Last Man Standing (1996) User Reviews

And like Jericho, Walls come tumbling down.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 16 August 2013]

Last Man Standing is directed by Walter Hill who also adapts the screenplay from a story written by Ryûzô Kikushima and Akira Kurosawa. It stars Bruce Willis, Bruce Dern, William Sanderson, Christopher Walken, David Patrick Kelly, Karina Lombard and Ned Eisenberg. Music is by Ry Cooder and cinematography by Lloyd Ahern.

Walter Hill's variant on Yojimbo, plot basically sees Willis as drifter John Smith, who after arriving in the dusty town of Jericho, promptly sets about making some serious cash by playing the town's two gangs off against each other. Smith is one tough hombre, a deadly pistoleer who has a fear of nothing, which is why the two respective gang leaders want him to work for them. Noses get put out of joint, blood flows, scores settled and a anti-hero is born, complete with permanent scowl and dry narration.

The look and sound is terrific, Cooder's pessimistic twangs are all over the plot, while the visuals dovetail between sun-baked landscapes and the misty lensed ghost town of Jericho. Hill brings his trademark stylish violence into play, with slow-mos and rapid fire shoot-outs impressive, while his skill at creating an antique atmosphere is very much in evidence. Unfortunately the narrative isn't up to much, it lacks scope and characters merely exist, making this very much a style over substance exercise. It also means that much of the cast are given only morsels to feed on. A shame when you got Walken and Kelly on overdrive when on screen.

It's an odd blend of a Western with Prohibition Noir characters, but it's unmistakably a Walter Hill film. For his fans there's enough to like about it whilst accepting it's a bit of a throwaway on the page. For the casual crime/action film fan, however, it's likely to be much ado about nothing. 7/10

I loved this movie from the first time I saw it.

[bannonanthony · 7/10 · 19 December 2004]

I've become a big fan of Walter Hill's movies and this one is as good as ever. It's not a particularly cheery film, but it's still enjoyable. Bruce Willis and Christopher Walken are both terrific in their roles. Walken plays as good a bad guy as ever, and Willis is good as the ambiguous lead character.

The gun battles are staged excellently and the music by Ry Cooder works very well with the picture. It's very much a guy film, though. There are only two women who play big parts in the film, but they don't appear very often.

I give LMS 7/10. It's a moody piece but enjoyable.

"1911 Heaven"

[PredragReviews · 7/10 · 4 April 2017]

This one is a cult classic that while formulaic, still manages to engage and keep the viewer captivated. Filled with old west clichés, yet set in the Prohibition Era, the six shooters have been replaced with 1911's, and the horses with Model Ts. Exaggerated impacts, and body reactions to getting shot, coupled with the never ending supply of ammo that only rarely needs to be topped off, do get annoying. Yet, somehow, the viewer is still sucked into this modern take on Clint Eastwood's classic, A Fistful Of Dollars.

The editing, dialogue, cinematography, music, direction and acting are all top class. Everything is fantastically overblown but never preposterous. As for the film itself, it is very empty but the mood and tone are so very distant and weird, and I totally love it. Walter Hills direction is a well balanced cross between Sam Peckinpah and John Woo. And Cooder's score will transport you right into the movie even on it's own. Of course the film has its faults, there are very few films which posses non. For example Christopher Walken's character, Hickey is built up in his absence throughout the first third of the film as being the ultimate bad guy, however when he does actually appear he is a little tame. In fact he even tells Willis's character, Smith, not to believe all the bad things he has been hearing about him. Perhaps he is the anti-villain to Smith's anti-hero.

All in all, it's a film which is definitely worth seeing, even if you are unfamiliar with either of the two previous versions of the story.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

It's very orange

[boraxx · 11 May 2003]

This film is a bit of an oddity. A remake of a remake, the story is so obvious you are never surprised by events, but the gunfights are pretty entertaining and Christopher Walken's turn as the husky baddie Hickey is suitably menacing. Also the fact that the attractive brunette has a completely pointless scene where she is topless in front of the mirror is a bonus. :) The camera work is stylish and the discordant guitar riffage of Mr.Ry Cooder is superb, the pace is slow but not sluggish and you can almost feel the heat and dust. This film is good but not great. Er... that's it.

Enjoyable if rather dark action movie

[Patedwalters · 7/10 · 9 July 2007]

This movie serves fine for some action, with excellently dark shoot-outs being shown as John Smith (Bruce Willis), as he has told us at least, wonders into this town and quickly learns to play the two opposing gangs for all they are worth, willing to kill in the process of course, which he does expertly while wielding two colt .45 1911's masterfully. This movie recalls both the westerns of of the sixties, one of which, For a Fistful of Dollars, is another adaptation of this movie's source material, Akira Kurosawa's Yojimbo, as well as the noir movies of the 40's. This may work for some but it does feel rather odd, in both a good and bad way. Bruce Willis, in grim and monotone manner, is perfect for the narration held in between the shoot-outs. This narration, along with the costume's of the characters, fedora's and all, are cheerful reminders of the noir movies of past, to show that perhaps that genre has a little life left within it. The desert setting in which this 1860's style ghost town, in which the two rival gangs square off, both with help from our main character, is located in is the main reminder then of the western part of this movie as well.

The Plot then is basically Bruce Willis's character playing both sides for whatever he can get. He is grimly cool in a certain way. The gangs then are the Irish, led by Doyle, and the Italians, led by Strozzi. These gangs are essentially copies of each other except for their names and accents, and perhaps their faces. The only difference of course being that Doyle has a psychotic second-in-command, or so we are told at the start of the movie. He, as a psychotic, is played by the true mother of all psychotic playing actors.... You guessed it, Christopher Walken, essentially playing Christopher Walken. The only other occupants of the town then are the sheriff, bartender, and undertaker.

In the end this is movie is certainly a dark one, although it is also not particularly serious in terms of realism. The atmosphere is extremely dark and grim as many characters are killed by Willis as well as Walken. It may actually be found depressing later on in the movie. However, contrary to this, the violence is often slightly comical. In one instance as many as forty bullets are needed to take down a character, and in others people, after having been shot by pistols, fly back several yards in the air. Something will certainly work for everyone who sees this movie, however only some will find all of these mixed aspects pleasurable when placed together as they have been here. This movie definitely employs major style, both in its shoot-outs and visual style. In parts of this film, the color has been diluted so much that it appears more or less selectively colored, such as in Sin City but not so much so. This will work for noir fans as well as those who find this bold style innovative and original, but others will find that it contributes more-so merely to the grim nature of this movie. The shoot-outs, undeniably are the best part of this movie and is all you desire is some good action then this movie fills that desire well. While this movie prefers darkness over fun, the stylistic and violent gunfights as well as the dark style will appeal to many, as it has to me. 7/10

Nice gangster/western movie with loads of crossfire , killings and multiple mayhem

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 16 January 2023]

This Last Man Standing (1996) is a remake of Yojimbo (1961), being an engaging but but not terribly original mobster/western , featuring partially the novel plot : "Red Harvest" by Dashiell Hammett . It pits a mysterious killer against two gangster organizations that are feuding over business . In the small 1930s border town of Jericho, Texas , John Smith (Bruce Willis) hires himself out to both sides of a bootlegging war , for Irish boss Doyle (David Patrick Kelly) and his nemesis Fredo Strozzi (Ned Eisenberg) in an effort to make some quick cash. Meanwhile , hired hand Smith saves a damsel in distress (Karina Lombard) . Along the way, he is helped by a barman (William Sanderson). Smith takes first one side , then the other until he is beaten to a pulp for his double-dealing plans . There are two sides to every war. And John Smith is on both of them !. In a town with no justice, there is only one law... Every man for himself !. If you lived in this town, you'd be dead by now !.

This is violent , beautifully crafted and exaggerated gangster movie . This stylish noir film contains rapid and deliberating filming at times , elaborate shoot-outs , and portentous close-ups of grime-encrustred faces with bloodbaths included . In fact, it is a remake to ¨Fistful of dollars¨ the epitome of the Spaghetti Western , that at the same time was a rip-off to ¨Yojimbo¨by Akira Kurosawa . Producers and credits claim lineage from the Kurosawa movie , but this plot's been around for a while . The impact of this Spaghetti Western ¨Sergio Leone's Fistful of Dollars¨ opened the gate for the huge numbers of Italian-Spanish Westerns which made fortune for their producers and directors in the sixties and early seventies and eventually leading to this American ¨Last Man Standing¨. Here Walter Hill, providing noisy action with some good moments , especially towards the final . With one of the slimmest storylines put on screen , this Prohibition , blow-them-away gangster saga delivers a bizarre and extremely violent shoot-fest . The higlights of the movie are the violent confrontations between throaty Bruce Willis and the nasty whispering trigger-happy Christopher Walken. There're lots of bloody-blasting action and it's all well done , though more akin to the spirit of the Spaghetti Western than the Japanese samurai film on which's actually based.

It contains a colorful and brilliant cinematography by Lloyd Ahern II, along with 1920s era costumes, especially bathed in brown filters, looks just right . Likewise , an evocative jazzy/country musical score by Ry Cooder , Walter Hill's regular. The motion picture was competently directed by Walter Hill who provides his ordinary trademark with visually exciting action scenes. The veteran craftsman Hill is a good writer , producer , filmmaker who has made a lot of films of all kinds of genres , working from late 60s , early 70s to nowadays . As he has directed action movies as Hard times , The driver , Southern comfort , The warriors , Extreme prejudice, 48 Hours , Another 48 hours , Last man standing , Johnny Handsome , Undisputed. Science fiction: Supernova . Western: Geronimo American legend, Wild Bill . Long riders . Comedy : Brewster's millions . Terror : Tales of the Crypt . Musical : Crossroads . Rating 6.5/10 , it will keep you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end and it is fun too.

Macho, stylish but not very brainy, medium good film

[Samiam3 · 6/10 · 21 February 2011]

For Last Man Standing, director Walter Hill relocates Kurosawa's Yojimbo to depression era America in a dusty desert town. There is something arguably distinctive about the flick. Perhaps it is the merger of gangster and western; something seldom seen in movies. Or perhaps it is the way that Hill's visual portrayal of a time and place seems flawless. Last Man Standing has an exceptionally retro look to it, very crusty and dusty, and also very macho.

The problem with Last Man Standing comes down to it's roots. Once you've seen Yojimbo, Last Man Standing doesn't feel all that special. Hill never chooses to break free of the Kurosawa structure, so his film is predictable from the get go. Having said that, even if you know the outcome of the trip, part of the journey is worth while. As an action film, Last Man Standing delivers in spectacular fashion. The fight scenes are staged with a sense of gusto and texture; something is often denied to the majority of such scenes in other movies.

When Last Man Standing is in adrenaline mode it works, but when it comes to the talky segments, it feels painfully stiff. The acting style is flat, and everybody delivers their lines with the same sour expression, which Hill seems quite fond of considering how many facial close ups he uses.

In the end, the movie has a little something to offer. It's recommendable on some grounds, but it needs a bit more brain and less brawn.

Dusty, Stylish, Macho Detective-Samurai-Western-Gangster Hybrid Movie

[ShootingShark · 6/10 · 14 July 2007]

In prohibition times, a mysterious stranger drifts into the ramshackle town of Jericho on the American-Mexican border, run by two rival gangs of bootleggers. Sniffing paydirt, he hires himself out to both factions as a gunman. Can he stay one step ahead of the hoods ?

This is a stylish, hard-nosed gangster reworking of Sergio Leone's 1964 Per Un Pugno Di Dollari / A Fistful Of Dollars, which was a western remake of Akira Kurosawa's 1961 ronin classic Yojimbo (and all three stories bear a lot of similarity to Carlo Goldoni's 1753 comic play Il Servitore Di Due Padroni / The Servant Of Two Masters). It cites the Japanese film as its main source, but is essentially a remake of both; storywise it follows the samurai movie (for example, Walken's character is identical to Tatsuya Nakadai's), but visually it's much closer to Leone's (lots of guns). It's own hard-boiled style, with raspy narration and a town full of grifters, also comes from noir fiction (say, Dashiel Hammett's 1929 pot-boiler Red Harvest). In this sense, it's more of a series of cultural references and motifs than a movie, but it's still a lot of fun, remaining faithful to the classic tale of the mysterious pragmatic avenger, and the hybrid gangster/western setting is very original. Willis lacks the mythic qualities of Mifune and Eastwood, but is pretty good in the lead, with able support from Sanderson and Dern. The two best performances are by Hill regular Kelly as the head of the Irish clan (there's a beautifully tender moment where he expresses his unassailable love for Lombard whilst his goons look embarrassed) and the ever-reliable Walken as a nutty red-headed whispering psycho. This story will always be appealing because it slyly blurs the divide between hero and antihero - he helps and exploits people in equal measures. Slickly written by Hill in his usual tough-guy patois, with a strangled score by Ry Cooder, top-notch stuntwork by Allan Graf and great dusty sepia-soaked photography by Lloyd Ahern - surely this is the brownest film ever made. Well worth catching, but don't miss its two predecessors, particularly Yojimbo (the hardest to find), which is one of the most engrossing, stylishly-made and funniest mythic adventure movies of all time.

Unfairly trashed actioner from a master director

[wierzbowskisteedman · 8/10 · 17 August 2005]

Plot summary: In a prohibition era update of Yojimbo, Bruce Willis shoots a load of gangsters.

First off I will never understand why Walter Hill does not have a better reputation. He's probably best known for his commercial success with the 48 Hrs films, and his other brilliant features get criminally overlooked. He scored a cult hit with "The Warriors", he delivered one of the best westerns ever with "The Long Riders", and put all other car chase movies to shame with the ultra cool "The Driver." As anyone who has seen these films should realise, Hill should be mentioned in the same breath as Peckinpah, Woo and Rodriguez when it comes to slow-mo gunplay.

"Last Man Standing" doesn't rival these earlier works, but it is a tough, gritty film with some fantastic shootouts. It doesn't hold itself back in terms of blood and violence, something current US films of the genre are guilty of doing. It has everything an action film needs; tough antihero, loath able bad guys, a creepy main villain and plenty of cannon fodder. As long as you don't get hung up on technicalities (ie the guns fire ten times more ammo than they hold) you should be entertained.

It doesn't feel like any effort went into the screenplay, but Hill adds some nice touches to the film in terms of nods towards the source material. I particularly like the opening where Bruce spins his empty whisky bottle on the ground to decide which road to take; a clear reference to Toshiro Mifune throwing a stick into the air to decide on his path. There is also an interesting cast; there's earlier Hill collaborator Bruce Dern (The memorable villain from The Driver), William Sanderson (Blade Runner) and of course Christopher Walken, who chews the scenery talking tough with his hoarse accent and threatening people with a Tommy gun. His performance is really the most memorable thing about the film. Willis is not Mifune or Eastwood, but he does suit the mysterious drifter character well and this is one of his better action man roles.

All things said, the film certainly doesn't come close to "Yojimbo", but it does give the more rough hewn "Fistful of Dollars" a run for its money. By no means a masterpiece, "Last Man Standing" should still provide enough for any action fans tired of watered down mainstream Hollywood nonsense that currently dilutes cinemas. It is certainly a lot better than its reputation makes out.

Breaks no new ground, but Hill and Willis make it watchable.

[oneguyrambling · 6/10 · 27 December 2011]

Not much rattles John Smith (Bruce Willis), he has the sort of unflappable self-confidence that requires not an absolute belief in one's own abilities, but the misguided thought that one could control the uncontrollable.

Random gunfire, warring crime gangs and deceitful backstabbing women are not a concern to Mr Smith. Even when it seems that all three factors are conspiring to end his existence he doesn't feel that the combined threat even warrants a facial expression. Were he wearing a heart rate monitor I am sure the testers might remove it after gun battles to see if it was turned on.

So when John Smith wanders casually into Jericho, Texas in his 1920s jalopy looking for whisky and a map, only to find desolation, despair and death, he sees opportunity.

The rival gangs that wrestle for control of the town are lead by an Irish guy named Doyle (David Patrick Kelly) and a slick group of Italians lead by Strozzi. The precious few other citizens of Jericho include an apathetic sheriff (Bruce Dern) - who could care less as long as the violence remains within certain parameters - various hookers, a saloon owner who runs a perpetually empty saloon and an undertaker for whom business is booming.

And over the coming days it'll only get better.

Smith is immediately 'noticed' upon arriving in town and when the initial intimidation tactics fail he is headhunted for a new vacancy in the Doyle gang. The Strozzi gang gets wind and decides the new gun must work for them.

Smith doesn't care who he works for as long as the cheque clears, and he spends a considerable amount of time alternating between siding with - and blowing away - employees on both sides in gloriously exaggerated fashion.

Take one scene for example where Smith visits a local 'working girl' and midway through 'festivities' he is thrown headlong into a gun fight with several heavily armed bad guys. After pulling two pistols - I don't want to know where from -in the span of a few seconds a buck-nekkid Smith takes down his assailants in a hail of bullets, as if this isn't the oddest thing to happen that day...

As the body count piles up and tensions rise it is obvious that Smith will eventually have to either choose a side or simply take both gangs down personally. For the main part the film is generally reasonably quiet, only punctuated by dialogue so dry that the actors cough dust and insanely loud gunfire from handguns that seemingly never run out of bullets.

Bruce maintains the same squint and set jaw throughout the entire film. If he divided his paypacket by lines of dialogue or facial expressions then his salary would be the highest in film history this side of Holly Hunter in The Piano, who might I remind you was mute.

Christopher Walken also appears as the menacingly homicidal and universally feared Hickey, the only guy in town with a machine gun and Doyle's right hand man, and as always he takes every opportunity to chew up the scenery and in this case blow a lot of it away.

The finale is both preposterous and a little confusing, but then again that is to be expected where on more than one occasion one man with two guns can take down a roomful of trained gunmen before they can even raise their own weapons.

Despite the simplicity and illogical elements I liked Last Man Standing. Bruce once again played the underdog only this time with little doubt that he would emerge victorious, even though he gets the living crap kicked out of him a couple times, and the well directed action sequences are in the main bloodless and suitably gymnastic, with the recipients of some of the many bullets seemingly propelled dozens of metres backwards and flipping over an over again seconds after being shot.

Special mention too to the quiet, quiet, quiet, LOUD dirty blues that serves as the score here, it was both familiar but a different approach to the usual action movie backdrop.

Final Rating - 6 / 10. Bruce Willis was hardly breaking new ground when he agreed to do this, but at the same time director Walter Hill managed to make what could have easily been a formulaic action film into something at least worth watching.

"They were all better off dead..." Dull period action saved somewhat by Willis.

[poolandrews · 5/10 · 5 July 2007]

Last Man Standing tells the tale of a gun for hire (Bruce Willis) who is travelling through Texas to get to Mexico, about 50 miles from the Texan border he stops at a ghost town called Jericho which is run by two Irish & Italian feuding Chicago bootlegging gangs. They currently have a truce but tensions are high between them, he checks things out & finds the local Sheriff Ed Galt (Bruce Dern) is bent & he senses he can make some easy money. First he kills a couple of men working for gang leader Doyle (David Patrick Kelly) & is promptly hired by Doyle's rival gang leader Strozzi (Ned Eisenberg), he calls himself 'John Smith' & begins to play the two gangs off each other as he passes information along which will make him lots of money. However Smith becomes too involved & as the situation spirals out of control just about everyone wants him dead...

Written, produced & directed by Walter Hill I thought Last Man Standing was an average & fairly forgettable action/western remake of Yojimbo (1961) & A Fistful of Dollars (1964). The script which takes itself very seriously is alright but it could have used more action, as it is it feels long & drawn out without much happening. You know I'm not really that sure who Last Man Standing is meant to appeal to, it has elements of drama, action, romance, western & thriller without actually settling down & concentrating on one particular genre. It's a bit messy & while it tries to be several things it ends up being nothing in particular. The film features a constant narration by Willis' character which saves the need for a lot of dull exposition heavy dialogue I suppose but it's flatly written as is the whole film really. To be fair to it it's watchable but nothing special, in fact I only saw it a few hours ago & I can barely remember it. I wasn't convinced by some of the plot either, I mean why would these gangs give Willis' character so much information when basically they didn't know him? Why did they trust him so much & fall for every lie hook, line & sinker? The ease with which Willis play the two gangs off each other just seemed far too easy to me.

Director Hill does alright but the few action scenes are very brief & not exciting in the slightest, then there's the pacing problem because it does drag in places & there's not much variety in the plot either. I also didn't like the decision to film everything in a brown/orange sepia tone, everything just looks dusty, dirty & very dull with little detail. To be fair the period recreation is well done & it looks the business but, well, I still didn't like it that much. The violence is tame with little blood, there's some nudity including Willis' bare bum if that's your thing.

With a supposed budget of about $67,000,000 Last Man Standing tanked at the box-office & you can understand why, I'm not really sure who it was meant to appeal to. It's well made for sure with high production values although the annoying brown tone makes things a little muddy & hard to make out. The acting is OK, I really like Bruce Willis & he's made some great films although why he chose to do this is beyond me, luckily he got back on track with his next film The Fifth Element (1997). The great Christopher Walken is wasted in nothing more than a cameo role while Ned Eisenberg has recovered from a homicidal maniac shoving a pair of garden shears into his throat in the classic slasher The Burning (1981).

Last man Standing is an OK time waster, it's nothing special & I can see why it bombed at the box-office. Worth watching if your a Bruce Willis fan but even then you may not be that impressed.

Stylish Mayhem

[ccthemovieman-1 · 8/10 · 21 February 2006]

This is simply what the above headline states: an ultra-violent movie done is stylish cinematography. Walter Hill, a nasty director who does this sort of thing (violent, profane films but usually with great visual appeal) did it in spades on this one. This is testosterone gone berserk.....and very entertaining.

Actually, I enjoy watching this film and don't apologize for it, although it has no "redeeming qualities." However, I love the old-fashioned narration, here done by Bruce Willis in great Mickey Spillane/Mike Hammer-style, the period in which it's done (1930s) and the great colors in here. Love those orange colors!! This looks tremendous on DVD with a good flat-screen set.

If I'm feeling in the need of seeing a violent crime film, this usually fills the bill. It's a fun flick. I could do worse.

A remake of, which is a remake of, which is a remake of

[lastliberal · 7/10 · 15 April 2007]

I once real that there are only 100 plots that can be used to write a story. All novels or movies are just variations of these 100. I don't know how true that is, but if you watch a lot of movies, you will come to believe it.

I generally hate it when they remake great Japanese movies, but since Akira Kurosawa (Rashômon, The Seven Samurai) stole Yojimbo from Dashiell Hammett, I guess fair is fair. Anyway, Sergio Leone also stole the story and made a western version - Per un pugno di dollari - with Clint Eastwood. Now, Bruce Willis is no Clint Eastwood, but I generally find his films to be a pleasant way to spend my time - I watched Hostage for the fourth or fifth time last night.

He does a reliably good job as a gangster in this film and is supported by a truly evil bad guy, Christopher Walken. There are some other great performers in this "guy" film. Yes, there are women, but they have really minor roles.

Ry Cooder provides some great blues that really sets the tone.

A mean and dusty movie.

[TOMASBBloodhound · 5/10 · 23 June 2005]

You get the feeling that somewhere underneath all that dust there was a good movie waiting to be made. This Walter Hill film is really nothing too exceptional, though. How in the world could any movie in which Bruce Willis fires so many rounds of ammunition lose 49 million dollars? The film uses the ancient story of a mysterious drifter waltzing into town and pitting himself between two rival gangs. This plot has been used in westerns, samurai films, you name it. This film takes place in a dusty west Texas town which seems to exist only for the purpose of being a midway point for bootlegging during Prohibition. Two gangs have an uneasy truce going when Willis drives into town and starts wreaking havoc. One gang is led by David Patrick Kelly, who is an old Walter Hill stand-by actor. The other is led by Ned Eisenberg. You may remember him as being the guy from Moving Violations who is really into horror films. Both gangs are incompetent, but at least Kelly has the services of Christopher Walken's savage character on his side. Willis predictably routes these gangs, or sets up scenarios where they can kill off each other.

The biggest problem with this film is its tone. Everyone is mean, depressed, or indifferent. Nobody is having any fun at all. Walter Hill is such a talented man. Hadn't he seen Willis in The Last Boy Scout? That film was also loaded with excessive violence, but it was at least FUN! Hill has given us 48 Hours and the Warriors. Those films also worked mainly because they didn't take themselves too seriously. Last Man Standing is all style and no grace.

The action of this film is also very easy to see coming. Does it take a genius to figure out that when the Mexican woman gives her necklace to Willis that it will be found on him later by Kelly's gang? Notice how they beat him senseless, then turn their backs long enough for him to crawl away! You have got to be kidding me! There is not one surprise along the way.

The location is dirty and desolate, but I found it somewhat beautiful. The music from Ry Cooder (whom Hill often uses) is very good and atmospheric. These little things make you wonder what a re-write could have done for the film.

I'll give it 5 of 10 stars. The Hound just hates to see a good director waste a good cast!!!!

Kurosawa on Kurosawa

[tedg · 28 July 2002]

Spoilers herein.

Students of film have great fun with situations like this. Here we have three films (`Yojimbo,' `Fistful,' and `Last Man') with the same script but entirely different cinematic philosophies. All do well at what they attempt.

Kurosawa is one of the great innovators of film, developing the notion of the disembodied eye whose curiosity changes depending on the action. He is interested not so much in the images, but in the seeing of the images and the acknowledged reaction to what is seen.

Leone had a different agenda. He wanted to take an extremely mature idiom and turn some elements of it inside out. The hero is damaged goods. The focus is on the characters but the trick is to take Kurosawa's knowing eye and give it humor. So we not only are seeing Leone make fun of the Cowboy hero, he also builds in our humorous reaction into the fabric of the film. It worked and defined a style of self-ironic films that is far more popular now than ever was the western.

Now comes Walter Hill. He takes the `old' selfirony away from the camera and gives it to Willis, who has made an entire career out of winking at the audience. Where the character irony used to be, Hill places cinematic irony. In other words, Leone was modifying the expectations of character and Hill modifies the expectations of situation.

The result is a camera that makes fun of the pictures it takes. When Willis shoots the first guy, he barrels back a good 100 feet. When the guns go off, they are more a commentary on the silliness of guns than a serious depiction of death. Victims instantly die. All of them and us are `shot.'

This only works when everything is far more abstract than in the predecessor films. The town is as desolate and simple as possible. The sunsets are only of one kind, imagined. The clothes are extremely theatrical.

This film is not about a guy. It is about film, and filmmaking, using much the same trick as in `Romeo + Juliet' of that same year. Unfortunately for us. Hill is a better theorist than he is an artist. So though one can see that he set out to do something clever, even important, his skills weren't up to it. If you want to see a more successful attempt, still flawed, check out `Way of the Gun.'

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 4: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

Decent enough.

[Mrbigham13 · 6/10 · 19 January 2020]

Not a great movie but not a bad one either. If you're a fan of Bruce Willis and Christopher Walken then give it a go. If you like anything gangster related definitely see it. Nothing ground breaking here just some fun dialogue and gun play. The story is so so and the environment obviously dry but apart from all that it's a solid action flick. Might as well be a Colt. 45 advertisement with very few reloads.

he is the middleman standing on both sides of the fence

[lark40 · 7/10 · 27 September 2020]

Bruce willis at his peak and a brillant blend of the old west style film of not stop action.Jerica ,texas 1931 and new breed of gunfighter haunts the windswept border town the big suits from chicago who are in conrtol of illegal flow of alcohol crossing the mexican border . Jericos two gangs have replaced law an order with a cival war and the sheriff Gaff has know control or power to stop the bloodshed , then a mysterious stranger blows in and spends a few hrs looking for a hotel . he calls himself smith he feels like a drifter but he is highly dangerous with a gun and then all hell breakes loose. soon he is hired by one gang and then the other as he cleverly and lies betrays both sides in a war than can leave only one man standing. brilliant film i gave it 7/10 enjoy.

a great action movie

[little_nellie · 7/10 · 28 December 2006]

A great action movie. Bruce Willis acting is good. The story line appears to be the same as Clint Eastwood's "A Fistfull of Dollars". Helping out the girl, got beat up and helped by the bartender. The undertaker, burning of one of the gangster's house etc. Set took place at an old cowboy town, just fast forward a few years from Fistfull of Dollars. Or fast backward a few years and you have the same set as "Fistfull of Dollars". The only disappointment is the ending. I sure thought there should be more fight between Walkins character since during the movie, there is build up on how bad this guys is. A single shoot ended his life seem a bit too fast. He really did not show how bad he really is. Worth seeing. The DTS soundtrack is great.

Not one of director Hills' best, but entertaining.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 28 January 2015]

The great action director Walter Hill creates another effective male milieu in this stylish American reworking of the story previously told in "Yojimbo" and "A Fistful of Dollars". The film certainly *looks* good, even if it's somewhat limited in its use of colour, and Ry Cooders' music score is typically flavourful and evocative. A low key Bruce Willis leads a dynamic cast of well chosen character actors. Hills' script, which he based on the screenplay for "Yojimbo" written by Akira Kurosawa and Ryuzo Kikushima, is passable; the story here yields adequate entertainment without being particularly memorable.

This version is set in a small, small Texas town during the Prohibition era. Willis plays the role of "John Smith", a drifter who arrives in town to discover that there are two warring crime families dominating things. The Italian family is headed by Fredo Strozzi (Ned Eisenberg), the Irish one by Doyle (David Patrick Kelly). Seemingly a man without scruples, Smith figures that he will play both sides of the street in the name of self-interest. Not surprisingly, he finds his way of life ultimately compromised.

Willis is okay, but the people in supporting parts fare better. Christopher Walken has fun as a henchman with a pronounced raspy voice. Alexandra Powers does what she can with the most substantial female role in the picture, while Karina Lombard mostly just looks beautiful; Leslie Mann is fine in her brief time on screen. William Sanderson is endearing as bar owner Joe Monday; also appearing are Michael Imperioli, Ken Jenkins, R.D. Call, Ted Markland, Patrick Kilpatrick, Luis Contreras, Raynor Scheine, Tiny Ron, and Lin Shaye.

"Last Man Standing" is appreciably violent, if not that bloody. However, there's so much gunfire throughout the film that it all becomes a bit numbing. Also, Smith is able to blow so many damn bad guys to kingdom come that it actually comes as something of a relief when he takes his lumps at one point and we see he's human after all. The highlight for this viewer came at a little before the 80 minute mark when the intensity of the action reaches a peak.

Fans of the action genre will likely have a pretty good time with this one.

Seven out of 10.

Bruce Willis doing The Red Harvest

[mickdansforth · 8/10 · 26 December 2004]

This movie is a Gangster remake of Clint East Wood's A Fistful of Dollars which is a Western remake of Yojimbo which is a samurai adaptation of Dashiell Hammett's The Red Harvest. When adapting the first time Akira Kurosawa changed the amount of gangs involved from 4 to 2. Every version since then has had only 2. The Continental Op, The Man With No Name, Mifune's Samurai, and Bruce Willis's John Smith. All Nameless. All working all sides to their own end.

As this is the only gangster version of this story, I like this movie very much, though I would like to see a more accurate version of the Red Harvest. When deciding who should play the Continental Op, none come to mind more than Bruce Willis, which of course brings me back to liking Last Man Standing. Not as pretty as those that came before, but pretty cool.

Solid Action Flick

[morris9795 · 7/10 · 29 November 2007]

Last Man Standing is the story of John Smith, a gun-for-hire with an ambiguous conscience. He is on the run from his latest (unexplained) adventures when he finds himself in the small Texas town of Jericho. The town, not really much of a town, is plagued by two warring gangs. Smith sees the situation as an opportunity to make some quick cash by playing both sides against each other. However, as the story unfolds we find Smith to be caught in a conflict of his own warped sense of honor and conscience (which of course is profoundly ironic since Smith claims to be without a conscience).

The movie is solid but nothing special. It is well acted, Bruce Willis as the lead character John Smith is superb and Christopher Walken is, as always, superb as the Irish mobs number one shooter. The two lead female characters in the film play a major part in the development of the story despite not having large roles.

Overall Last Man Standing is a fantastic movie, but not in the sense that it's a good movie but the sense that it is quite unrealistic. Regardless it is very entertaining and a great movie to watch when you don't want to put much thought into the movie. It is a guy movie though, meaning it is rather violent (though not graphically so) and contains a fair amount of female nudity and sexual content (again not graphically so).

My final recommendation is sit down with a bag of popcorn and enjoy watching Bruce Willis kick some bad guy butt.

Awful! Awful! Awful!

[eshwayri · 1/10 · 6 July 2002]

I am pretty easy to please. I have liked many movies that critics have panned, BUT NOT THIS ONE! It is AWFUL! It has no redeeming value whatsoever. To start off with, the scenery is terribly boring. A drab and colorless desert town with obviously fake tumbleweed. There is no color ANYWHERE as brown and grey are the orders of the day. This would not be such a problem if there was a decent plot or script on which you could concentrate, but alas those are as bad and boring as the scenery. The movie did have action scenes, but they were ludicrous to say the least. Handguns that would not empty, aim that was perfect, and bullets that propelled humans 100 ft or more. All of that followed by a medieval banquet that was as strange as the mad hatter's tea party. With most bad movies one can find at least one redeeming factor (beautiful scenery, music, etc..), but not in this one.

I must admit that I only watched the first 20 minutes of the movie as that was all I could take. I had never before walked out of a movie theater, but after those 20 minutes I was sure there was something better on TV.

Don't waste any time or money on this movie. You WILL regret it.

Brutal, masculine entertainment handicapped by one flawed sequence.

[fertilecelluloid · 8/10 · 21 January 2006]

This brutal Walter Hill pic has one of the best beatings ever burned to celluloid. It is so brutal, in fact, that the victim (Bruce Willis) looks like Jason from "Friday The 13th" once his attackers get done with him. Even better, he then lurches around like Rondo Hatten in "The Creep Man" plotting his revenge.

The film's final action scene is an awful, indescribable mess, and I have always wondered why Hill and usual editor Freeman Davies opted to construct it this way. It is a shootout presented in a series of dissolves, and it just doesn't work. Hill has always been an adroit director and editor of action, and his fine work has a precision to it that this sequence lacks. Perhaps the camera negatives were damaged or the studio ordered a truncation. Whatever the reasons are for this flawed sequence, it, unfortunately, turns a great movie into a good movie.

The opening sequence, replete with Ry Cooder's smooth scoring, is poetic and beautiful; Willis's arrival in town is directed with skill and energy; and cudos are also in order for the scene in which the first shot is fired and a stuntman is sent flying through a door into the dusty street outside.

Christopher Walken is fantastic as the violent enforcer Hickey, and it is great to see David Patrick Kelly back on the screen as the malicious Doyle.

There are many standout sequences and much to enjoy. Willis's solitary siege of a brothel, for example, is classic Hill stuff in terms of its staging, unapologetic brutality and superb cutting.

That the film is a remake of a remake is of no consequence to me. It is still a rousing, spare piece of masculine entertainment with a whiff of Peckinpah, a dash of Kurosawa, and a splatter of Corbucci.

That ain't no bad thing.

A Rodriguez style gangster-western

[JimmyG100 · 7/10 · 12 July 2007]

Didn't quite know what to expect when I picked this one up at the store for $5. Bruce Willis and Christopher Walken in a Western set in 1930's prohibition? (you may think that is a gangster film, but trust me, watching this, it's not.) Anyways, I was forced to ask myself the question "if this film's so good why's it being sold so cheap?" Well I'm not one to shun a film just cus it's got a low low price, hell I picked up Street Fighter (the original Chiba one) for just a dollar. So I figured I might as well check it out see if it's really worth it.

Well it was. I'm not too familiar with Walter Hill, but he does a fine job in this film showing Bruce Willis blasting away at the bad guys. Watching it I'm reminded of a watered down Desperado. This whole film seems like a Robert Rodriguez film without the Robert Rodriguez attitude. And while that is missed, especially in the screenplay, it's still got some wonderful shootouts in it.

Based off the same story Sergio Leone's Fistfull of Dollars takes it's plot from, you'll notice many similarities between the two. In fact, you could even see this as a re-make of Fistfull of Dollars if you wanted to, but not in a bad way. To give a fair analogy, this movie is to Fistfull of Dollars as the Tom Savini 1990 re-make of Night of the Living Dead is to the original 68 George Romero film. Same basic plot, slightly different action, which one's better? Well you decide.

You want to see something fun, shot well, something that successfully mixes the two sub-genres of western and gangster films, something that's got Bruce Willis going Desperado on Christopher Walken? Pick this one up and have a good time.

boring and pointless

[lil_pimpcess80 · 1/10 · 27 November 2006]

If i were to describe Last Man Standing in one sentence, i would say:Bruce Willis going on a shooting spree.From the beginning to the end you'll see Bruce Willis killing everyone.thats just basically the plot of the movie. the movie has no depth and no foundation whatsoever. A big waste of time and money. so if you want to watch 101 minutes of gunshots then this is the movie for you. Most men will probably disagree with me because they enjoy violence and guns. But if you look at the big picture you'll see this movie has no point to it. if you want to see some real action, watch the news. Its way more interesting than this film.