Wild Bill (1995) User Reviews

The Legendary Wild Bill

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 19 June 2008]

In Wild Bill we get to see one of the best characterizations of the legendary western character. Jeff Bridges joins a pantheon of great players who've essayed the part of the marshal of Abilene, Kansas. Folks like William S. Hart, Gary Cooper, Roy Rogers, Guy Madison, Bill Elliott, Forrest Tucker, and Charles Bronson have all played Hickok with varying degrees of success.

Some of these people have played Hickok more or less nobly as the script and their screen persona permitted. Someone like Roy Rogers you know without seeing the film had Hickok be a straight arrow. The real Wild Bill was someone who was as tough as he had to be to enforce law and order in a wild and woolly town like Abilene, Kansas circa 1870-1871 when Hickok kept the peace there.

Among those other actors who played Hickok also includes Jeff's father Lloyd Bridges who did it in an hour television drama on the Great Adventure series. I saw that years ago and I wish I could remember more of it so I could compare father and son. The part I best recall is the famous story of Hickok accidentally shooting his own deputy who made the fatal mistake of coming up behind him too quietly and after he'd just shot one of Texas's rowdier cowboys. It's part of the Hickok legend and shown here as well.

Of course the manner of Hickok's death has also entered into folklore with wide and varying accounts of the kind of man Hickok's killer Jack McCall was. He was probably closer to the sneaky rat that Cecil B. DeMille had Porter Hall play him as in The Plainsman. Here he's shown as a drunk and scared kid played by David Arquette much in the same manner as Bob Ford was played by Casey Affleck last year. Arquette does well in the role.

Ellen Barkin is cast as Calamity Jane and while she's as tough as the famous frontierswoman, she's way too good looking. Too bad Louis B. Mayer never thought of using Marie Dressler for the part back in the day. Even she was a little too femme for the part.

The film is done in Citizen Kane style, narrated by John Hurt who is a close friend of Hickok in the story. It's a pretty good western, coming out when those are few and far between.

Muddy, angry, two-fisted tale of revenge in the Old West...

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 31 May 2008]

Historians may scoff, but Walter Hill's "Wild Bill" is an absorbing and intriguing western with elegiac overtures yet much of the emphasis placed on the battles. Jeff Bridges does a fine job as scruffy, mangy, weathered James Butler Hickok in the 1870s Midwest, getting into brutal fights while doing nothing more than standing at a bar (John Hurt's narration tells us, "Being 'Wild' Bill was in itself a profession."). Ellen Barkin plays Calamity Jane like a lovestruck toughie who clucks behind Hickok, waiting for a commitment; David Arquette is Jack McCall, a young man defending the honor of his mother, whom Hickok loved and left. Occasionally, director Hill hits a stumbling block (there's an inconsequential bit with Keith Carradine as Buffalo Bill Cody which disconnects the mood, and also a black-and-white flashback filmed in high-contrast where Hickok attempts to talk sensibly with a no-nonsense Indian tribe). Still, the hand and gun bouts are fully charged with adrenaline, and there's a genuine feel for these sad, meandering people that recalls strong sections from other westerns, particularly "McCabe and Mrs. Miller". A bumpy film, but not a bad one at all. **1/2 from ****

Forget facts and enjoy the cinema

[JuguAbraham · 7/10 · 11 November 2004]

Walter Hill has based his screenplay on two literary works by two individuals: Paul Dexter's book and Thomas Babe's play. Hill is a good screenplay-writer himself. I recommend viewers to view the film as an example of a good screenplay and not be unduly worried about facts.

The structure of the narrative is simplified by the sepia and black-and-white flashbacks by the director. Unlike other directors, Hill chooses to uses tilted shots for most of these flashbacks, suggesting a "colored" viewpoint of what is shown.

The film can be dismissed easily as a crass action western--but this film looks at bravura narcissism (opening shots of shooting a glass on top of a dog's head), a man who refuses to be tied down to relationships with women but is friendly with men, stupid reactions to knocking his hat, etc. The heroics may belong to the mustachioed men rather than the clean-shaven but the film has more to offer than hairy faces.

The casting of John Hurt, Bruce Dern and Ellen Barkin is commendable--they provide fascinating screen time that adds to the credibility. Hurt and Barkin who open the film carries the film even though Jeff Bridges proves to be a credible lead player but he is no great thespian.

The film ultimately belongs to Hill and art director Dan Olexiewicz, with the atmosphere changes from bright sun to slushy streets--that strangely keeps pace with the characters. Hill develops the characters slowly through filmed flashback and dream sequences (visit of Wild Bill to the insane asylum, the conversations with Red Indians, are examples) rather than the spoken word of the main character and that contributes to the feeling that most characters are not fleshed out. They are well developed, in an unusual way. This is not great cinema but above average stuff--a good way to describe Hill's body of work.

An Unrecognized Masterpiece

[Torchy · 7 August 2001]

I've been checking out the comments on this film and they seem to be in line with most of the other reactions I've heard. It's important to say up front that this is not a film for Western fans. It's not a film for action fans. It's not for history buffs who care only about the facts. It's not a film for people who want to see a good story told simply.

Wild Bill is one of the richest and most disturbing films ever made about the American West. It shows us a complicated man without trying to explain or rationalize the contradictions in his character. He's capable of love, but he also commits acts of brutal violence. He cares for his friends but he holds them all at arm's length. And he feels compelled to play the part of the living legend to the end, come what may.

I suspect that Walter Hill chose this subject because he identified strongly with Wild Bill himself. But whether or not this is true, the contradictions in Hickok's character are a part of this country's character. Hill was lucky to have Jeff Bridges in the lead. It's one of his finest performances. Though Wild Bill doesn't voice doubts about his life out loud, Bridges' face shows us that he doesn't understand himself the reasons for many of his actions.

The story is not told in chronological order, but the organization of the sequences is not haphazard. In fact it's beautifully thought out. This is not a film for everybody, but I think it deserves a lot more attention than it's gotten so far. I feel like fans of Walter Hill's work will see the same thing I do: a beautiful and haunting meditation on why this country is the way it is.

Great Gunslinger Shooting Action

[Dark Swede · 7/10 · 24 November 2000]

Great gunfight scenes and exquisite costuming highlight this fast-paced story of Wild Bill Hickok, man and myth. The film illuminates some of the most exciting and legendary characters of the untamed American West. One of the better Wild Bill portraits on film. Remember.. "You shouldn't oughta touch a man's hat!"

Stylistic Western With a Weak Screenplay

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 8 December 2004]

The life and death of the legendary Wild Bill Hickok is presented by Walter Hill in a stylistic western. The direction is great, the cast is excellent, the art and photography are wonderful, showing the important parts of Wild Bill's life in flashbacks in black & white and inclined camera. However, the performance of Jeff Bridges is horrible, using grimace to represent a nasty gunfighter, opium, card and whiskey addicted in a weak screenplay. The story is not pleasant and is impossible to feel any sympathy for the character Wild Bill Hickok. Diane Lane and Ellen Barkin are beautiful as usual. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): 'Wild Bill – A Lenda do Oeste' ('Wild Bill – The Legend of the West')

Overambitous but disappointing

[Hunt2546 · 4/10 · 3 September 2010]

Most reviews seem to look at this through the prism of "Deadwood," which seems unfair as the elongated TV format allows for far more character development. So to point out that the characters in "Wild Bill" aren't as-- well, you get the picture. Viewed alone, the movie deserves praise for performance, set design, a sense of period dialogue and historical accuracy in visual recreations. Yes, WB really did wear Navy Colts backwards, cavalry-style, in a red sash; yes, he did have greasy lanks of hair and wear a big floppy hat, a thick tie and a vest that didn't match his jacket which didn't match his pants. And for about an hour, I think the movie is pretty amusing. But when it sinks into Deadwood over its last hour, it appears to use too much of the stagey dialogue of one of its sources, a play by someone named Thomas Babe. At this point, it pretty much abandons history which is bad enough, but also cinematic fluency, of which Hill is a master: it becomes static, talky, dreary, and completely loses its momentum. And someone--Babe?--made the decision to give the McCall-Hickcock dynamic an Oedipal overtone--he's the "son" of a woman once loved , then abandoned, by Hickcock. This is an attempt at coherency, to bring the murder into some sort of classic framework. Yeah, swell, however: McCall was much older, a buffalo hunter who'd lost dough to Wild Bill the night before. He didn't stand for the abused son, he stood for the randomness of frontier violence, where booze, pride, stupidity and a culture of pointless aggression could easily spell an ambush murder like McCall's. THAT, to me, would not only have been more accurate, but more fluent and a better movie.

Utter confusion.

[PatrynXX · 6/10 · 16 June 2002]

Spoiler??)

Bleh. Hey I like Jeff Bridges. And he makes an excellent Wild Bill, but the flashbacks are freaking annoying. This is a weak movie. It coulda been longer too. They decided to focus later in his life. Alot of the characters in this movie aren't developed enough for us to know who they are. I think the creators assumed too much and figured some of us know all about Bill's legend. The odd thing... I've heard of alot of legends, but I think poor ol me just totally missed the Wild Bill one. Until this movie came out, I had little idea of who he really was.

Comment for the creator's. Need more input.

6/10

Quality: 3/10 Entertainment: 8/10 Replayable: 4/10

Walter Hill got it right with "Deadwood"

[gvit-2 · 5/10 · 5 February 2006]

This could have been great, but there are two big problems, Ellen Barkin cast as Calamity Jane, and worst of all, the idea that Jack Macall couldn't bring himself to pull the trigger when he TWICE had the opportunity. Hill's "Long Riders" is miles ahead of this film, although this is not all bad, Bridge's performance is excellent as are many other supporting roles. I found the John Hurt character a typical John Hurt 19th century character which he did best in Cimino's "Heaven's Gate". Here he takes the place of real life Charlie Utter for reasons I don't understand. Barkin is so miscast that it almost hurts, her imitation of an southern accent is so close to a crime against humanity that she should at least pay a fine, and no woman looking like Ms. Barkin living in a town like Deadwood would be as clean and pretty as she always seems to be. Her bubbly, sweetness is also more than misplaced. You can bet your gold nugget that the studio needed a love interest who would show her birthday suit, I would well hope that Hill was not responsible for her character or role. Hickock's killer is a much more believable character in the excellent HBO "Deadwood, here he's a whiny, indecisive jerk which makes it hard to believe that he was raised by the woman who captured Hickock's heart long before. Lastly, the set design in this film was too "westerny", the bars are polished, the woodwork is excellent, the furnishings are expensive, etc. Deadwood was a gold mining camp that sprung up over night, this looks like a standard movie town for westerns despite the muddy streets. The excellent book by Dexter is done a disservice by this film and it is quite interesting to see what Hill did with the same story 9 years later in the pilot episode of "Deadwood". Watching both is a learning experience.

Not that wild about it!

[Scufovo · 7/10 · 31 August 2003]

OK, I'm biased. I was in this film. So I should love it, right? When we were making it, it seemed very cool, and everyone was excited. It sat for a year, and then when it came out, awful. Just terrible. Everyone in it was over-acting. (In our defense, that's what they asked for on the set.) And the story sort of...rambles. I am going to avoid a long rambling review, since I was, 'Gambler guy who walks in front of Bill as he gets out of the stage in Deadwood', my opinion may not be entirely free from favoritism.

A great time shooting, a bad time watching. Oh, well, they can't all be Oscar winners. (I think we were heading for the Razzies!)

Hey, we had fun, anyway!

too much jumping around in time

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 14 April 2015]

Charley Prince (John Hurt) and Calamity Jane (Ellen Barkin) are at Wild Bill Hickok (Jeff Bridges)'s funeral. The movie flashes back as Wild Bill ride with California Joe. Then it jumps around from Nebraska 1867 to as a Marshall in 1871 Abilene, Kansas where he accidentally shoots his own deputy in a chaotic shootout. He joins Buffalo Bill Cody (Keith Carradine)'s show in NYC where he's generally a bad actor. He's losing his eyesight. He gets called out by wheelchair bound Will Plummer (Bruce Dern) in Cheyenne and promptly kills Will. He meets up with Jane and is dogged by young Jack McCall (David Arquette). Jack is helped by Lurline Newcomb (Christina Applegate). Will Bill had an affair with his mother Susannah Moore (Diane Lane) which ends in tragedy.

The movie jumps around so much in time period that it feels very aimless. The plot meanders and pacing drags. The back and white flashbacks make it lifeless. Sometimes it turns surreal. I was relieved that Calamity Jane finally rejoins the movie but then it goes off once again to another place and time. Other than being a drunk card-playing gunslinger, the movie doesn't get too deep into Wild Bill. The movie fades in and out so much that it's hard to cling onto. Jack McCall is not necessarily a compelling character. In the end, the movie slips through my fingers.

A Psychedelic Look At 'Wild Bill'

[ccthemovieman-1 · 10/10 · 21 February 2006]

If there was ever a psychedelic western movie, this has to be it. It's so bizarre, at least compared to most westerns, that it was tough for me to write this review. I stopped and re-started several times. Where to start?

I just found it great fun, an entertaining film that's always a kick to view, and what more you can ask? Being someone who is very much into visuals, great cinematography and unique approaches to camera-work, this film provided all of that and more, such as an interesting story with whacked-out characters.

I love narration and John Hurt's description of the goings-on here was just great to hear. He played "Charlie," an Englishman with a gentleman's vocabulary that was in stark contrast to the hardened outlaws, led by 'Wild Bill' Hickok himself, played by Jeff Bridges. Ellen Barkin plays "Calamity Jane," and few women of the 1980s and '90s played foul-mouthed, hard-but-sexy women as convincingly as Barkin.

In addition to Hurt, Bridges and Barkin, other fun characters included "California Joe," Hickok's gravel-voiced friend who doesn't say much but when he does, you hear some some of the longest sentences ever uttered. Daid Arquette plays a very strange villain, the man who became famous for shooting Wild Bill. He acts strange and talks as if he has a mouthful of marbles. James Remar, another mean-looking tough guy, is a hired killer. Christina Applegate, Bruce Dern, Margoe Gortner, Keith Carradine and assorted other characters all add to this strange tale, strange in its telling and even stranger in its visual style.

Some of the film is in flashback, which is seen in startling black-and-white and mainly features Diane Lane, who is flat-out gorgeous and maybe the most intriguing person in the film. One of the flashbacks has the film deliberately overexposed with wild dream-like images.

No western "purist" admits to liking this but I love the genre and I put this near the top of my list of favorite westerns. So, sue me!

Ellen Barkin in the old west

[lastliberal · 7/10 · 8 April 2007]

I can just barely recommend this movie because I happen to like Ellen Barkin. This role as Calamity Jane isn't anywhere near her outstanding performance in The Big Easy. Jeff Bridges did a fairly good job as Wild Bill Hickock. Fans of the TV series Deadwood may want to watch to see another version. David Arquette was the worst Jack McCall that you could imagine; gunning after Wild Bill because he thought he left his mom (Diane Lane). It was slow as westerns go and that was a fine set of guns Wild Bill had. They must have got off 20 shots at the end! Like so many movies, I feel the ending will leave you disappointed. It just didn't seem in character for McCall.

Stylish and Slick, But Cannot Live Up To The Name.

[FiendishDramaturgy · 5/10 · 28 April 2007]

This film presents the viewer with an odd perspective on the psychedelic West, but as MGM's answer to Disney's/BuenaVista's "Tombstone," it falls flat on its face. It failed at the box office, and it fails to convey any resemblance to a modernized western. Actually, this plays more like Andy Kaufman meets Quentin Tarantino in Deadwood.

That combination may sound like fun, and at times, it is, but for the most part, this is one convoluted mess that cannot live up to the name Wild Bill Hickock, though it is slick and stylish in its development and execution.

Jeff Bridges was one bright spot in this work, while there are other bright spots, they are matches next to his spotlight.

All in all? I was entertained, if somewhat aghast.

It rates a 4.8/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Deserves a Better Reputation

[Michael_Elliott · 18 February 2018]

Wild Bill (1995)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

Wild Bill Hickok (Jeff Bridges) comes into Deadwood where he meets up with his old flame Calamity Jane (Ellen Barkin) and has a pesky young kid (David Arquette) threatening to kill him. While staying at Deadwood, Hickok begins to feel that his questionable past is starting to haunt him.

Walter Hill's WILD BILL pretty much took a beating when it was originally released. The critics ripped it apart and movie goers pretty much stayed away turning it into one of the year's biggest bombs. I avoided watching the film due to its reputation but I finally got around to the movie and I must admit that I found it to be incredibly entertaining on a number of levels.

I think what I enjoyed most was the style of the storytelling. The film starts off like a greatest hits package as we get several small scenes showing some of the more notorious moments from Hickok's life. I really loved how Hill made this work as we basically get to see what made the man a legend and then we get to the current story of him struggling with his past while at the same time having to deal with this young man who wants to kill him.

Not only does the story work extremely well but we're also given a terrific cast. Bridges is downright terrific in the lead role and I must say that he's a lot better here than he was in TRUE GRIT. In fact, you could make the argument that this contains some of the actor's greatest moments on the screen, which is saying a lot. Barkin is also extremely good in her role of the love interest and Arquette is also good in his part. We've also got a great supporting cast including Bruce Dern, Keith Carradine, Diane Lane, Christina Applegate, James Gammon and John Hurt.

As you'd expect from a Hill movie, WILD BILL is well-made and contains some great style and especially when it comes to the violence. The shoot outs are handled extremely well and they are so well-filmed that you can't help but get caught up with them. The personal story of Bill and his demons also work extremely well. I'm really not sure why WILD BILL was such a disaster at the box office and with critics but the film is certainly worth watching.

Soft hearted gunfighter plays his last hand

[helpless_dancer · 7/10 · 3 October 2001]

Damn good western with plenty of smokin' guns, hot lead, and wagons of dead bad men. Bridges was perfect as the famous gunslinger and the rest of the cast also looked the part of the old west. I liked the use of flashback, especially the stark black and white style used; it was a nice addition to the story. A real rip roaring shoot-em-up.

Never touch another mans hat.....

[FlashCallahan · 6/10 · 24 August 2011]

Wild Bill Hickok, famed lawman and gunman of the Old West, is haunted by his past and his reputation.

He is loved by, but cannot love, Calamity Jane.

Dogging his trail is young Jack McCall, who blames Bill for abandoning the boy's mother and destroying her life.

McCall has sworn to kill Bill, and Bill's ghosts, his failing eyesight, and his fondness for opium may make McCall's task easier....

One of the main reasons to watch this film is of course Bridges, who puts in a wonderful performance as the titular character. He is ably supported by Barkin and Hurt, and thats most of the positive things said.

The film is shot beautifully, and does have an authentic feel to it, but Hill feels out of place directing this, and has made some evry odd choices with the uses of flashbacks, and using Arquette, who is not convincing, but you know the demise of Bill when you meet arquettes character.

Reason being that the man is too slimy and typically evil in a Mike Myers way (not a compliment) and is the sole reason of making the film just that laughable. Sure, the history is a load of garbage, but that doesn't matter, all we want to know is how many people he shot, how drunk he got, and how well Bridges does to adapt the two aforementioned traits.

it's watchable enough, with some silly scenes and misjudged narrative, but thanks to some good performances, the film isn't the turkey most say it is.

Historically it is also completely inaccurate!!!

[ktgifts · 2/10 · 23 August 2005]

Wild Bill Hickok did not have sexual relations with Calamity Jane. They didn't know each other until they road the stagecoach to Deadwood. Bill & Calamity were not caught in a sexual act by Jack McCall nor did Jack have paid help in order to corner Bill. It is speculated that Jack McCall shot Bill over losing at a card game the night before. At Jack's trail, he claimed it was because Bill had killed his brother. But, Jack only had 2 sisters. Bill was a married man in March of 1876 and that is never mentioned. The story also eludes that Bill was losing his eyesight possibly because of all the womanizing he had done. Not true. He had glaucoma which is not a sexual illness. The only thing that was accurate was that he was a marshal at Abilene, Kansas and that he was in Deadwood on 8/2/1876.

Somewhat tamed Bill

[Mr-Fusion · 6/10 · 11 March 2017]

An odd movie, "Wild Bill". I reconciling the legend with the man (especially one who's on the downslope of life), there's plenty of backstory to fill in. And the way it bounces around between flashback and present day gives the movie a fairly schizophrenic vibe. On one hand, you kinda wish there was more running time to this just to handle all of the history - but on the other hand, the movie has its own pacing issues after the first 30 minutes or so. Maybe excitement just wasn't in the cards for this one.

Putting aside the weakness of David Arquette, the movie boasts a solid cast (with Jeff Bridges as the standout). It's a decent western and the shootouts are classic Walter Hill.

6/10

Someone should put a bullet in this one

[Samiam3 · 4/10 · 25 August 2010]

Perhaps I love Deadwood too much; the critically praised, HBO series for which director Walter Hill appropriately won an Emmy for the pilot. I clearly set my expectations a little too high of this one, which predates the Deadwood series by eight years or so. Coming from Walter Hill, the man behind the Warriors and The Long Riders, there is no way that Wild Bill should have been this sloppy.

His portrayal of the life and death of James Butler Hickok results in a motion picture that self-destructs in spectacular fashion. It is vastly underwritten, poorly acted, edited as if it were a labyrinth of jungle vines to be cut down by a machete, and on top of that the movie is also severely anti-climactic.

All that Hill gets right is that parts of the movie are well shot, and he is able to capture the look of the times on screen, but on the pages, it is a different matter. The opening twenty minutes (give or take) are especially excruciating. What we see is almost a joke, totally amateurish and more oriented towards obnoxious gunplay than character illumination. I felt like I was watching kiddies play cowboys and Indians on the street with little wooden pistols.

Jeff Bridges portrayal of Hickok is devoid of talent and humanity. It is so obviously a performance, with hammy delivery, poor timing, and failure to capture Bill's misery and self loathing and his love for Calamity Jane.

When all is said and done, Wild Bill is a dud. It is clumsy and careless, and is easily one of the worst westerns I have ever seen.

"I don't want to be shot in the back of the head like Mr.Lincoln"

[morrison-dylan-fan · 6/10 · 23 December 2016]

Finding out about him after seeing the Pop-Art comic-book stylisation of The Warriors,I was surprised to find Walter Hill be very involved in the making of HBO's magnificent Western series Deadwood. Directing the pilot,Hill gave the ep a rawness which was expanded over the next 3 seasons. Taking a look at what movies were about to go from Netflix UK,I spotted a Hill title I've not heard anything about before,which led to me getting set to meet Wild Bill.

The plot:

Attending his funeral, Charley Prince starts to think about the "difficult" friendship he had with "Wild" Bill Hickok.

The past:

Getting on everyone's hit-list,"Wild" Bill Hickok leaves undercover to the outlaw town of Deadwood.Viewed as a mythical cowboy,Hickok plays up to the image as he joins friends such as Charley Prince passing the time drinking.Becoming recently reunited with Calamity Jane, Hickok learns that he has an illegitimate son,who is just as much an outlaw as his old man.

View on the film:

Spinning the guns to black and white flashbacks that Hickok has half-drunk memories of,writer/director Walter Hill and cinematographer Lloyd Ahern II give the flashbacks a poetic calm in in unveiling the events which led to the "code" Hickok lives by. Sharply contrasting the smoothness of the flashbacks,Hill and Ahern give the present an earthy,gritty atmosphere. Setting the sun down on the Wild West with Hickok's face covering the screen,Hill pours mud and dry dirt into the tensions of the West,which ignites in a fury of red and white dust being scatted across the screen as Hickok hands a short.sharp shock of a shootout out.

Visibly appearing to "tense" on screen, (with Hill saying that there was always some "tension" between them) Jeff Bridges channels this unease into a very good performance as Hickok,who displays flashes of his myth making bombast,but is wonderfully pinned by Bridges with a suspicion that his "code" is fading with the sun. Opening this adaptation of Peter Dexter's book & Thomas Babe's play with Hickok's funeral,Hill aims for the murky back-shooting of the Wild West with the elegance of the bio-pic. Inter-cutting between the past and the present,Hill struggles to keep the distinctive atmospheres at an even level,with the tough bite of Hickok's last days of living by his "code" being cooled down by the calmer,more withheld flashbacks,which leads to this being a far from "Wild" kill(ed) Bill.

A pile of horse s**T

[rusty13252 · 1/10 · 2 August 2013]

Out of every movie i have ever seen based on a legendary old west figure this movie was the largest pile of horse s**T i have ever seen.There is not 1/100 of fact base in this film i have spent 25 years of my life researching legendary western figures from Wyatt Earp to the back shooter Pat Garret and believe me they have made some stinkers but this is no doubt the worst pile of lies and misleads i ever saw. I WISH THERE WAS A RATING LESS THEN 1 BECAUSE THIS MOVIE WOULD RATE A - 10.Not to mention very bad acting from second rate actors.Walter Hill directed my favorite movie of all times the 1979 cult classic THE WARRIORS {in which he also used James Remar }so i expected better from him.This movie is a disgrace to a otherwise great director.

Better than average western, with some very nice touches.

[tigerrick · 8/10 · 9 April 2007]

I wasn't expecting much from this one, but Walter Hill's direction credit during the opening title sequence sucked me in - and I was glad it did.

A very capable cast and an interesting cinematic style gave this film a unique flavor, although some of the characters bordered on unbelievable at times.

Loved the interaction between Wild Bill and Calamity Jane on the saloon table, although the conversation seemed too modern for the late 1800s. But overall, the film was a great way to spend a Sunday afternoon, especially when compared with some of the lesser films available at the time.

Not an award winner,, but good movie 👍

[reddiemurf81 · 6/10 · 31 March 2020]

Wild Bill has a great cast! Jeff Bridges is one of the best actors of the last half century. John Hurt was always good, and is the same in his supporting role here. Ellen Barkin and Diane Lane bring a lot to the screen in this one. David Arquette,,, well,, not a great actor, he's good as the dumb kid pursuing a fool's errand in this movie. There are several other familiar faces you'll see who add to the story (can't remember names).

From what we see, the title character was a complicated man who didn't mix words,, and Bridges played him well. So just watch it!

wild bilge

[rcastl2335 · 1/10 · 1 September 2009]

I first saw this in the theater and found it forgettable. But I thought I'd watch again since it pops up a lot on cable. Now I believe it's too awful to be forgettable. This is a criminally bad film, easily the worst of director Walter Hill's spotty career, although it does seem to have pointed him towards the cable series Deadwood. That's another crime for another day, however. Except for some few expertly staged fight scenes and the performances of Jeff Bridges and Diane Lane, this is a low point in several usually reliable actor's careers. John Hurt is simply a windy fool, ditto James Gammon. Bruce Dern yells (yawn). And Ellen Barkin's Calamity Jane makes me long for Abby Dalton's performance in The Plainsman. Loud, broad, witless, with the worst Southern accent in the long history of bad Southern accents on film, this represents the nadir of her career. It's the only bad performance I've ever seen her give and I still can't imagine what she was thinking. Possibly the only way to enjoy this film is to turn it on, leave the room and, when you hear the sound of raised voices and gunfire, rush back in. Or you could just rent The Plainsman.