High Plains Drifter (1973)

good back-story, and good acting

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

I'm starting my journey through the Western genre, High Plains Drifter is maybe the first classic that I watched, and is really good.My only issue with the movie is just some things that I thought were "silly", like almost every scene the "stranger" gives a deep look to other people, but is ok, I get it, is probably a common thing at the time. The majority of the cast is good, I just thought that Marianna Hill's performance was really over the top throught almost the entire movie. There are some really cool scenes, Clint Eastwood character is the definition of "badass" for almost the entire film, the soundtrack is simple, but very good too. The script is good, even though some dialogues sound weird some times. Well, I think that probably my main issue with the filme would be "why he did all shity things with the folks down there?", e some weird shit to, like painting all the houses with red, wtf? Buuut, ate the end, for me, was clear that Clint character was something related to the dead guy (Jim Duncan), some mystical thing, like the ghost of the dead man, his soul or something like that, and, with that in mind, this previous issue of mine, doesn't apply anymore, so, it's ok, everything makes sense at the end.In short, High Plains Drifter is a great western, isn't a long filme, so is easy to watch, and have that old school cinema felling that (unless for me) is always great to feel.8,5/10

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.

I saw this first in the early 90s on a VHS. Jus revisited this recently. Dee Barton's eerie film score really stood out in making this a mystery western film. The first viewing did create a sense of suspense. In this film Eastwood once again plays a mysterious stranger, this time meting out justice in a corrupt frontier mining town. The scene in which he enters the town, there is this eerie music in the background. The same music is repeated when he departs from the town. I liked the film's dark tone and thought this was more than just a western. The movie has a mystery to it. When I saw it first, I thot that Clint was the dead spirit of the Marshal, but when I saw it recently, I think it's left ambiguous. It cud hav been the brother of the Marshal or some spectator who was hiding in the dark n came back prepared for the revenge. Please feel free to explain me. Nevertheless, its a nice film but not that good compared to other westerns. This is Clints first western to be directed by himself n 2nd as a movie director.

Fearful of three recently released outlaws who murdered their previous sheriff, the citizens of a small Old West town hire a mysterious gunslinger to protect them, but the stranger knows more than he lets on this offbeat western with a 'Twilight Zone' style twist. While the twist at first feels like an afterthought, it begins to make more and more sense when one reconsiders prior events, and while the gunslinger initially seems merely heartless and cruel with the way he humiliates the townsfolk when given carte blanche and unlimited store credit for his services, all of this comes across as logical in the end. Plot turns aside, the film offers an interesting outlook on the risks of giving someone absolute power, and it is curiously debatable whether the townsfolk would be better off at the mercy of the outlaws than the very unpredictable stranger who enjoys raping their women, drinking all their booze and wrecking property where possible. Clint Eastwood plays the part well with a quiet charisma, but even as an antihero, he is a bit too dislikeable (making light of a violent rape; destroying buildings) for one to root for him - and given how despicable all of the townsfolk are shown to be, 'High Plains Drifter' is a film without a single likable character in sight. That said, there is perhaps something deliberate to this as the film noticeably plays against stereotypes of chivalry in the Old West. Indeed, while some have cited 'High Plains Drifter' as a supernatural western, it presents characters more flawed and down-to-earth than in most traditional westerns out there.