Eminence Hill (2019) User Reviews

Watchable, albeit forgettable Western...

[paul_haakonsen · 5/10 · 23 August 2021]

I had the chance to sit down and watch the 2019 Western movie "Eminence Hill" here in 2021, as I stumbled upon the movie by sheer, random chance. And seeing that the movie's cover had Lance Henriksen, Barry Corbin and Dominique Swain on the cover, I must say that I was interested in seeing it, especially because of Lance Henriksen.

The storyline told in "Eminence Hill", as written by Robert Conway and Owen Conway, was actually adequate. It wasn't a movie that had me overly impressed. But I will say that I was adequately entertained by what the movie turned out to be.

However, Lance Henriksen was in the movie for maybe a full minute or so. So having him on the movie's cover was just an awful way of luring people in to watching it with putting a familiar face there. Hey, it worked. I picked the movie up, didn't I?

Director Robert Conway managed to make the movie feel like an old fashioned Western, so that was definitely something that worked in favor of the movie.

While "Eminence Hill" was a watchable movie, it was hardly an outstanding or memorable Western. Nor is it a movie that warrants more than a single viewing. Though I think that for the true hardcore fans of the Western genre, then a movie such as "Eminence Hill" will bring proper entertainment.

My rating of "Eminence Hill" lands on a bland five out of ten stars.

Wasn't awful and I learned a new word

[cbrowns-05283 · 5/10 · 12 February 2022]

From this day forward when I'm talking I will be confabulating.....that being said this movie held my attention for an hour and a half so it's a winner in my book.

Ok story, but lack of flow

[Screen_Maven · 5/10 · 18 December 2021]

The opening scene does promise a very good movie. But movies can be illusive.

The story line is thin, but ok enough, there are more movies which are good enough with a thin story.

The lack of continuity is a problem in this movie. Also some sequences are cut very strangely, if there are a sort of pauzes in a supposed fast shooting scene. Most prominent in the sequence (1:15:45) when they are in a small room, with the girl on the bed, what then happens lags flow totally. Also in that same sequence the foley sounds are mainly terrible absent. Then the sound track is mainly absent or present but with the wrong music.

Finally, the movie suffers also from the directing skills.

Still it can be an interesting movie to watch for film academy students to figure out about what exactly is wrong with this movie.

Truly Bad

[rocky37-40472 · 1/10 · 22 March 2021]

Trash. Graphic. Funny. It's terrible. Bad acting. Ridiculous plot. Crude at times. It's a challenge to watch it to the end

B movie

[kramforsbo · 1/10 · 28 February 2020]

So bad movie, bad acting, bad everything. So sad the story is ok but the acting is so bad.

Need a Western Movie Fix

[benwinstead · 4/10 · 22 April 2020]

So hungry for a good western! In the mean time, I guess this will do. It had its moments and was overall entertaining. It meets the COVID19 stay at home watchable....

Cowboy modern style

[BandSAboutMovies · 4/10 · 18 December 2019]

When a gang of outlaws attacks a small homestead in the middle of nowhere, killing a husband and wife before kidnapping their teenage daughter, the law has to come down hard on them. After the criminals get lost, they find their way to Eminence Hill, a town run by a group of deeply religious men and women.

Welcome to, well, Eminence Hill, which is directed by Robert Conway, who has directed three different Krampus themed films: Krampus: The Reckoning, Krampus Unleashed and Krampus Origins.

This movie is packed with stars. There's Barry Corbin, Harv from Critters 2 and perhaps better known to normal folks for being in No Country for Old Men. Dominique Swain, who was in the 1997 version of Lolita and Face/Off, as well as recently reviewed films like Blood Craft and The 6th Friend. Even Brinke Stevens shows up!

Probably the name that will get most people looking for this movie is Lance Henriksen, whose resume contains such stand-outs as Hard Target, Aliens, Near Dark, Pumpkinhead, Stone Cold and many, many more.

He's only in it for a few moments, but come on. If you're reading this site, you know all manner of films that relied on that one name to get the movie made and sold, an actor who barely shows up in the actual film.

Bad Everything

[gkshaw63 · 2/10 · 4 October 2021]

Bad acting. Bad script. Bad lighting. OMG it was just terrible. The costumes were ok but no not really.

Story might have been interesting but it was hard to get past the rest to appreciate it's originality. Occasional nudity and profanity were tossed in an attempt to keep the viewer interested.

Really not worth the time.

Well - I liked it !

[jayg_58 · 6/10 · 7 November 2019]

No other User Reviews yet. Twisty little western, obviously shot on a budget. My favorite bit was the way all the characters, obviously not well read in western history, talked like they were reading cue cards from a stage play. The clothes were too clean, the teeth too straight. To me it translated to "surreal". My kind of film. The sociopathic Marshall, the all to clean old cowpoke, the Hollywood hair bad guy, and the parody of religious fanatics (although unfortunately I think you could find them in real life). It was utterly entertaining to me. A cross between a TV western, a Shakespearean play, and a slasher. Wheee! I do kind of object to Lance Henriksen getting a top billing spot. He had less than 5 minutes and was obviously just there for his name. Collect that check. He did his part well. A number of characters were introduced and thrown away, but again, it wasn't trying to be historical or realistic. I'd watch it again someday.

Be aware of this movie

[flewis-20052 · 28 May 2020]

Has nudity and sex scenes. This is not a movie for children.

Gritty Western

[JoeB131 · 5/10 · 7 May 2020]

The movie revolves around a gang of criminals and the bounty hunters who are tracking them, meeting in the middle of a bunch of religious fanatics in 1887 Arizona.

I guess the biggest problem I have is with the Royce character being talked about as such a threat by everyone, but when it comes down to brass tacks, he is outwitted by a couple of Apache thieves and then a community of religious nuts.

All of this leads to the final conflict, which is a bloody affair, fun to watch.

The biggest problem is that I'm not sure who I am supposed to be rooting for here... and that's never a good in a movie.

Nifty down'n'dirty Western

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 29 December 2021]

1887. Notorious outlaw Royce (a memorably nasty turn by Clint James) and his nefarious gang kill a man and his wife as well as take the couple's daughter hostage. The evil bunch wind up in the remote small community of Eminence Hill, where the righteous locals give them a less than warm welcome.

Director/co-writer Robert Conway relates the enjoyable and engrossing story at a constant pace, maintains a tough gritty tone throughout, makes nice use of the desolate desert landscape, smartly explores the underlying themes of sin and redemption, delivers some jolting moments of brutal violence, and tosses in some tasty gratuitous female nudity for trashy good measure.

The solid acting from the capable cast keeps this movie humming: Owen Conway as uptight, but lethal lawman Quincy, Dominique Swain as the ruthless Gretchen, Barry Corbin as hardcore religious fanatic Noah, Charlie Motley as grizzled tracker Carson, Anna Harr as innocent teen Ruth, Louie Iaccarino as skeevy brute Cyrus, and Brinke Stevens as sweet cook Wilhelmina. Lance Henriksen has a cool cameo as two-fisted bounty hunter Mason. A neat little flick.

Good but unbelievably vulgar

[keeper-24533 · 7/10 · 15 July 2020]

This film is pretty well acted and intense. The profanity is gratuitous, excessive, and extreme; really feels out of place in a western. It seems that today's movie makers believe they have an obligation to use as many obscenities as possible. If the profanity were to be cut out, the film would probably be half an hour shorter. Still an intense movie with good performances. Keeps you watching.

"They will be called to account for their sin."

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 2 February 2020]

This is a bit of an anomaly compared to your traditional Western. There really aren't any good guys here, except maybe for the black mute who gives kidnapped teenager Ruth (Anna Harr) the high sign to make a break away from the Tullis gang. Even U.S. Marshal Quincy Hollis Foster has a tarnished reputation for killing women and children during his Civil War years, and it's a toss up as to whether he's any better than the outlaws he's tracking. And as for the religious community at Eminence Hill, well, they could just as well been from Eminence Hell. I thought the elements in the story were rather creative, like the drugging of the Tullis bunch and Foster's low key profile that exploded like fury during that confrontation with the four bounty hunters. The casting of Owen Conway as Marshal Foster made it appear like he was a poor excuse for a lawman, but his reputation revealed in the story portrayed him as a heartless, stone cold killer. So that was a good bit of misdirection.

However the film is guilty of a little bait and switch, at least the DVD cover is, in as much as Lance Henriksen is given prominence there, along with third billing for only about five minutes in the picture. Just long enough to call out Foster for his checkered past and take a knife to the gut for his trouble. Man, did he look awful here, though make-up might have been responsible for looking even older than his seventy nine years. Barry Corbin approaching the same age looked just about as ancient in the role of Eminence community patriarch Noah.

The story takes on some grimmer aspects in the later going when the Eminence folks deal with gang member Cyrus (Louie Iaccarino) via the slasher/gore route, and when Noah's cook Wilhelmina (Brinke Stevens) decides to deal with Ruth with some well aimed stones to the head. You sure didn't want to get on the wrong side of these pious, church folk. Just about everyone in the story is dealt with harshly, with Carson Garret (Charlie Motley) the only one coming out unscathed. And Ruth, of course, although the closing scene had it appear like she would be preparing herself to look for trouble. The only thing left wanting for this viewer after all the red herring references - where the heck was Blood Feathers?

A WESTERN!!

[Bgappl07 · 8/10 · 21 December 2020]

Short and sweet I was weaned on westerns at my daddy's knee during their heyday in the 50s 60s and 70s. In the past decade or so it's been very difficult to find anything that's halfway decent it seems that they're out of style well there are those that still appreciate them and search for them I found this and I was pleased the actors are well known they do their parts well and the plot is a good one I enjoyed it and that's what I expect from any movie

A little western to enjoy

[zerixos · 6/10 · 20 September 2020]

Do you like westerns? I do and this one I enjoyed. It's starts with a gang of misfits who kill an innocent family and abduct their daughter. This seems like a simple set up for the movie but it goes it's own way. It blurred the lines between good and evil and although the story itself isnt without flaws it delivers this message. We see a couple familiar face among the acteurs and they're at home in this movie. Overall the acting is pretty decent and the sets look great. The costumes are ok but feel a little to clean at the beginning. Nevertheless the western feel is real enough. But this movie isn't without hiccups. I can understand why some people hate it and it feels cheap at some parts through the movie. The editing feels rushed and even early in the movie the cuts become repetitive. It feels unprofessional and combined with the special effects the movie feels like a B movie. The camera work isn't the best as some might notice and it looks like it's been shot on a lower-end camera. I think a big chunk of the money went into the cast and set and they had to cut cost in post. If the budget didn't allow it I think they made the good choice to focus on the story. If you can live with the somewhat sloppy camera and like westerns don't let the bad rating scare you and give it a try.

Choice Psalms

[nogodnomasters · 6/10 · 23 November 2019]

Royce Tillis (Clint James) leads a small group of cut throats who are bent on vengeance against the jury that convicted his brother and anyone else who enjoyed watching him hang. After they kill the last juror (opening scene) they abscond with his daughter (Anna Harr) to sell. A cold killer Marshall (Owen Conway) with a reputation obtains the services of a jailed tracker (Charlie Motley) to go after Royce and crew. Through a series of mishaps, Royce finds himself at Eminence Hill, a religious community that metes its own brand of justice.

It appears every aspect of the western has been done before. I liked the characters. They could have added a grindhouse element to the story as it boarded on the genre. Flash up on the scene in bright colors bio info and slick nickname. Toss in some heavy rock swagger music. Have our bad guys walk to some swagger music. It wasn't a serious western. Lance Henriksen was on the screen for a short period of time. It looks like they signed him after they started filming and wrote him a bit part.

Guide; F-word, sex, nudity (Dominique Swain. Tori Glawe Osborn + 2 others)

Gerat bad movie

[kees-182-552825 · 6/10 · 1 January 2020]

If it was written by Quarantino And shakespeare both drunk. Very pathetic and overdone. It didn't bore me for a minute. Amazing, i had a good time watching it.

A no holds barred depiction of the 1880s West.

[lancehargitt · 7/10 · 12 June 2020]

I have to wonder why James Gammon was not listed in the credits for this movie. He is a good, established actor, not an unknown in a minor role.

Soft spot with a lot of blood

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 19 November 2021]

I have a soft spot for Western movies - the genre itself is something I grew up with. Well that and Eastern Martial Arts movies. On the other hand I have been accused of being too nice when rating and reviewing movies. Which I think is mostly correct - with a few exceptions of course. But even if I don't like a movie, I try to see broader view and how it may be perceived.

Having said all that, this movie right here has some really nice production values (considering the budget it probably was made with). Add to that a script that does challenge its actors to perform. And while I understand that some may feel differently and there are moments that might make you cringe, overall that works too.

While it has a lot of dialog (too much I reckon for some), it also goes all the way when it comes to violence (blood) and nudity too. Something to consider one way or the other.