Eastwood may have been the one to popularise the man with no name, but before he made this gruff remake, and before he shot to fame as the mysterious gunslinger, there was Alan Ladd in the eponymous Shane, who although has his name emblazoned all over, is more or less the same figure. The 1953 western is altogether a dirtier, enclosed affair, despite the state of an ageing, mid 50s Eastwood's beard. When Ladd rides off into the sunset at the close of the tale, his arm hangs limp by his side and the little boy has been shocked that the invincible figure has had his blood spilled. Here is the most noticeable change - Joey Starrett, the puppy dog that dogged Shane's every step and brazenly compared his gunslinging against his own father, replaced by a girl on the verge of womanhood, pretty enough that she thinks she has to fight with her mother for Eastwood. Modelled masculinity is replaced by puppy love then, although the ideal is the same. Eastwood lifts the story from its grimy origins and adds a supernatural flair, serving mostly his own character. He is not just a lonely drifter who wanders into town, but is directly summoned from the heavens by Megan, who prays for a miracle to lift Lahood's reign of terror. The film cites a figure of mythical proportions from the bible itself: "And I saw, and behold, a pale horse, and its rider's name was death, and hell followed him." The archetype lends to this aura; we get no backstory, no name, no explanation, only that he wears the preacher's dress but may not be so godly after all. Hints are scattered: the gunshot scars on his back that no ordinary man could have survived, and the corrupt sheriff's remarks on his now deceased nemesis. The preacher's ability to walk into a cafe and disappear into thin air in the final shootout further lends evidence towards this theory. But in doing so Eastwood gets muddled up in myth and displaces tension. Leone was a master of this, matching movement with music in slow, deliberate strokes. The soundtrack isn't so integral in this instance, and because Eastwood stresses the immaterial, there is nothing thrilling about the actions on screen. One particular sequence, in which a deputy stalks the outhouse, and is rudely interrupted by an errant hand and gun emerging from the trough, elicits silliness and giggles instead. The film seems sandwiched between its origins and the eventuality of the genre. The plot is almost directly copied from Shane, yet Eastwood himself is a weathered old relic of the past, grizzled and scarred and long past his prime, where the clipped dialogue was at optimum coolness. More key signs: the railroad, the most iconic symbol for the impending death of the west, and the machines that Lahood seek to replace hand and tool, great big metal constructs that blast water and dig up the earth to excavate gold. The rest of the residents also seem to be stuck in the wrong timeline. See the friendly giant Club, made ripe from goofy sidekick material, and the ever-hateable Chris Penn as Josh Lahood, with a face built like a high school bully. After Blazing Saddles, could his appearance be anything but ridiculous? Eastwood would have to wait a little bit longer until he fully looked the part, and fashioned Unforgiven, his masterpiece, and fittingly, his last western.

'Pale Rider' is rarely mentioned when people recall the great Westerns. But whilst it may not excite discussion in the same way as 'The Outlaw Josey Wales', 'Unforgiven' or Sergio Leone's 'Dollars' trilogy, it absolutely shouldn't be dismissed. Traditionally, the Western was a genre of morality stories - usually basic ones, too. In this respect, 'Pale Rider' is a traditional Western. However, referencing the iconic Western 'Shane' from 1953, Eastwood attempts to blur the lines of morality. We are confident in who the antagonists are, and we certainly root for the protagonist, Preacher, but this isn't a story like 'Gunsmoke' where the good are completely good and the bad are completely bad. This wasn't the first time Eastwood worked with such a narrative - 1973's 'High Plains Drifter' has a similar kind of moral ambiguity, although 'Pale Rider' is a more optimistic story. The performances in this film are generally quite good, with leading man Eastwood proving that even in the middle of a career slump (from which he recovered with 'Unforgiven') he can deliver a strong, sincere performance. The other memorable character, besides Eastwood's Preacher, is one of the antagonists, Club, who is played by Richard Kiel. Mostly recognised for playing Jaws in some of the Bond films, Kiel wasn't a great dramatic performer, but landed a number of interesting roles on account of his very imposing size and menacing visage. Club is involved in a number of entertaining scenes, and he brings a similar quality to Eli Wallach's Tuco in the first half of 'The Good, the Bad and the Ugly', exchanging blows with the hero but never becoming truly dislikable. I'd recommend 'Pale Rider' to any fan of the Western genre, as it heavily references the aforesaid classic 'Shane' whilst showing a return to form for Clint Eastwood, at a time when he had all but abandoned his Rowdy Yates image in favour of a more realistic, conflicted kind of character.

Even without a ton of dialogue, Clint Eastwood earns my attention in Pale Rider based on pure charisma and stature. He's done many great westerns, but this one ranks up there among his best.Of the many interesting things about a lot of Eastwood's westerns is that he often plays a wandering mysterious figure who happens to come upon conflict. Pale Rider is no different. This time, Eastwood is known as 'The Stranger' and 'The Preacher' who decides to help a small village of people from miners who intend to take over their land. For all intents and purposes, this feels a whole lot like a fresh take on the Seven Samurai structured story, but with only one bada** man.If it wasn't obvious already, I'm very high on Eastwood's performance here. He seems like a humble and honest man in his mannerisms but when push comes to shove, no one can take him in a gun battle. The supporting cast is formidable for the story they're telling. But besides some fun Richard Kiel moments, and an interesting 3rd act arrival from John Russell, the cast is really nothing to ride home about.Touting the lone two female characters are Carrie Snodgress and Sydney Penny as a mother and daughter from the village the Preacher is trying to protect. Although I think their performances are solid, some of the character decisions made them feel much more hollow and more down the line of clichéd females in film, sadly. Not to mention the unnecessary romantic angles Eastwood took with his direction of them.In terms of a western, Pale Rider hits all the beats you want. It has a compelling lead, high stakes, and one amazing gun-blazing final scene. If you're looking for another well-strung western from Eastwood, this is the film for you, even if some of the supporting characters and shoe-stringed romance misses the mark completely.+Eastwood as the Preacher is gold+Final battle+Fun appearances from Richard Kiel and John Russell-Romance angle is botched8.6/10

After the engrossing 'Unforgiven', I went to this movie. Maybe that is the reason I was not much impressed by it. I even believe that the movie is overrated.The script is stereotypical but somehow seems lame to the other Western ones ! Well, the Christian concept of 'Pale Rider' is intriguing(destroying an 'evil empire' by sword, pestilence, famine and wild beasts) but there was no need for the central character to wear a clerical collar, then people take him as a 'Preacher' and the audience is expected to connect him to the biblical 'Pale Rider'. It seems a trick unworthy of noticing but dilutes the intention. Megan reading the Psalm(or verses, I am naive at the term) would have been sufficient.Eastwood, as always, has given full justice to the character - the sangfroid when meeting the goons, LaHood and even while eliminating the deputies. The demon underneath seems to arise only twice in his eyes which Eastwood should be given a notable credit ! Except the 'Preacher', Hull Barret is the only character that leaves some impression - he is a common, vulnerable man but still does his best for the family and the folks. The Stockburn's character seems like a last-moment patch implemented in a software to save the script. Fails to impress even for a second as a villain. Better than him is LaHood who at least in some scenes appears to be a professional mining mafia/don.Frankly, I didn't even notice any background score - that itself speaks of it's lameness :P . Since the script revolves around the camp, the mine and the town, one is deprived of the typical Western panoramas, the horse riders amidst terrain and so on. The town too appears modern and synthesized, lacks the dull and the creaky yet appealing look of a troubled Western stereotypical town.To summarize, one should watch the movie only for a glimpse of the vintage 'Western Eastwood', any more expectations can result in disappointment. Yes, the movie has rekindled my old interest in 'Apocalypticism' :) .