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.

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Walter Sloane Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

operez3 Jack Fowler (Randy Travis) is a common farmer who abandoned his family to protect and carries eight (8) years fleeing because they had to kill someone (drunk Lenny) that it confused with the ruthless, bloodthirsty and famous gunman Jack Cole.Lucas Moat (Ernest Borgnine) takes more than a month, along with his two sons, following the trail of the real Jack Cole to avenge the assassination of his brother, as well as other crimes including a child.Abel Hart (Paul Tinder) is a fugitive, mental unwaged, which have an obsession with wanting to be the real Jack Cole. This also confuses Jack Fowler with Jack Cole and takes advantage of his wife (Mrs. Vaughn Taylor) and son (Alec Medlock) to try to kill him.The character Eric Roberts (sheriff Hank Bowman) is so insignificant and outside sense that coupled with its dismal performance is the only thing that is bad movie.

Edmund_Dantes I liked the movie. I guess many of the previous posters missed the sex and swearing. The New York accent was explained when Arthur was discussing with Miriam her desire to return to New York because of the threat in their town from the presence of a gunfighter. I liked the confusion in the beginning about Jack Cole and it was fun figuring out during the course of the movie the identity of Jack Cole and the story of why Jack Fowler left his family for 8 years. The Bible verses were true to life in that persons were poor in those times and often the only book they owned was The Bible and as a result many became quite conversant with it.

erv_donnelly I really enjoyed this movie.. I think the reason Eric did not have the usual saddle on the horse is because he was riding HIS OWN horse in this film and wanted the horse to be at ease.. You could see how relaxed he was himself with the horse. It was obvious the horse was his own..The movie itself may have been a little wishy- washy but Hey I like that..And Yes they could have paired him up with someone else but what the hey... Looks aren't the be-all and end-all. It is what is inside that counts .. Doesn't anyone get that!!!!Of course I was wishing there would have been more of Eric in the movie.. I guess the star was supposed to be Randy Travis.. Whatever!!!!

poliglot I rented this from Blockbuster last night. They have no refund policy unfortunatley. I cannot imagine a worse western film than this. This was so poorly written that it was laughable. And the direction was so hideous that I immediatly looked up the director on IMDb to see who it was so that I would never mistakenly rent another of his films. Ernest Borgnine, a fine actor, simply collected a pay check here, and the script was so bad that even his delivery of the lines were comical and poorly delivered. The wife and the rest of the cast were so poor that it was embarrasing. Not to mention Marshal as the store keeper with his heavy N.Y. accent right out of the city "today" totally out of place and mis cast in this part. I would give this film a -1 but 1 is the lowest rate I can give it. Save your rental money if you are thinking about seeing even and entertaining western feature...this one isn't it....