Joe Kidd

Probably Eastwood's weakest western overall. Given the stars on hand (Eastwood, Duvall, Saxon) it's amazing how average and predictable everything is. The location photography is great, though.

For a collaboration by Elmore Leonard, John Sturges, Clint Eastwood and Robert Duvall (and John Saxon as a Mexican!) this is pretty ho-hum. Not terrible but a disappointingly average western.

Behold the power of a picturesque filming location.

The early 70's was a time when if you were a director and you got Eastwood to sign on you said to your self, "we're home free now." and you would have been right. "Joe Kidd" does nothing spectacular, but Eastwood makes this movie.

As far as Eastwood westerns are concerned this could've been called Joe Schmoe.

John Saxon the Mexican ahahahahahaha...

Passable but ultimately forgettable western functions as a decent time-waster but nothing more. Eastwood is at his best in the opening scenes (with his method of serving breakfast a particular delight) but it is a shame that his character's sense of humour evaporates entirely as the rather pedestrian story and screenplay develops. Lalo Schifrin's score is a definite highlight as always.

A pretty decent western. Not the best movie in the world, but my love for westerns inflated the score.

Not bad.

Joe Kidd is as close to a comedy as any Eastwood western comes, with his memorable antihero dealing quips and takedowns that are frequently hilarious. The narrative is fairly stunted and the final act somehow underwhelming despite a locomotive driving through a saloon, but for light entertainment it's still a winner.

Joe Kidd is somewhat of a mess. The characters are all obnoxious cartoons (especially Robert Duvall's henchmen and possibly excepting Clint Eastwood, although he does tread towards self-parody at points); the characters have barely any motivation for anything they do; and every plot development is rushed with little impact as the movie careens through its barely 90-minute run-time. They only positives? Beautiful settings and a kick-ass soundtrack.

Clint and western movies equal GREATNESS.

Feels like an unnecessarily long episode of a middling western TV show. Seems to be setting up some potentially interesting stuff that actually says something in the beginning, but nah--s'all just to position Kidd as the babyface and justify the big and silly shooty-bang-bang scenes. The train-goes-to-the-saloon scene was fun, though.

You know that bit where he's busted Lamarr's voicebox with the butt of a shotgun and then tricked him into falling to his death from a tower, then taken his hat and gun and assumed his post, then gets harassed by the other men and shouts back, in Lamarr's busted up voice, "WHY DON'T YOU GO SCREW YOURSELF!"? That had me howling.

Very scenic, just hard to take seriously. Not Duvall's best film. Kind of boring.

The politics in this film are inscrutable. In the beginning, Joe Kidd is a loner who looks set to become a hero to the oppressed. Toward the middle, he supports neither the peasant rebels nor the landowners. At the end, Joe Kidd convinces the rebel leader to surrender and trust his fate to the state court. That Joe Kidd would propose such a thing is out of character; that the revolutionary would accept surrender and state law contradicts everything we have learned about him.

Everybody in this film acts as expected, including being cast to type. If you like Eastwood movie's you will get exactly what you expect.

Normalish western, but better than most.

Immensely boring.

This film has some slow spots but there are a few good exciting scenes that make up for it. This film is well cast as the actors do a good job with their roles. Overall I would recommend this western.

Not THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY but along parr with several other of Clint Eastwood's lesser western works.

a good western movie 10 out of 10

Eastwood has some great moments: Steering a train straight into the saloon, swinging/smashing a bucket over the guys head, killing a guy by opening a trap door as he was stepping onto it, sitting in the judges chair at the end and shooting the bad guy. The movie looks good and is enjoyable, but over all pretty average and not a stand out, it will blur together with other Eastwood flicks in my memory.

Despite a few impressive kills and fine cinematography, this is a bad movie in almost every way. From lousy characters and tired acting to the uneven tone and unbalanced narrative.

While neither the best work from Eastwood or Sturges, there is a tight script from Elmore Leonard and a fun performance from a young Robert Duvall (though he still looks 55). John Saxon plays a Mexican, which is something, and then not a lot actually happens. It is all fine, if not a bit forgettable.