A Town Called Hell (1971)

The priest is actually a sort of corrupt revolution leader. He has followers and the people loved him. That explains for why they don't give him up while they are being hung, and it also explains for all the organized action scenes on the military or police led by him. It's actually a great lead character role and story, plus the details of the story and movie are actually pretty impressive. But its down fall is: 1, it is made pretty poorly; bad editing, poor audio in some parts, and out dated even for its time. 2, It is a bit confusing because they don't explain any of the stories details but you can understand by paying attention (and its actually a really cool and original story.) 3, Its misleading with the previews and marketing, posters etc. It realllly is the kind of movie I think would be a great remake. Change the time period a little earlier and make it more comprehensive with better writing and directing. Add some good lead and supporting actors. My friends we would have a golden contemporary western film. I give it the 8 because of the story and the characters, and the details of the movie, like art direction and dialogue. But everything else besides the acting sucked.

There really is no substitute for a Sergio Leone to make this style of film work properly, and even "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" could have bombed out badly if there had been any uncertainty about the direction and editing.That seems to be the problem with "A town called Bastard". The theme has great potential, and the cast are just the ticket for the job. The locations and sets are pretty good and much of the camera work is impressive. However, it somehow just doesn't seem to integrate as it should. Too many loose ends maybe.Leone would have been more diligent about making sure the audience knew in what direction the film was heading, even if the destination was not revealed until the very last scene.Parts of the film are quite memorable and it does help to watch it at least three times; but the point is that you shouldn't have to if the director is doing his job properly. Robert Shaw and Martin Landau play their parts faultlessly and at least the director gives these masters of their craft a free hand to develop their characters; but good acting alone doesn't make a successful film.Overall a disappointment but still good to view again from time to time. Could be well worth a remake to get it right. Maybe Tarantino could do something with it ? R. B.

This British-Spanish co-production is one of the countless films shot in Spain in the wake of the unexpected phenomenal success enjoyed by the Italian "Spaghetti" Westerns and, as is typical of such genre efforts, features an eclectic assortment of established and emerging international stars: Robert Shaw, Telly Savalas, Stella Stevens, Martin Landau, Fernando Rey, Michael Craig, Al Lettieri, Dudley Sutton, Antonio Mayans, etc. Ironically, however, this incoherent mess of a movie serves as a shining example as to why that most American of film genres became a dying breed in the 1970s and is nowadays practically (or is that officially?) extinct.I really wanted to like this film, not only because the Western is one of my favorite types of movies but also because it had all the qualities, including an intriguing premise, to be a good one - not to mention the fact that my father had purchased a paperback edition of A TOWN CALLED BASTARD's novelization following its original release! As it is, the film's sole virtue (if, indeed, it can even be called that) is its sheer eccentricity: for instance, Stevens, playing a widow out for revenge on the man who betrayed her revolutionary husband, sleeps inside a coffin(!) driven around in a carriage by her dumb manservant(?) Sutton; Savalas, as a blood-thirsty renegade, who at first appears to be the film's main villain, is unceremoniously dispatched by his own henchman Lettieri very early on in the picture; the villain of the piece, then, turns out to be Landau who, in the film's very first scene, is seen pillaging side-by-side our legendary hero-turned-priest Shaw!; Fernando Rey, playing a blind peasant, is the only one who can identify rebel Shaw who, in the end turns out to have been merely a front for...well, nevermind! As you can see, the plot is very confusing and it gets stranger from there! The production team responsible for this film were also behind other Western fare around the same period of time, like CUSTER OF THE WEST (1967), BAD MAN'S RIVER (1971), CAPTAIN APACHE (1971) and PANCHO VILLA (1972).

An incredibly confusing collaboration between Spain and Great Britain, starring Robert Shaw, Stella Stevens and Martin Landau. Stevens is the widow who arrives in the town of Bastard out to get the man who murdered her husband; Shaw is the priest who clearly knows more about the murder than is prepared to let on; Landau is the Mexican army Colonel, intending to have the murderer executed in Mexico City. The only lead the hunters have is a single name: Aguila. That said, the plot is really difficult to follow and the film needs at least two viewings."A Town Called Hell" contains some good, tense moments and striking images: Stella Stevens sleeping in a coffin, driven in a hearse through the Spanish desert by Dudley Sutton (Tinker from the BBC's "Lovejoy"). As with most foreign westerns, the dubbing is atrocious and there are some laughably awful moments - a dead soldier, killed with barbed wire, takes a few steps as the wire fence is pushed to the ground. The script is, unusually, quite intelligent with many possibilities, unexplored themes and good ideas. The relationship between Shaw and Landau is both well written and well played out. The music is simple but effective, especially the religious tones in the scenes with Shaw in the church.Overall, the complexities of the plot aside, the film is very good. With strong performances from Shaw and Landau, it holds interest and is well paced by the director - and any film starring Telly Savalas (killed off early on here) as a Mexican bandit can't be all bad...