It's disappointing that a cast this extensive and strong couldn't be better used. I think I'd hold Director Steve Miner most accountable for this flop. He has done such a good job in the horror genre, but I think he tried to play way out of his league on this one.

This movie is terrible. The only value that can possibly come from watching this awful film is the unintentional laughs you'll get from it several times during the otherwise entirely wasted hour and a half you'll spend watching this. Okay here is a good place to give you this advice, don't waste that hour and a half, watch something else or do something else, I kept watching thinking and hoping it would have to get better but it never did. The writing is pathetic but what really stands out is the incredibly pathetic acting, Ashton Kutcher stinks in everything I've seen him in but this performance is by far the worst I've ever seen from him, maybe it's because this is the only non-comedy role I've seen him in so him trying to do drama really stands out as just wrong. James Van Der Beek is very bad in this too but he still shines next to Ashton Kutcher. If you don't believe me and really do have an hour and a half to waste then watch it, you will get a couple chuckles out of watching Ashton Kutcher deliver lines in a pathetic attempt to "act".

These people obviously love the old "spaghetti westerns". I was expecting Clint Eastwood to show up at any time. So true to the old genre that it's almost camp. Even the music is true to the genre that I expected to hear the theme from The Good, The Bad,and the Ugly at any moment... Some of the lighting and background is obviously theatrical, and the editing from scene to scene is clipped in places. I don't know why people are complaining so much when this was obviously more than a little tongue in cheek, with a tip of the hat to Italian westerns. Hey, who needs a plot when you've got the good guys against the bad guys? Viewed in that light, it was well-done. Otherwise, hardly an historical document ;-) If you want to know about Texas, read James Mitchner...

The film was pretty entertaining, very noisy but ultimately fairly ridiculous. The acting was wooden, but fun (not sure it was meant to be so funny....but was nonetheless entertaining because of that!). I also firmly believe that the good guys SHOULD be better looking than the bad guys, so have no problem with the casting overall! Although most of the reviewers mention Kutcher, Van Der Beek et al, am I the only person in the world who believes the narrator who only introduces the story at the very start of the movie was none other than the late, great, legend that was James Coburn? I scanned the closing credits (yes I watched the WHOLE thing!) but the narrator wasn't mentioned at all....was Mr Coburn embarrassed by his contribution or involvement, or am I barking up the wrong tree entirely....can someone PLEASE put my mind at rest (and settle a dispute with my partner!)?