Hickok (2017) Reviews

• Establishing Law and Order in Abilene

  Uriah432018-09-23

  After getting into one scrape with the law after the next, "Wild Bill Hickok" (Luke Hemsworth) rides into Abilene, Kansas and heads directly to the saloon for a drink. While there he saves a young man from getting shot while in a poker game which happens to catch the eye of the local mayor "George Knox" (Kris Kristofferson) who subsequently offers him a job as the town sheriff. Although the town of Abilene is known for its lawlessness this doesn't faze him and so he accepts the job with the intention of establishing law and order one way or the other. Unfortunately, this doesn't please everyone-especially the richest and most influential resident named "Phil Poe" (Trace Adkins) who owns the biggest saloon and has benefited tremendously from the status quo. Likewise, the fact that his fiancé named "Mattie" (Cameron Richardson) seems to have kept a secret from him concerning her relationship with Hickok doesn't please him either. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this turned out to be an enjoyable Western movie with decent performances all around. Admittedly, the pony tail sported by Trace Adkins struck me as rather odd for this particular era but other than that it turned out to be a good, solid film and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

• Doesn't get any worse than this

  chumgriffin2017-07-07

  Disappointing is a word I would normally use when discovering a below par movie, but I did not expect much from this movie to begin with so the bar was set quiet low in my expectation. Somehow the director managed to lower that bar considerably. Terrible direction, no style of any kind whatsoever.. terrible sound editing,, a gunshot sounds like someone farted loudly.. awfully clichéd dialogue, wooden acting at its worst, lighting was poor, cinematography was childlike and vacuous,. This was a calamitous endeavour from start to finish. Watch it only to learn how not to make a western.

• What a shame.

  rareandfirsts2017-07-08

  This had so much historical fodder for storytelling and they did this. The writing was terrible, the direction worse, and many of the actors seemed to be just phoning it in fora paycheck. The most sad thing of this had to be Kris Kristofferson who seemed to be reading from a slow loading dialogue delivery system of some sort. The only actors that did well were those with few paychecks behind them. Action and SFX were beyond poor and the entire film was a train wreck in that you can't stop watching to see if it can get any worse. Kris and Bruce? It's time to retire. You had great runs but it has gotten down to the point that peeps might think you just don't give a shot anymore. Loved you both in your earlier stuff.

• Average Western with disappointing action and plot

  nevideo-929132017-08-15

  I am a fan of well done, action packed Westerns but this movie fails to deliver any exciting or believable fight scenes. The gun play sequences are poorly paced and not very believable and the transitions between scenes are awkward. The worst flaw was the lack of continuity between scenes. A young boy is shot in the right leg and we watch as the bullet is removed by a half drunken doctor but in a scene five minutes later, the boy is shown sitting with a bandaged LEFT leg, only to be shown later with an injured right leg again. Overall this was a promising movie that did not live up to my expectations.

• don't waste your time

  sharpwar82017-07-07

  This movie was just plain bad. Nothing about it was remotely factual to true events of Hickok's life. That might be the only thing true to who he was. He was a notorious liar or blow hard about events in his life, but that is the only thing common to this movie that holds true. The acting is shyte. Not one person who is in this film has a sense of who they are playing, so they just seem lost as to what they are supposed to do. The opening of this movie depicts hickok in his union days having to leave a wounded soldier to die, thus leaving him with remorse........ no accounts of this at all in real life, so why put it in the script. In fact the only two things Hickok ever had remorse for was the very first man he killed, whilst hiding behind curtains. He paid that mans widow 35 dollars, and said he was sorry for doing it. The next was him killing his own deputy who was trying to come to hickoks aide. Nothing in the movie about these things. For heavens sake, they didn't even bother to look the part. Hickok had long curly red hair....... hemsworth short dark brown. I honest don't know why they would have made this movie, my guess is trying to capitalize off the success of films like Unforgiven and Tombstone, sadly they don't come close to either film. Hickok was a real piece of work, but he survived having tremendous luck, (until it ran out) and grit. A good story could have been told about that, and I am sure would have done well.