StunnaKrypto
Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.
PlatinumRead
Just so...so bad
Stoutor
It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.
drtturner
Amazing how you can see a movie, not think of it for a decade or even 2, but then remember some parts. The ending was so special and I called it right before it happened making me think I saw it years ago. My claim that it is blaxploitation comes in way of looking at the clown white sheriff and looking at how our 2 heroes can ride in a car that goes 4 miles per hour and escape all bullets as if mythical characters, a trademark of blaxploitation super hero films. Even though Glenn Thurman is in this one, the film would have had a bigger push, following and lasting impact had a James Earl Jones or Rosie Grier been secured in the lead role. As it stands, the actors involved did an admirable job.
classicsoncall
At first I was intrigued by the title; then, when Thomasine (Vonetta McGee) makes her first appearance, I thought this was really going someplace with the concept of a female bounty hunter. This was the first time I ever ran across one after nearly five hundred Westerns, and the fact that she was black made it even more intriguing. However the film couldn't carry the momentum, and eventually settled into a standard genre flick, except the chases were done in early 1900 automobiles instead of on horses. Which begs the question, how did Bushrod (Max Julien) know how to drive a car? He and Thomasine hijack the president of the Tyler Bank following their robbery of same, and J.P. handled it like a pro, didn't even pop the clutch the first time. That was one of the first 'huh?' moments.A couple more occurred when at least twice in the story, Marshal Bogardie's (George Murdock) chase vehicle closed distance within barely a hundred yards, and the outlaws still got away. But how did they do that? At least in most stories, you wind up with some idea how the bad guys reach safety, but not here. The picture simply transitions to another scene where Thomasine and Bushrod are doing something completely different oblivious of the law.And then there's Mr. Jomo (Glynn Turman). Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the character, but a Jamaican cowboy? Speaking 'ya mon'? Next time provide a little context on how this could possibly be. But I sure was sorry to see Bogardie use the old rattlesnake torture on Jomo; that was a nasty piece of business.Maybe the most surprising thing of all though, was when I pulled this title up on IMDb and found it came out in 1974. In some respects I think the cinematography got it better than the film it's often compared to. Any ardent film fan will pick up on the idea that the picture is setting us up for a 'Bonnie and Clyde' finale, and it almost gets there. And it also has some of 'The Quick and The Dead' to offer before the lights go out. Ultimately though, the film doesn't break any new ground in the genre, and is cautiously recommended primarily for Max Julien's take on black characters in the not so Old West.
cableaddict
Wow, this movie is far, FAR better than I expected. First of all, it has been referred to as being of the "blacksploitation" genre. This is not appropriate, IMO. It has none of the braggadocio of that genre, nor does it portray whites as complete bumbling idiots. This is simply an excellent western that just happens to have two black leads. (FWIW, I'm white.) There is plenty of action, but much more emphasis on the characters feelings, as any good movie should have. This isn't a zany romp, like (say) Buck & the Preacher, but a serious look at two complicated individuals.The film is excellent. It reminds me more of Butch Cassidy than Bonnie & Clyde. The two leads are excellent actors, and have great chemistry between them. Vonetta McGee literally gives an Oscar-worthy performance. Seriously. She pulls a great range of emotions out of what would otherwise be an average script. The plot is well worked-out, considering the genre, with no clichés to be found. The cinematography and score are both first rate. While I wouldn't call this a "must see" film (how many of those are there, really?) it is a fine piece of work. I gave it an 8. If the screenplay had been just a little better (the low-point of the entire production) this could have been a 9 - 10. Don't pass this up if you get a chance to see it.
wllatimer
This movie is very dated. It is so corny that we found ourselves laughing at the attempts to be "cool". The worst scene was when the couple played in a muddy river I expected to see them running through a grassy field in slow motion next. There isn't any resemblance to Bonny and Clyde except for the fact Thomasine is a female and Bushrod is a male. You might enjoy watching it as an example of the use of stereotypes in a movie or as a lesson in cinematic history. The photography was better than the rest of the movie.
