SparkMore n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Cody One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

denisa-dellinger This film would not be made today because it would be considered politically incorrect. I would not normally watch a western like this but because I was at a relatives house, it was his TV so I watched. From the first scene of Charles Bronson quietly standing in a bar having a drink, to the end scene, I could tell this was not your ordinary western. I would call this a psychological exercise that turns morality and motivations of men on its head in the period after the civil war in the old west. With the simple back drop of the barren land of the old west ( which was really shot in Spain) Chato's land becomes one of the main characters of the film. The actors in the film are the heavy weights of old westerns who did an excellent job portraying their characters. Chato led these men into his land and basically let this posse of men battle themselves. It seems that the basest of natures resides in a small place in men's hearts and here we see that nature come to the forefront as they hunt Chato in order to "string him up" for shooting a sheriff in self defense. Just who is the bad guy and who is the good guy is questioned in this film. The fight between good and evil is challenged in this film. I would highly recommend this film. Be prepared to stick it out and look at the film as a study in human nature. If you do that the film can be viewed as both entertaining and an exercise of your brain.

Leofwine_draca Having watched CHATO'S LAND a mere two weeks after watching Robert Aldrich's ULZANA'S RAID, I'm struck by the number of similarities between the two films. Both detail the violence inherent in the Old West, where Indians and US soldiers typically used the same kind of barbaric methods in dispatching the other side; both detail pursuit across arid landscapes, where the pursuers and pursued merge and lessons are learnt in the blazing sun. However, I can't help but think that Aldrich's movie is by far the better of the pair. I was really into that film, living and breathing and feeling for the characters, while CHATO'S LAND on the other hand feels like a somewhat stodgy, uninteresting version of the story.The film is notable for being the first pairing between Charles Bronson and Michael Winner, who of course would go on to find popularity with the DEATH WISH franchise. This isn't their finest moment. Bronson plays one of those roles where he has hardly any dialogue and seems like part of the landscape, not dissimilar from the craggy rocks surrounding him. He isn't given much to work with, and I didn't find myself really caring or feeling for him like I did in later productions such as Peter Hunt's DEATH HUNT.Winner explores some interesting themes but his direction is lacking in places. There aren't any notable action sequences and the characters just aren't that interesting. As usual for the director, man's inhumanity to man is examined, and there's an unpleasant rape sequence, but we don't really come away learning anything profound like we did in ULZANA'S RAID. It's almost like this is a comic strip, just telling a straightforward story and then finishing. He also manages to waste the talents of an interesting supporting cast, with the likes of James Whitmore barely registering. Jack Palance takes chief villain duties, but he seems subdued here and nowhere near as entertaining in other westerns I've seen him in.

joeventuraa This was Rambo...guy minds his own business and is hassled by the law. Then a posse is formed to get him and one by one, they are led into demise. Bronson was ripped in this movie. The guy looked the part. My dad said towards the end, "He didn't need to memorize many lines." He didn't have to, his physique and look did all the talking! This is a guy's flick, but there are deeper themes like the revenge, greed, lust, and the evil all men have in their hearts. It's there is you are willing to see it. Another movie that demonstrated man is sinful and at the core, we are all capable of murder. Grim? Yes it is. The answer to man's dilemma is in the movie if you are willing to hear.

Norbert Palotas Though I haven't seen all of Bronson's movies I'm sure this is one of his best performance. I was wondering why is it so magnificent and I realised that it has a special mood and of course it has Bronson himself. By the way he was a perfect choice for this role equally inwardly and outwardly. Jack Palance was almost as brilliant as Charles, the only thing I didn't really like him is that he was the bad guy. Being a western-revenge movie, its story isn't full of surprises but Michael Winner did his best -like each time- and he made a wonderful but serious movie. Finally, I would like to thank Robert Paynter (camera-man) for the amazing panorama, sure he hadn't forgotten to have a look around.Taking it all round, I think Chato's Land is not just one of Bronson's best pictures but it is one of the best westerns I've ever seen.