Angel and the Badman
Angel and the Badman
| 05 July 2009 (USA)
Angel and the Badman Trailers

A remake of the classic 1947 John Wayne western about an injured gunslinger who falls in with good company in the form of some Quakers.

Reviews
dsenseiu-14411

Having seen both movies I would take this movie as the better one. True, John Wayne is a great actor as I am a fan,but the difference between the two movies is taking out "the Horseshit and Gun-smoke". This movie have more feelings in it. The moral of the story is what it was all about. There were many changes in this movie that made it different than the original..Lou Diamond Phillips did a great job and Deborah Kara Unger did a better job as "Temperance". T I don not agree with the critics given this movie anything below 6 stars, as a matter of fact I would give it a 9 or maybe even a 10. It was a movie that is rarely seen nowadays without all the sex,profanity. The rating is PG-13. If thay had the rating in 1947 it would have been rated "R".

... View More
Mo ([email protected])

I came to watch the movie because I'm a fan of Luke Perry so I like to check out his work. It looks like most people here watched the movie because they wanted to see the new version of John Wayne's classic ... and were disappointed. Many of them opined that perhaps if someone didn't know about the incredible classic movie and just watched it on their own then they wouldn't be so let down with how the film turned out. I'm here to say that that's a wrong assumption. Yuccch. What a cliché movie. Starts off with the legendary gunslinger walking into the message carrier's office, "Hey you, I need to deliver a message." "Now, wait just a minute, you can't tell me what to do, this shop is closed." "I'm sorry Quirt, it looks like you won't get to send the message." "Uh, d-d-did you just say Quirt? As in famous Quirt?? Never mind there, friend, I'll do whatever you want, sir!" And the scenes like this just keep coming. The fun action does pick up toward the last ten minutes and the climax begins to pique the interest, but that doesn't make up for the previous hour of blech. Not only that, Luke Perry , although a central role, isn't in much of the film, which is why I watched it in the first place (then again, if you watching because of LDP or to watch this remake that shouldn't bother you, I guess). I also kept trying to figure out that in real life, who would take LDP seriously as a cowboy given his ethnicity as this movie's time was back when everyone was a racist? Wouldn't they at least mention it in the story? Would women be swooning over him back in the 1800's or whenever this was? Just curious. But it didn't take away from his acting, which was spot on. The ending was feel-good Hollywood, though I was really preparing myself emotionally for a proper yet depressingly tragic conclusion, the fact that I didn't get it and instead got a happily ever after gives me mixed feelings. I left the movie feeling like I really liked it because alls well that ended well, but the cinema connoisseur in me felt like they took the cheap way out. In the end I guiltfully enjoyed watching my guy Luke Perry, the movie made me feel good (but I also like drinking Coca Cola), and over the years I've been conditioned to not regret watching films like these because of those two reasons. However, the truist in me knows this movie wasn't amazing. Then again, look at the budget and the M.O.W. destination, you can't really expect a masterpiece, so there's really no reason to complain. I'm just saying, if you had the choice to watch a million amazing movies or this one...

... View More
boblipton

This is a remake of the classic 1947 John Wayne western about an injured gunslinger who falls in with good company in the form of some Quakers. Full of comedy and broad performances, the original includes some classic bits and a grand performance by Harry Carey Sr. at the end of his career. The people at Hallmark must have been hesitant to greenlight this production, but they manage to produce a pretty good movie as a result and on its own terms.As with all good remakes, it takes the same material and spins it in a different direction. and the more serious tone of this version does work for the first half, when the contrast between Quirt's life and character is spoken about -- it's handled humorously in the original. Instead, the humor in this version is reserved for the section where Lou Phillips, as Quirt Evans, tries going back to his old life. The attempt to play comedy as Phillips grows more dissatisfied and disgusted with his fellow associates does not, alas, quite work.It does remain a good character study, and among the supporting cast, a special note should be taken of Winston Rekert who plays the Harry Carey role -- a sheriff who had hoped to hang Quirt with a new rope. His is the toughest act to follow, and he manages it very nicely.

... View More
bob1701a

Nobody does it better. I repeat, NOBODY, does it better than The Duke. Don't bother watching this until you can see it for free. John Wayne is The Ultimate Cowboy! Nobody does it better! Nobody ever did it better! Nobody ever will do it better! To try and copy him is a fools errand.If you wanna watch LaBamba, Lou Diamond Phillips is the perfect choice. If you wanna see teenage cowpunks go bad and shoot up town after town, he can get the job done. If you wanna see teenage punks screw up in high school and make the teacher look like an idiot, he's pretty good at that, too.Remake a John Wayne film?!?!? NO WAY!

... View More