Occasional good acting, sometimes, and occasional re-use of Elmer Bernstein's iconic score just cannot save this from the moronic script.
The alleged lead, "Chris," tries too hard to emulate Clint Eastwood -- same facial grimaces and twitches -- from those equally iconic Italian Westerns.
"Vin" just walks through his part, maybe like a character from a Marvel comics movie -- lots of swagger but too cliched to be believable.
Apparently a lot of money was spent, as witness the sheer numbers of people involved, but that money could have been better spent on a better script from a better writer.
Perhaps use of another title would not have led us to expect anything -- after all, it was for TV.
But in my experience, it is some of the silliest, most cliched, cardboard characterizations by any writer I've seen in decades. Did I say "terrible" yet?
One more warning: This awful movie is disguised at YouTube as the 2016 version. So be warned if you try to see it there. Why YouTube allows such dishonesty is beyond me.
The alleged lead, "Chris," tries too hard to emulate Clint Eastwood -- same facial grimaces and twitches -- from those equally iconic Italian Westerns.
"Vin" just walks through his part, maybe like a character from a Marvel comics movie -- lots of swagger but too cliched to be believable.
Apparently a lot of money was spent, as witness the sheer numbers of people involved, but that money could have been better spent on a better script from a better writer.
Perhaps use of another title would not have led us to expect anything -- after all, it was for TV.
But in my experience, it is some of the silliest, most cliched, cardboard characterizations by any writer I've seen in decades. Did I say "terrible" yet?
One more warning: This awful movie is disguised at YouTube as the 2016 version. So be warned if you try to see it there. Why YouTube allows such dishonesty is beyond me.