A Cold Day in Hell (2011) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
30 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Just bad !
quincey5927 June 2011
This film is just an embarrassment to film making and acting.

Not really much more to say.

Hammy acting, poor script, terrible editing.

I have seen decent films with Michael Madsen in and am amazed he had anything to do with this. Even his acting looks poor in this. None of the Characters have anything about them. Impossible to build any rapport or empathy with the characters or story line.

The best thing about this is the DVD Cover - hilarious - comparing this rubbish to quality western films like and 3.10 To Yuma and True Grit.

Please stay away from this "C Movie".
15 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
give it a miss
mickerick200016 June 2011
To be honest the film seems like it was made at a high school club, The town is made from brand new wood (every building),The clothes look like they have all just been delivered from the dry cleaners the holsters are all brand new and they have silver guns. Whoever did the props needs to watch a western film not the milky bar kid advert from the sixties.I am an avid watcher of westerns and love a good ole gunfight but this lacked just about everything you like in a western ,Even the guns sounded like they were firing caps i could clap my hands louder

To sum it up it looks like a few people got together and played cowboys I gave it 1 out of 10 and thats because they don't have a 0
20 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A tragic waste
sajpratt-82-26527716 June 2011
I love Westerns, so when I saw that a recent film release had Michael Madsen in the lead role of one, I was excited.

Sometimes there are low budget films in which a budding director's talents can be seen and appreciated. Such directors need encouragement and guidance, and when they get it, we are often rewarded with truly inspired film making.

There are also people who, by some miracle or fortune of birth or happenstance get to produce, write and direct a movie, but who we hope will try another occupation for their own sake (and ours).

Try as I might, I could find no scene that wasn't victimized by poor camera angles, horrible writing, and just plain bad acting. We can forgive the cheesy sets and amateurish sound editing -- these are the first things to suffer in low budget films. But the Director Forbes (who is also the DOP) handles the camera like a news reporter (apparently there was only one camera in use, so it is doubly important to use it well, have a longer shot list and apply more energy to filming each shot), with strait-on-face closeups that make you expect a journalist to pop up with microphone in hand. This indicates an impoverished shot list and subsequently is just plain agonizing to sit through.

There is evidence that some of the unknown actors have talent, but the moments one might see this are rare, and they are often victims of a shot that sidelines them to favor the lead or some burdensome, unnecessary background ambiance -- and lack of directing talent has these supporting actors actually diminishing the lead's scenes, rather than actually supporting them. So, as a result, we don't know if Forbes was just too timid to support aggressive retakes and make manifest what might have been a more creative shot list, or he didn't buy enough camera time, or he's just lazy and uninspired.

About 30 minutes into the film, we find ourselves begging Madsen to pull the thing out of it's hole with sheer force of personality, but no dice. If someone told me Madsen was ordered to do this film as some sort of community service penance, I'd be willing to believe them. Still, with such horrific writing, he sometimes manages to deliver his lines as well as any decent actor could, given the awful material he had to work with.

We must heap responsibility on a director for a film's worthiness, because even a director that has been given a horrible script can make at least some of it shine if he/she is talented enough. That's not the case here with Forbes, however, since he is also one of the writers -- making this appear to be exactly what it is -- a vanity project by someone who got/had some money and wanted to do a movie (he also is a producer, writer, DOP, editor and songwriter for the film). What fun! In short, this is a dreadful, annoyingly bad film made by One-Man-Band Forbes who appears to be not so talented in any one of the roles he's assumed here -- even his tedious, predictable soundtrack seems to be garage-band inspired and is consequently weirdly out-of-place. My advice to the director is to attend film school from year one if he insists on pursuing a career as a film maker.

I've vigorously thrown this movie into my "Tragic Waste of Time, Energy, and Money But At Least The Crew Got Paid" file.
18 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, Mr. Madsen
Gladys_Pym23 June 2011
Michael Madsen, eh? He's in barely a single scene with anyone else in it - my guess is he came on set for a couple of hours, did his bit and left. Even so, he was probably the best 'actor' in the film.

It looks like it's filmed in some Western theme park, and if there's a single gunfight where you can actually see the shooter and the victim in the same shot, I didn't notice it. Which would work if the editing wasn't so lamentable.

All in all, one for the bin. Straight to DVD? Why bother.

Even the production company haven't bothered to get their friends to write 10* reviews on IMDb.

It's tempting to believe it's a wry pastiche. But it's not. It's just rubbish.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Even the Trailer looks bad.
zikarro5 July 2011
Just watch the trailer and you can see this is an awful movie. Cheesy sound track, bad acting, and it looks like it was filmed using a digital camera. This "movie" looks like something someone made to put up on YouTube. Micheal Madsens name at the top of the cover...really? He's barely in the movie. Madsen is an accomplished actor. I do hope this movie is not an indication of where his career is headed. If so, he needs to switch managers. The other actors in this movie sound and look as if it's their first time in front of a camera. Reciting lines. Terrible movie. Hardly worth the time it took to write this review. Spend your money on some other form of entertainment, not this drivel.
16 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A typical production direct to DVD rental market
rightwingisevil15 June 2011
Any movie with Michael Madsen in it is a trademark of B-movie (B=Bad), definitely with poor screenplay, killing-me-over-and-over horrible deadbeat dialog, loose and stupid scenario/plot, mediocre or extremely bad directing, entry-level actors with poor or non-exist acting talent. This movie is no exception. Actors who acted in this movie always gave me an impression that they've suddenly forgotten their dialog, every word came up two second slow. Their performances were just too forced to look convincing. The costumes they wore were too modern, trying very hard to look cool. The gunfights in this movie also looked pretty phony too, especially when shot a guy with 5 shots overkill, no wonder the gun fighting scenes were littered so many brass shells. The gun powder blasts also sounded pretty unreal. The worst flaws of modern western B-movies were all included in this typically dragging one, i.e., everything looked just so unconvincingly unreal and tasteless like chewing a piece of cork.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bah hahahahahahaha
rabiem22-91-45092727 June 2011
I would have given this poorly named movie a ZERO had the option been there, but I suppose IMDb site owners have not factored into their calculations the probability of that ever happening. This movie has done it with style. Had the phrase "3:10 to Yuma RIDES UP TO TRUE GRIT" not screamed out at me to give it a chance, the cover alone was a sufficient tip off that this flick was a flop. I had given up watching the movie at just the exact time when I sensed my intelligence could no longer be insulted, which was just about 35 minutes into it. I was nonetheless mesmerized by its outlandish plot, inept camera work and the "actors" natural rigid performance which is no performance at all. These three ingredients I thought are what make a good comedy.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Horrible
mexicosteve18 June 2011
Looks like it's shot on video and probably went straight to DVD, a complete waste of both. The acting is sub high school drama class. The script, particularly the dialog, is just plain awful. The scenery is all wrong- the setting is the Sierra Nevada Mountains but there's not a pine tree or snow capped peak to be seen. The time period is mid to late 1800's and books from that time period are already old. The buildings are are also already old. The continuity is a constant problem. Guns change, books change, glasses are moved, empty, full and empty again. I seriously can't believe Michael Madsen agreed to be in this train wreck. I can only assume he owed someone some serious money or this was a close family members Jr. High School film project.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
There should be laws against releasing a movie this bad.
jokerb-76-49240030 June 2011
I rated this 1 star out of 10 because they don't give you the option to choose no stars. Obviously, this movie really wasn't written/produced/directed by someone named Christopher Forbes because no one in their right mind would attach their name to this kind of rubbish. A pre-school class could have made something more entertaining than this. If I could go back in time and had the choice between paying for this movie or throwing $100 down a toilet I would've chose the latter just because I wouldn't want to give the film producers 1 cent of my money for this rubbish. Don't waste your time or money on this "film"!
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Wow! I was very impressed.
antonio_tanti17 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
What impressed me about this film was how bad it really was. It was incredibly bad. The plot was a cliché of every other western, I've seen better acting in porn movies, the effects were... well, to give you an example: An explosion is a bang, the camera pans away suddenly and some wooden planks fall to the floor. Seriously, the 1.5 million dollar budget is way too expensive for this file. They must have given most of it to Michael Madsen. Although he did absolutely nothing throughout the whole film. Bad script, bad direction and bad editing. I can't express this enough, this isn't a B Movie... its a BAD movie. Watch it only if you have nothing better to do and you are completely drunk. It has to be the worst movie I've ever seen.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
If there was ever a film that could turn some heads, this is it.
shaynecaboor5 December 2011
Yes, you read this correctly. This film is definitely capable of turning your head; or in other words, it's capable of turning your stomach inside-out while you turn your head AWAY from the screen in anguish.

I admittedly found a copy of the DVD abandoned by its previous owner. I did not at all pay to obtain a copy of this film, and thank goodness I didn't; it is clearly obvious to me why the person who previously owned it wanted to dump it off the way they did, and quite frankly, I would consider doing the same...

Never in my entire life have I laid eyes upon such a horribly developed "western", if you could even call it that. The acting is horrific; the music is pathetic; the story is...wait, what story? The only somewhat tolerable portion of this film is its action sequences, and even they leave much to be desired.

Let's start by discussing the acting. To put it bluntly, the costumes in this film seem like they were thrown together by a ragtag band of clueless teenagers who were attempting to make a montage of their favorite two-bit Halloween outfits; therefore, the actors seem incredibly out of place in this supposedly "rough terrain" that gunslingers had to ride through day after day. A good cast would have helped to make this flaw less-noticeable, yet unfortunately, the "acting" seems as stiff as the clothes they wear. Michael Madsen severely disappointed me in this, and surprisingly appeared just as amateur as the others. The only way I could possibly believe that he ever got involved with such a film is by losing a bet, or being extremely drunk when he signed on. I had not before heard of any of the rest of the cast, but if any of their prior roles were at all reminiscent of this, it is no wonder why. Awkward camera angles, shallow character development and poor editing certainly do not help matters any.

Musically, the film is atrocious. One might think, if they bothered to unplug their ears while the "Main Menu Theme" played upon the disc's startup, that the songs in this film were created to evoke comedy...and if this "score" had been used for that type of a film, it would have been hilarious. This, however, is not the correct genre for such a pathetic piece of work. Perhaps Mr. Chris Forbes attempted to tackle too many of his "God-given talents" in this film: producer, writer, editor, DOP, and songwriter. Maybe if some REAL talent had been brought in to compose the music, we might hear something worth listening to. But as it is, I strongly recommend that you take several tablets of aspirin before attempting to sit through the film's music; otherwise, do yourself a favor, mute your TV, and flip on the subtitles so no pain caused from hearing the soundtrack will be experienced.

I was utterly perplexed with this film, story-wise. Not once before have I been so uninterested in a film's narrative. This, however, takes the cake. I do not wish to spoil anything if anyone develops the urge to experience this film first-hand (although I highly advise against it). Just believe me when I say that this movie's plot is nothing above a mound of seemingly irrelevant events that build gradually until the film's ridiculous climax. Whole sequences appear to be absent from the film, and others seem to just be thrown in to increase the length and production value. The ending is just as bad, with only the slightest sense of a plot resolution. Of course, one cannot let Forbes escape without the blame on this one, as he is credited with writing this agonizing series of events. So everything we see on-screen has come from the man's own mind, and is EXACTLY the way he envisioned it (despite, presumably, that it would in turn lead to a flop).

The action was just partially tolerable. A few of the gunfights were done well enough that I was actually able to watch the screen during a chunk of their duration. This, however, was again completely trashed by the lack of dynamic camera angles. This reduces the look of authenticity in the skirmishes, as they simply appear to be reenactments instead of live gunfights. The visual effects are also a bit oppressing at times. Gun smoke erupts into an unrealistically large cloud of fog, and the cheesy "pops" that sound every time a gun is fired just make the whole thing laughable. Apparently to Mr. Forbes, a dynamite stick explosion consists of a corny sound effect and two or three wooden boards flying across the screen (that alone should be convincing enough to prove my point).

All in all, I guess you cannot demand much out of a movie of this caliber. Rudimentary sound editing, underdeveloped sets, poor visual effects, and somewhat weak costumes are among the things to be expected. That being said, there are numerous things in this film that are, for the most part, inexcusable: i.e. the intolerable musical score, the feeble acting, the poor camera work, the repulsive script, and the low-grade plot line.

The only thing that I loved about this film was its punchline on the cover and the disc itself: "3:10 to Yuma rides up next to True Grit." Hysterical! A true man of wit had to have been involved with the composition of those words referring to something as disgusting as this film.

I highly recommend that you skip over this one if you have not yet seen it; it is not worth the disc it was burnt onto. My rating is two stars, and that's the very best I can do; one star for trying (or, at least, pretending to try), and another for managing to convince me that this is by far one of the top ten worst films of our decade. Bar none.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
These so-called western fans are babies
forbesfilm29 June 2011
These so-called western fans need to look to horror fans to find out what it is really like to be a fan of a certain genre. When a horror fan watches a low-budget film, they don't whine about why more money wasn't spent or cry about why their favorite actor wasn't perfect in the film. I'm a true fan of western films and I've viewed a vast number of them, from the classics to new films that have gone direct to video. I always watch a film looking for what's right with the production, and there is a lot right with A COLD DAY IN HELL, notably some solid performances from a number of key players. But the crybabies who wrote these so-called "reviews" don't see this. What I would suggest is that they meet with their mommies to work out some long-buried issues and then write a real piece of criticism. Then, negative or not, it would still be a respectable piece of communication. Otherwise, shut up and eat your gruel.
1 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Somebody help . . . no real producer/director would release this!
evan3080922 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know what a spoiler is. My review is just me telling it like it is, it is terrible. I guess they give the producers/directors/actors and distributors etc. escapes. They just call my very serious comments "spoilers". Blame me for their inabilities!

This has to be the most incompetent movie group in the USA!

Looks like some body is selling the acting parts . . . for money not talent . . . since there are no real actors in the movie.

While this guy Forbes claims to be a director . . . he ain't! Maybe he should get a job farming or something!

Did the distributors actually watch this movie before they released it?

If Netflix sends me another movie like this . . . I will have to review who I get my movie recommendations from!

In summary this movie was so painful that the person watching it with me and I had to take two "butt breaks" to get through it! It was a very irritating waste of my time and money. I only finished watching the movie just to see if it got worse or better . . . I got worse! What did the train have to do with this nowhere story . . . there was no story have you every seen a more incompetent movie ? ? ?

Barnholtz . . . this is two . . . are you a masochist?

Nothing makes any sense or appears to be thought out!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Credit where credit is due!
MennoMan13 July 2011
I Give Credit to everyone who cast and crew who used their real names in the CREDITS of this disaster of a film. Anyone with a home movie editor and a keyboard could have cut and mastered this film better. As for effect.. Water tower which could not hold water... See through Fronts.... Train Clips probably found in public domain video with train sound effects recored with a Edison machine. They should of at least used a Lionell Toy train for the wreck instead of a Cardboard cutout moving in a 2 second clip. Horrible plot. Way to many cuts and bad cuts. Music sounded like a child on a old church organ. Worst than BAD.. SO BAD it is worth watching just to see how poor a movie should not be made.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Good for a laugh
kate_elinsky17 February 2012
I can't believe that I finally found something that makes home movies look like masterful works of art.

Every time a scene came on with Michael Madsen, all I could say was "Oh Michael...how far you've sunk." After 20 minutes, we put it on pause and sat there looking at the screen talking about the good movies that he was in, and finally turned it off.

I can honestly say that we didn't pay for this piece of tripe - we borrowed it from the library. I feel sorry for the person who actually paid good money for it.

This movie was just plain sad and it will be one cold day in hell when we watch it again. I think that Christopher Forbes shouldn't quit his day job quite yet.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bitter disappointment!
Steiner_Rolf26 June 2011
I am so disappointed by this film. Apparently this is yet another in the slew of direct-to-video westerns produced in recent years. The base story is good, and had it been done with more of the budget on special effects and not on salaries, it might have gone somewhere. As it stands, it appears that most of the film's budget was spent on big-name salaries, however the speech and acting is stilted and wooden, even Mr. Madsen's. The plethora of CGI shootings didn't help either. Fake blood and squibs *do not* cost much and probably might have been cheaper than the CGI wounding. I'm sorry, but a 3 is the best I could cough up. This one would be best avoided, no matter how big a fan of westerns you might be!
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
bad, very bad
razosuper2 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
as a filmmaker myself, I respect that they went out there and got it down. It's hard making films, getting everybody together. With that being said, this was bad. Acting is horrible, production value is bad, even low budget westerns out there now are not this bad. Badly written, characters are stale and no actors. This is what I did in high school and my first year of college. It's a student film and it's a bad student film. If you are a director, actor, writer, you should know what's good and what's bad. If you don't, you come up with a project like this. All bad. I think all filmmakers out there should watch projects like these to learn what not to do. This is suppose to be a movie but doesn't look like a movie. It was shot on "HI Def" video but looks low Deff. It needs to look cinematic but looks like it was shot by my 60 year old uncle with a VHS C camera. I don't want to hate on this but there are so many things wrong with this "movie" and as an artist you can't help to think, what are these so called "filmmakers" thinking when they put this project up? It's sad
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst movie in history
mr_pivac198524 January 2012
Looks like it's shot on video and probably went straight to DVD, a complete waste of both. The acting is sub high school drama class. The script, particularly the dialog, is just plain awful. The scenery is all wrong- the setting is the Sierra Nevada Mountains but there's not a pine tree or snow capped peak to be seen. The time period is mid to late 1800's and books from that time period are already old. The buildings are are also already old. The continuity is a constant problem. Guns change, books change, glasses are moved, empty, full and empty again. I seriously can't believe Michael Madsen agreed to be in this train wreck. I can only assume he owed someone some serious money or this was a close family members Jr. High School film project
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Worst film I've rated on IMDb - out of 3650!!
witster1820 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Granted, I try NOT to watch terrible movies, so I'm sure there's worse out there.

Where to start? I guess the opening credits. There's some train shots that would look like a 1974 promo clip for the Smokey Mountain Railway, with font and music that makes one ponder if anyone involved has ever done anything in the movie industry. Of course the promo-clip analogy was doing it justice, as the train sequence has many obvious toy train images. Fresh with Astroturf.

Of course, Michael Madsen's on the cover. He's barely in the film, but just go ahead and dupe-us by putting him front and center on the best thing about the movie, the cover.

The acting here is beyond terrible. It's like a Saturday night live skit, fresh with actors reading off cards, only add-on wooden faces and no enunciation. It's truly dreadful.

I could make a better film than this. I'm broke, have no professional experience in front of or behind the camera, but IM CERTAIN I could make a better film than this.

The few action sequences are as embarrassing as the rest of the characteristics.

Avoid at all costs - unless you're just trying to see one of the worst movies of all-time. Some films are so bad they're somewhat entertaining(Birdemic, The Thing with Two Heads, etc), but this one is just bad bad. It hurts. Not a scene goes by where you don't shake your head and wonder if these people even knew they were actually live and shooting this.

8/100 easily my lowest rating. Makes Master of Disguise, Glitter, Gigli, Pluto Nash, Room, Birdemic and Leonard Part 6 LOOK DECENT. Seriously!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Waste of time to watch
efkoren-573-9617944 January 2013
Possible runner for worst movie I've ever seen..I hope it didn't cost money to make..Liked the train scenes, mountain views, nice horses...Script came across as if it was read from a book by people who had never seen the book until someone shouted "A cold Day In Hell,Take 1...Cut..Print"

Is it possible that this movie was a spoof? It reminded me of the pasta westerns of the '60's except it wasn't re dubbed in English. Costumes looked like they were from the lost and found box of a C.A.S.S. event that got rained out. I wish I could get two free extra picks from Netflixs for watching this disk :( Good Night, The old guy
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
a home video western
be-bop-795-42052 October 2013
This movie was apparently made by an amateur would-be filmmaker who loved watching westerns so much he tried to make one himself actually. As such it is not bad at all. Just should be kept in the family and not copied onto DVDs.

But if judged by pro standards, the movie is a disaster in almost every respect you can think of. First off, it is a disaster in casting. I saw a silent question of 'what am I doing here?" in the eyes of quite a few actors appearing on the screen. Michael Madsen is NOT in a leading role, and his repeating cameos are so unnecessary for the... plot (OK I'll put this word) it makes YOU wonder what is he doing there anyway. Actors' performance (Madsen included) is as cheesy as is the dialogue. The rule here seems to be, the smaller is the role the more it's tolerable. Silent roles go best and even show some skills. The plot is an epic disaster. Epic in a sense that there are so many lose ends and episodes leading nowhere, you soon start feeling like you're in the middle of season two of something. I actually smelled the rat as soon as 5 minutes into the film when a mass killing of children was used just to show how bad are the bad... The camera work is even more awful than everything else except for those few citations from classic examples that look meaningful thanks to the originals. And and if you're in for some beautiful scenery, look elsewhere. Some reviewers hated the music too, I'd say it is more weird than bad, and at least there's some measure of individuality to it. Directing... what the hell?..

I'd like to stress there's no evil in making amateur movies, or low budget movies, or home camera movies, or one-man movies as such. But what I'd expect from these is some originality, some sharpness, some cleverness, some acquired taste, some feeling of purpose. You don't really find it here. It's just a 'me too', and a very weak one. I sincerely hope the filmmaker is young and willing to learn. Make him a favour (and Michael Madsen too) - don't ever watch 'Cold day in hell'.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
To the WESTERN community
wildwildwestman30 June 2011
I love all westerns so I may be bias but this movie is a good movie considering it being a low budget film if your in tuned with the western low budget genre.

Any movie with shooting and horses gets me excited.

I know MM personally from jobs i've done around HW and he isn't in the film very long due to its small part and the timing it gives for his other films.

The ones that complain about this film must not know what a bad western is because if you look up bad westerns there's a list of over 100 that are sure worse then this.

  • Mr. Hollywood
0 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
No Redeeming Value Whatsoever!
dalekinner17 October 2013
I had hoped at least Michael Madson would make this movie tolerable. I was wrong. His acting parts are minimal, and even then, the script made it impossible for even him to shine. As far as the rest of the cast, the pauses between responses, nearly all of them, makes you think you are watching a production of a high school drama program that is truly lacking in direction. I think all the money for production went into the DVD box cover. That was the best part of this movie. I truly wish there was a governing body that could determine if this stuff is even fit for chargeable public viewing. If it were on Youtube, only the actors and families of those actors would ever even view it. It is that bad.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Purpose of a Film
jbum515 July 2011
First of all, let me say that the purpose of watching a film is for entertainment. If the majority of viewers are not entertained then the film missed it's mark. Chris Forbes - your comments in the above mentioned "review" were as poorly written as your film. You can't rebuke other reviews of western fans because they don't like your movie. There is no personal attack here. It is simply a judgment passed on the work itself. To call names and insult your audience is amateur, at best. If you had done your job as a director you would be reading reviews that I am sure you would be more proud of. Do what professionals do; read the reviews and learn what you need to do different next time around. The "whining" you are referring to seems to be coming from ForbesFilm.

Now, for my opinion of the film - Chris Forbes needs to be a director and nothing more. There are many things done right here. A recognizable name is cast in the film, some shooting was done well. However, you need to bring a real camera man on board with you. You need to let a professional musician do the music. You need to get a real screenplay and tell that story. You can't do it all. For a one man show I'd have to rate it 2 stars.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Cold Day in Hell
Themanwiththetan30 June 2011
This is a straight to DVD release.

Acting can clearly be seen as amateur but remember this is a "straight to DVD release" Michael Madsen didn't give his Reservoir Dogs performance but has he since then? He's in and out of the movie but creates a stable enough character for his small role.

Props are not all ERA related but again... THIS IS A STRAIGHT TO DVD RELEASE. The clothes and guns look new but who the hell cares? They had ways to wash clothes in the 1800s.

The one problem that shouldn't be wrong with this film is the confusing aspect of the script, no matter how low budget the film, the script should always flow together. This movie has a few scenes that should had been left out.

No this isn't True Grit or 3:10 Yuma but any person with enough experience watching or buying films should realize it's called "Marketing" even if it's not done correctly we all know how the Movie industry likes to pull one over on us... Just take a look at all the REMAKES of Hollywood.

This movie isn't the best. It's not a Oscar performance for Madsen and I doubt the Director gets a "Best Directing Award" but the overall film is OK. I watch movies for creativity and although this film lacks such it's bad reviews are mainly coming from the FALSE ADVERTISEMENT the Production Company decided to slap on the front of the cover. Watch if you like low budget westerns, it's at least a different take on the classic/modern westerns.

Do not watch if you expect Michael Madsen to give a Jeff Bridges sort of performance and want the guns and clothes to match the time period down to the hour.
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed