Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

Connianatu How wonderful it is to see this fine actress carry a film and carry it so beautifully.

Carlos André I'm starting my journey through the Western genre, High Plains Drifter is maybe the first classic that I watched, and is really good.My only issue with the movie is just some things that I thought were "silly", like almost every scene the "stranger" gives a deep look to other people, but is ok, I get it, is probably a common thing at the time. The majority of the cast is good, I just thought that Marianna Hill's performance was really over the top throught almost the entire movie. There are some really cool scenes, Clint Eastwood character is the definition of "badass" for almost the entire film, the soundtrack is simple, but very good too. The script is good, even though some dialogues sound weird some times. Well, I think that probably my main issue with the filme would be "why he did all shity things with the folks down there?", e some weird shit to, like painting all the houses with red, wtf? Buuut, ate the end, for me, was clear that Clint character was something related to the dead guy (Jim Duncan), some mystical thing, like the ghost of the dead man, his soul or something like that, and, with that in mind, this previous issue of mine, doesn't apply anymore, so, it's ok, everything makes sense at the end.In short, High Plains Drifter is a great western, isn't a long filme, so is easy to watch, and have that old school cinema felling that (unless for me) is always great to feel.8,5/10

Fella_shibby I saw this first in the early 90s on a VHS. Jus revisited this recently. Dee Barton's eerie film score really stood out in making this a mystery western film. The first viewing did create a sense of suspense. In this film Eastwood once again plays a mysterious stranger, this time meting out justice in a corrupt frontier mining town. The scene in which he enters the town, there is this eerie music in the background. The same music is repeated when he departs from the town. I liked the film's dark tone and thought this was more than just a western. The movie has a mystery to it. When I saw it first, I thot that Clint was the dead spirit of the Marshal, but when I saw it recently, I think it's left ambiguous. It cud hav been the brother of the Marshal or some spectator who was hiding in the dark n came back prepared for the revenge. Please feel free to explain me. Nevertheless, its a nice film but not that good compared to other westerns. This is Clints first western to be directed by himself n 2nd as a movie director.

nbthalia The most controversial scene in this movie concerns the taking by Clint Eastwood of a "lady" and now referred to by many posters as a rape. These people should first of all consider the context, i.e. the "wild west" in the 19th century. This was not an epoch or location noted for gentility and good manners. Indeed, such attributes would have been ridiculed in a rough mining town such as this. Anyone being raised here would be influenced from a young age by ongoing situations and the general mores of the town. Let's not mince words here, this girl was a slut. Her initial approach to Clint was notable for its lack of finesse, but this girl knew no other way to approach a man. She had learnt from observation that this was the way to achieve her ends. This same approach, in a more modified form can even be seen today in some quarters. Rape? I don't think so. Her dubious character was accurately drawn. There is a strong and ironic comedic overtone to this movie and is very welcome considering some of the violence depicted. Never have so many craven cowards been assembled in one place. Of course, the movie is dated, but now takes its place as a classic of the genre. A great watch if you are in the mood for a simple plot which is brimming over with malice and satisfying revenge themes. Thank goodness Clint didn't ride off into the sunset followed by the departing unsatisfied wife who had simultaneously loaded up her buggy as Clint left town. That would have been unforgivably corny. On another note I thought the buildings in the outdoor set were unconvincing in some respects. The timber was too smooth and modern looking. Also the windows were obviously plate glass (not invented) and too sparklingly. clean considering the dusty street. And modern building materials could be seen, especially round the backs of the set.

damienbiggs I'd give this movie some marks for being one of the most unique westerns I've ever seen. Clint Eastwood acts well in the movie and the action scenes are done well in my opinion.The main issue is that the main hero character rapes one woman and borderline forces another women to have sex with him. These scenes in and of itself wouldn't stop me watching a movie. It's quite different though when a movie sets up the rapist as the hero of the movie!You'll read a bunch of reviews about how this rapist goes to this town to dispense justice to cowardly townspeople who covered up a murder in relation to their mine. I'm sorry but that does not excuse rape. Clint Eastwood's character is meant to be an anti hero but he's not really. Ultimately his portrayal is far closer to a conventional hero than to say a Walter White.For a point of reference, I'm a man in my thirties. The 70s were definitely different in terms of attitudes to movies!