User reviews

SERAPHIM FALLS boasts outstanding cinematography from the very beginning, with scenery ranging from snowy mountainous locales to sun-scorched deserts. The landscapes look and feel beautiful and the characters all have that weathered look, particularly Pierce Brosnan who's almost unrecognisable in the leading role.

It kicks off with action at the outset and remains a chase film throughout. The storyline is slender and the back story annoyingly ambiguous, at least until a late-on flashback that solves that particular mystery. The chase stuff is done well, with tension, drama and violence. I always enjoy these survival-style stories so this is a bit of a no-brainer for me.

Another highlight is the film's cast. Brosnan is on good form (I've always liked this actor, just not when he played Bond) and Neeson his match, but it's the supporting cast who interest me the most. Michael Wincott (ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES) had me thinking of a young Fred Ward throughout, Xander Berkeley gets to be gruff, scary Tom Noonan (THE MONSTER SQUAD) shows up as a preacher and Ed Lauter appears just as I was thinking of this film's similarity to the Charlie Bronson flick DEATH HUNT (in which Lauter also starred in virtually the same part).

The ending is a little weird, moving on from the action-adventure format and becoming almost mystical and allegorical, featuring late-on cameos from Anjelica Huston and Wes Studi. It's not the most entirely satisfying ending I'd have considered, as it goes against the heartfelt vengeance focused upon for the rest of the movie, but at least it's different. A good, if not great, little movie.

I think you're going to see some very mixed reviews for this film. The tragedy is that it's going to be picked up primarily by fans of westerns, who are looking for shootouts and plots that can be boiled down to "good guys" and "bad guys." Do not go into this movie expecting that.

This is ultimately a revenge story, but not a straightforward or clean-cut one; in this way I would compare it to "Memento" and "The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada".

It's not clear who we're "supposed" to sympathize with at the beginning. We want to sympathize with the revenge-seeker; but we're told almost nothing about why he wants revenge. As he displays at least as many brutal and mercenary traits as anyone else in the film, we question why we side with him, and realize that we're only inclined to do so because our previous experience with "revenge" stories has programmed us to do so.

But the quarry is far from a sympathetic character as well, and we're torn emotionally on what we want to see happen. That is, until the original tragedy is finally revealed. And I've honestly never seen such a well-conceived scene of this type... the tragedy is heart-rending.

I won't say much more except that as the film goes on, the degree to which it will appeal to fans of literal straightforward westerns decreases significantly. You see, as the film begins, Carver's pursuit of Gideon takes them through various isolated episodes: encounters with various characters. As the film goes on, these encounters become more and more obscurely surreal; the final such encounter seems almost supernatural or fantastic. The writer and director have peeled away the internal reality of the story, and are speaking to us through the form itself. Not something that your average Western viewer is likely to accept or appreciate.

Viewers will come to this film expecting a completely realist story; and that's what they seem to be getting at the beginning of the movie. The viewer is not prepared for this realism to slowly and obscurely fall apart - and while that may be the reason that the film creates such a powerful and somehow creepy experience by the end, the same factor is likely to leave most viewers feeling robbed.

Ultimately this film is definitely worth watching, but may not have enduring appeal to lovers of the traditional Western genre. A note while viewing: pay attention to the theme of loss, and how various possessions of the characters are lost.

I rented this film without ever hearing of it before, and was pleasantly surprised...something which is becoming more and more rare in my movie renting experience.

This gritty, untypical western appealed to me on a number of different levels. The unusual casting of Liam Neeson and Pierce Brosnan intrigued me, their film presence was an enhancement without being a distraction to the film. The story was complex and minimalist at the same time, sometimes combining ultra-real and surreal elements. The cinematography is straightforward and beautiful, and a welcome relief from the jiggly camera technique, colorization, and other "contemporary" gimmicks that all too often nowadays cause technique and style to become a major distraction with the story being told. Thank goodness there are still directors that believe in having movies being filmed this way!

While the story grabs your attention from the very beginning and moves quickly, it takes its time in revealing who the characters are, and what are their motivations and the demons they are dealing with.

If you watch this with a preconceived notion of what a western should be, a la John Ford, Howard Hawks, etc. you may be disappointed, as some reviewers here obviously have been. I myself found this intelligent western - that is a little offbeat, with an element of mystery, and not always clearly defined bad guys and good guys - a refreshing change of pace from the racks of slasher film sequels, lame comedies, and Jennifer Aniston vehicles at the video store.

Written by Abby Everett Jaques and David Von Ancken and directed by Von Ancken, "Seraphim Falls" is a rough, tough, old-fashioned western set on the dusty plains and snow-covered mountains of western Nevada. The plot is little more than a straightforward revenge tale involving Liam Neeson (sans Southern accent) as a sadistic Rebel army colonel who hires a posse to track down the marauding Union officer he believes slaughtered his family in the days following the Civil War. The officer, played with steely-eyed determination by Pierce Brosnan, is a savvy, quick-on-the-draw survivalist who, through sheer ingenuity and skill, stymies and outwits the colonel and his men at every turn.

What "Seraphim Falls" lacks in substance, it more than makes up for in grit and style. For even though there isn't a great deal of depth to the characters, there's much pleasure to be derived from merely watching two actors of the caliber of Neeson and Brosnan squaring off in a grueling game of cat-and-mouse played out in a punishing, unforgiving landscape. Brosnan's character achieves an almost Superman-like quality as he stays one step ahead of his pursuers, devising ever-more elaborate means of ensnaring them in his traps. The movie takes a decidedly metaphysical turn in its closing stretches, with the divine Anjelica Huston, no less, appearing out of nowhere as a desert apparition to set the boys straight on a few eternal verities like redemption and forgiveness. But it is as a simple tale of vengeance and obsession that "Seraphim Falls" most captures our imagination and interest.

SERAPHIM FALLS is an odd film, one that on the surface appears to be an homage to the old Westerns, but proves to be a psychological battle for survival between two men engulfed in revenge. There is very little story to relate: Carver (Liam Neeson) with a small posse of bounty hunters (Michael Wincott, Ed Lauter, John Robinson and Robert Baker) treks Gideon (Pierce Brosnan) through snow, forests, mountains, rough water, and desert over a Civil Ear seed of hate. The 'story' fades to a philosophical stance (somewhat clumsily) by the intervention of some ghostly creatures (Anjelica Huston, et al) and ends without much more than a whisper of a memory about the futility of revenge.

Bronson and Neeson do well with their scant dialogue, revealing more of their character's minds with physical action and the power of facial expressions. The mood of the film is in the superior hands of cinematographer John Toll and Harry Gregson-Williams' musical score. Director David Von Ancken keeps the tension at peak level even though the film is desperately in need of editing (just under tow long hours in length). But for a diversion and an appreciation for the wilderness of America in the mid-nineteenth century, SERAPHIM FALLS is a visually satisfying experience. Grady Harp

With this film you have to take your hat of for Mr. Brosnan he is great in his acting, This is a movie that will remain as one of the greatest western films of all times and some sequences of this film will be remembered for ever I will not tell anything but if you see it(and you must) you will remember this.

It is beautifully shot and has a solid script, great action and deep emotions mixed along the way. If you like western you will not be disappointed.

When you watch Seraphim Falls you will have your emotions mixed as the movie develops and when the fantastic finale arrives you will be even more pleased. It has one of the mos original showdown finale I have ever seen.

This movie is a must see!

It's 1868. This starts in the Mountains of the west. Gideon (Pierce Brosnan) barely escapes a posse led by Carver (Liam Neeson). They chase him from the mountains down to the deserts. It doesn't really explain the reason for the manhunt until close to the end.

That's the big premise of this movie. It dives right into a chase without telling the audience the why. There is a certain fascination. It's almost as if the reason doesn't matter. In a certain way, it almost doesn't. That's why the reveal is rather a minor disappointment. It could never really satisfy the build up. I think it would be more compelling if they never showed the explanation. The ending does get a bit too surreal especially since the movie never hints at that kind of bent.

Seraphim Falls is directed by David Von Ancken who also co-writes with Abby Everett Jaques. It stars Liam Neeson, Pierce Brosnan, Michael Wincott, Xander Berkeley, Tom Noonan, Kevin J. O'Connor, John Robinson, Ed Lauter, Wes Studi and Anjelica Huston. Music is by Harry Gregson-Williams and cinematography by John Toll.

It's post American Civil War, 1868, the Rocky Mountains, and Gideon (Brosnan) is being hunted by Colonel Morsman Carver (Neeson) and his hired killers. The reason why is not yet known, but it's the beginning of a relentless pursuit that's propelled by rage and hatred, a pursuit that will force both men to the day of reckoning.

The premise is as simple as it gets and on the surface the film holds no surprises until the divisive ending. However, before taking in the thematics of the story, it's refreshing to find a film of this genre type utilising the scenery to the max, whilst simultaneously playing out with sparse dialogue as two grizzled actors tell the story. An obvious forebear to "The Outlaw Josey Wales", Seraphim Falls is ultimately a meditation on revenge and remorse. Moments of violence flit in and out of proceedings, these moments cloaked magnificently by natural surroundings, where the expansive wilderness plays host to the intimate human drama unfolding. It's also a film that pulses with mythical atmosphere, where Carver's pursuit of Gideon plays out like that of the Grim Reaper and his charges sent to capture the soul of the fleeing man. The falls of the title clearly indicates man's decent into hell, because it's not for nothing that the finale is played out on a blistering plain, which as you cast your eyes upon it, it is indeed hellish.

It's also worth noting that we the viewers are never sure who we should be rooting for - if either of them!? Gideon is out on his own, but he is an immensely skilled mountain man, one who is seemingly out skilling his pursuers. Is he the bad guy here? Or is it Neeson's Carver? One is ex Union, the other Confederate, this gives added spice to what then develops into a most intriguing journey. Where the film has irked some critics is with the ending, with some calling it pretentious and a very weak pay off. It's true enough to say that Ancken has slackened the grip slightly, as the tight gritty tone gives way to something more open and even airy. Yet I personally like it a lot, it helps to round out the supernatural feel that appears to loom as we have headed towards the day of reckoning. It lacks dramatic impact for sure, but thematically and for tonal bedfellow process, it pays off on what had gone before it.

Brosnan (stepping in when Richard Gere bailed out) and Neeson revel in the roles, seemingly enjoying the complexities and war torn burdens that their characters carry. Their scenes together are as professional as one could wish, both men comfortably doing world weary characterisations. Wincott is on hand for gravel voiced villain duties, his portrayal of Hayes is cold and in keeping with the movie. The other notable names in the cast drop in and out of the narrative, each important, and in the case of Huston and Studi, suitably weird. But the real star of the show is John Toll (Braveheart/Legends of the Fall), whose photography is pristine and always remaining atmospheric, he captures the natural beauty of Oregon and New Mexico with great keen eyed skill. Switiching seamlessly from the blue, grey and whites of the mountain pursuit to the browns and yellows of the salt flats, we witness a master cinematographer at work.

Likely to infuriate as much as it enthrals, one just hopes that it's the latter that anyone reading this does indeed find to be the case. 8/10

I can never understand why a movie producer or director will go to all the trouble and spend millions of dollars and end up with a film with so many obvious errors. These always show up in the "Goofs" section. Some are pretty obvious while others can be subtle. I see this as laziness on their part and an insult to the viewing public. I have ridden horses all my life and when you are out in the middle of nowhere and dismount, the last thing you do is let loose of the horse and let them wander off. REALLY! How stupid! Gee, it's only thirty eight miles back to the farm, I don't have any water or food so I think I'll just turn O'l Buck loose. How unrealistic. When the Chinese railroad crew set down the two rails on the ties and just started whacking them with their hammers, (no railroad spikes involved) I really had to laugh. Think how many people watched that scene and thought how stupid it was? You don't have to be a railroad expert to see the problem. For all the money these directors get paid, you would think they could have someone around who would clue them in.

It is easy to dislike a film that slows down during the middle to the point where very little is happening and for that reason, many people may not enjoy this film. Thankfully the performances kept my attention on the screen. The two leads are fantastic with Liam Neeson as the predator and Pierce Brosnan as the hunted. Brosnan particularly stands out giving a performance much different to what he has done before this. Right from the beginning you believe that he is trying to survive in the snowy Ruby Mountains whilst he is being hunted. Were it not for the two leads, this film would have been uninteresting to watch.

This is not an action western like 3:10 to Yuma, which is one of my favourite films I might add but is instead a drama that focuses on how far men will go to get what they want or what they will do to survive. Thats not to say that it is devoid of any excitement as the film starts off with Brosnan being chased through the woods and into the rapids. Without spoiling too much the ending is also gripping and concludes the film nicely.

The soundtrack for the film is great and works well with what is happening on-screen. While it may not be as rememberable as The Assassination of Jesse James, it nice to listen to as you look at the films fantastic cinematography. When they are in the cold mountains, you feel cold and that there is little chance of survival for the characters. When they are in the desert, you will feel their thirst for water.

If you watch the film expecting it to be slow and uninteresting, you will be surprised. Watch this film with an open mind and you will see that this is a very well made film boasting fantastic performances from the two leading actors.

Okay, I read all the glowing reviews of this film, and I have one question for anyone who gave this thing more than a middle zone rating; Did you actually watch this movie? I won't recap the plot, that's been done a number of times already. I will say that both the leads to a great job in their roles, and the film looks great. But none of that matters if you don't have a story that is engaging. The simple fact is there is no character in this film who is wroth caring about. And then it goes all siddhartha in the end.

I'm open to new ways of using the western formate, I love a movie that surprises me and makes me think. This movie does neither. I gave it a 4 because it's well acted and well shot, but it's not entertaining, informative, or though provoking.

What does a post civil war, quasi-western-movie (recollections of "Cold Mountain") have to do with shoot-em-up-Tarantino- "Reservoir Dogs" you ask??? Well, because besides being a bit of a western, with rugged men toting guns on horseback, and a bit of a drama, with sad faced innocents, glimpses of lost love, and lots of deaths, "Seraphim Falls" plunges along into a great chase story without ever revealing who the bad guy is.

Peirce Brosnan's character starts off getting the run-down and the gun shots, so you figure he must have done something bad. But then you see Neeson's character is acting like, well, an ass, so you figure maybe Brosnan's the good guy. And it goes back and forth like that with only brief flashbacks of the past to keep you guessing. Thus, I give it a "Reservoir Dogs"-esquire quality. :)

FYI: A few pretty pretty vivid, squeamish scenes. It shouldn't dissuade the girls from watching, just cover you eyes for a while!

Westerns do not typically do well at the box office. 3:10 to Yuma may have made $50 million, but most, like this one, do a small fraction of that. In fact, this one probably didn't pay for the crew's donuts. That is a shame, as it was well worth seeing.

Maybe it is because westerns typically present the world in black and white - good guys versus bad guys. That world only exists on right wing talk radio. Even good guys have flaws and bad guys may not always be completely to blame (Hitler, Stalin and Bush/Cheney excepted).

Liam Neeson plays a man obsessed with revenge in this film. It was a beautiful display of how such obsession can eat you up until you have lost all humanity. We have all been wronged at one time or another, and sometimes we hold onto those feelings far too long. Neeson brilliantly played such a man - a man who would trade his last drink of water for a gun with one bullet as he crossed a desert in search of Pierce Brosnan, the bad guy, who really wasn't.

Brosnan, who out-Ramboed John Rambo as he treated his own wound early in the film, gave a really cool performance as the man who just couldn't understand why Neeson couldn't let go.

Writer/Director David Von Ancken did a credible job with a story that plays well for all of us.

Oscar-winning Cinematographer John Toll (Braveheart, Legends of the Fall) gave us breathtaking scenes in Oregon and New Mexico to take away with us.

This is an excellent western - with two great stars that show grit and go beyond their usual work. The photography is stunning and the story is meant to make you think - not pander to the usual formulaic plot. The first 30 minutes will make your hair stand up and the rest will keep you going - definitely a must see. Pay attention to the cameos at the end. They have gone about the heads of some reviewers, but really bring a sense of classical reference to the story. War has been a societal issue since ancient Greece, and perhaps we have not yet learned the lessons that need to be learned.

Kudos to the director who has brought together story, talent, and visual art in one epic piece.

Watched this excellent western on a Sunday morning, not knowing more about the film that it was a western - a man being hunted by another and that there was a grudge from the past between them. I always loved a good western movie, stories are usually kept simple, and so is this one. That however doesn't keep it from being a brilliant movie, beautifully shot and with the right cast. Since i didn't know who was starring, it took me all the way to the end before i realized that the leading part was played by no other than Pierce Brosnan, who once again proves to be a top of the line actor who can play a very wide variety of roles - from James Bond to this. If you ever liked watching a good western this is a must, all the way up there with the other nine best western movies of all times!

//Tobey

First of all I'm glad that there are new westerns coming out because I always liked that genre. When I saw it was one with Liam Leeson and Pierce Brosnan I had high hopes. But at the end I'm a bit disappointed. It could have been much better, but I guess it could have been worse as well. The actors are flawless, the scenery is great, the story is good but could be much better if there were not so many flaws. I'm not going to say what they were because I don't ever want to write anything that could spoil the movie. I think 6 stars is the most it should get. It's a nice entertaining movie but not good enough to be in my favorites. Anyways, I'm glad that they still make westerns.

This movie is a excellent, down to earth, no holes bared revenge drama. Well acted with a stellar cast. I do not need to get into plot lines. But this underrated western deserves more exposure.