehen, an dem ich großen Spaß hatte. Das hier war mir alles so voller Klischees das ich kaum gefallen an der Geschichte gefunden hatte.

    View

  • Kartik Singh

    Clint is the best Western star that ever was.

    View

  • Jordan

    ★★★★

    Full of complex emotion and rich characters, Eastwood's Western is gripping and well-paced.

    View

  • Jake

    ★★★★½

    Easily one of my favorite Western films which is primarily thanks to Clint Eastwood who not only directs but also stars in the biggest Western of the decade. Eastwood manages to give this film a classic feel while also dealing with timely themes such as environmental issues and religion without being too heavy handed on either. It also looks great, keeps the action grounded while also being fun, has a solid supporting cast, a great score and though the plot isn't the most original the script elevates it above its average roots.

    View

  • feedingbrett

    ★★★★

    After a number of films that have depart from the Western genre, Clint Eastwood spent much of his career around the mid 70s to late 80s period attempting to re-establish and reinforce the Eastwood persona in the modern world; either as a man out of time (Dirty Harry) or a kind-hearted idealist (Bronco Billy), his existence certainly stands out from society, and in turn either passively or actively aims to instil change in a world that sorely needs it, or…

    View

  • ShadetreeDad

    ★★

    Well I've seen bits and pieces of this many times on TV. However I decided to sit down and watch from beginning to end. For a Clint Eastwood western it's actually pretty subdued. A decent story but the characters aren’t really very compelling. To my 2017 eyes it reminds me of an extended version of TV’s Bonanza/Gunsmoke. And Richard Kiel, was he a “good guy or bad guy”? It looked like a strong wind would blow him over……
    In Clint’s film catalog, it's one of his weaker productions.
    Not really recommended…..

    View

  • lermentov

    ★★½

    This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.

    Certainly signs here that Eastwood was moving towards a more mature style of filmmaking. The violence was restrained for most of the movie. Characters are fleshed out and Eastwood's man with no name is on the journey towards the redemptive Unforgiven. Having said that, the idea that Eastwood is some kind of avenging ghost is a silly dimension which should have been jettisoned during the scriptwriting stage. After all, how many ghosts do you know keep security boxes in banks!

    View

  • KJKnow

    ★★★½

    A strong Western that manages to be a little too long. There is so much of this film that's great, between the gorgeous cinematography and the ecological themes, but then the film spends time on two "women love Clint Eastwood" plotlines...

    View

  • AngelsArcanum

    ★★★★½

    There's lots of evidence to the contrary, but I think this is a ghost story.

    It's not the kind of meticulously plotted and deceptive direction that focuses on a twist drastically changing your outlook of the narrative in retrospect a la Fight Club or Sixth Sense where each scene prior was constructed with that truth in mind to keep them tightly knit, pigeonholing the interpretations and instead trying to piece together some thematic conclusion at the end. This film's narrative…

    View