Gunfight at Rio Bravo

Im a big Western fan so I indulge in some of the low budget films. This one is better then most. Very basic story but one that has worked well over the years. A good pace with lots of action - no big special effects but some enjoyable action scenes. There was decent acting and characters you bond with. All this packed into 80 minutes. Very enjoyable if you go in with an open mind and view it for what it is. If you under some delusion that this low budget TUBI movie is going to be a classic - well of course you will be disappointed. All in all for me it was an enjoyable experience and would recommend this to any Western fan.

If this is a comedy film, then it's great!

It is simply impossible to take such a game of actors seriously, shots and wounds look like effects were made in the application on the phone.

The main character is trying to be serious, but he is so unnatural that it only causes a facepalm.

There is one dialogue in the film with a hint of seriousness, but it would be better if it wasn't there.

In general, no need to waste time on this pathetic movie. Better read the reviews of this movie, it will be more useful and funny.

The only good thing about this movie is i wanted to rewatch the original RIO...

OMG... Are you kidding me???? This is the worst western I've ever seen in my life!!!!! I really don't understand where come all these 10-ratings from, are you people blind and deaf? It seems to me that all the reviews were written by professionals and sent by e-mail to all the friends of Nevsky, in purpose to copy-paste them and post on IMDB.

Pathetic and helpless acting and directing, bad costumes, lack of any interesting film editing, empty lines and dialogues - this movie feels like laundering the black money for Russian mafia (kidding, still want to live) :)) The only actor that did some good work on set was Matthias Hues (still looking good low budget movies actor), all the rest of cast, including Nevsky, was terrible. They didn't even have enough material to make this failure a bit longer...

I didn't see any "outstanding performances", any "really good bunch of talented actors", any "thoroughly depicted historical scenes", any "fantastic landscapes"... I didn't hear any of "Quentin Tarantino-style dialogues", any "fantastic music", any good work of sound department, any interesting intonation at all... Ilya Naishuler was mentioned in one of the reviews, but I'm sure he would cry upon this movie and amount of money Nevsky spilled on it. And I wonder what it would be if Tarantino was reading these reviews he was mentioned in.

I know what is the category called B-movie. And I love those movies! But this so called western isn't even close to this category!

It's just bad bad bad movie...

I should have believed all the reviews that pan this movie. Weak and basic plot. Acting basic, mostly. No surprises. Cinematography good. Landscapes beautiful. Costumes decent. Setting very good. It left me unmoved. I didn't learn anything. Find a different one to watch, like Treasure Of The Sierra Madre, Hang 'Em High, the Life and Legend of Wyatt Earp TV Series, Once upon a time in the West, Fistful Of Dollars, the Deadwood series, Tombstone, the original half-hour shows of Gunsmoke. Anything but this, unless you Want to kill your soul. I feel like I've just had a pre-frontal lobotomy. I want my life back.

This is a comedy Western.....isn't it? Surely it's not meant to be serious. The dialogue and acting are indeed laughable but the writers forgot to add the intentional jokes and left in the unintentional ones. Every cliche, every plot point, every character, every attempt at conveying emotion.....all been done before and better.

The multi-lingual cast may be fantastic actors in their natural language. But if they have learnt this dialogue phonetically, as appears to have happened with this movie, it really doesn't help the action or the story.

You know the phrase "so bad it's good"? Doesn't apply- it's so bad, it's worse.