Don Siegel and Clint Eastwood made a very good first film together in the form of "Coogan's Bluff." I naturally expected their next collaboration to be just as memorable. Sadly, this is not the case with "Two Mules for Sister Sara." I was quite irritated by this film. First of all, I am not a fan of Shirley Maclaine as her kind of acting tends to leave a horrible taste! I could never warm to her and she's no different here. Secondly, the plot is woeful and totally unbelievable. How is Clint Eastwood that dumb that he falls for all of the deception that comes his way from his leading lady? One expects a lot from the audience to digest glaring narrative errors which tend to bite pretty hard! Some things in a story you can't just take at face value. The lack of action is notable throughout and boredom soon sets in. The photography is ok in itself but that can't save "Two Mules for Sister Sara." There is absolutely no one in the supporting cast to recognise or to remember for that matter. Surely a couple of familiar American character actors like John Vernon would have helped? The acting honours go to the snakes and the horses. Don Siegel is a highly talented artist but I really can't understand why he had to direct this mess. Clint Eastwood does his usual and no doubt thought his paycheck the only worthy thing from this film.

Two Mules For Sister Sara is just as my title says, a great movie, it has a decent plot (With an excellent plot twist) and great acting from all the stars (One of the few movies that has Clint Eastwood hurt and that shows him vulnerable).In terms of effects they are good (For their time) but lacks some credibility (The Mexicans falling out of the church in the final scene is just dumb and the fight scene with the machetes just seems slow and exaggerated). The music is good (It is Ennio Morricone) but it doesn't live to other works he has done. But aside from all of that is a good western with really funny parts; a must see if you love Clint Eastwood.

This 1970 producion is the first "spaghetti western" made by mainstream Hollywood featuring Eastwood. The original spaghetti westerns were directed by Sergio Leone and were originally in Italian (Eastwood only added his voice when they were dubbed into English and released in the US).These Italian westerns which made Eastwood famous were filmed in Spain in the last half of the 60s.In this movie Eastwood is a mercenary who has agreed to blow up a French garrison for Mexican revolutionaries in return for half the cash stored there. On his way to this job he saves McClain from being raped and the two proceed with their aims as a duo (she too is helping the revolutionaries disguised as a nun).As an aside Siegel said later that McClain was very hard to work with-- she was tough and "it is like she has balls". She and Eastwood did not get along. Also Eastwood said he had to kill the rattlesnake because Mexican authorities did not want it released in that area. Eastwood does not believe in killing animals--he obviously is against hunting.Siegel's cinematography is flawless may I even say fantastic--watch the mountain lion and the horse stepping on the spider. The story is good up until about the last 30 minutes when it degenerates into a boring moralizing Hollywood finale with a mass assault on the garrison (I much prefer finales with Eastwood and his 6 shooter) also a dud cliché surprise denouement involving McClain.So in summary very good for the first hour but doesn't maintain it.Misc: This movie was high budget for the time (over $4 million) it was moderately successful grossing about $4.5 million in N. America. It was filmed entirely in Mexico over about 60 days.RECOMMEND

An imitation spaghetti Western directed by Don Siegel, written by Budd Boettiger, with music by Ennio Morricone, starring Clint Eastwood (he's the guy with the little cigar and the poncho) and Shirley MacLaine as a fake nun.Well, they all know their business so it should be pretty good and, in fact, it's not terrible. Eastwood, of course, could have walked through the picture. The nearest he comes to a smile is a kind of pained grimace but that's all required of him -- that and lighting a stick of dynamite with that cigar and an expression of complete removal from the situation.I don't know exactly what Shirley MacLaine is doing in this. One thinks of her neither as a nun nor as a female figure to be batted around by a seedy hero like Eastwood, let alone the grease balls against whom they're fighting.Two good scenes stand out. In one, Eastwood's shoulder is pierced by an Indian arrow and MacLaine must remove it by the most painful process imaginable. Eastwood actually gets to register pain for once.Scene two. What with that injured shoulder, Eastwood can hardly be expected to climb the trestle that carries the railroad tracks across the gorge so that dynamite can be planted and the bridge destroyed at the moment the train is crossing it. MacLaine must do it. It would be easier if she just climbed the hill, walked out on the rickety bridge, and tucked the dynamite away underneath the rails but not nearly so dramatic. Or so amusing when Eastwood, using only one arm and while drunk, must try to balance the rifle on MacLaine's shoulder and try to hit and explode the dynamite.Morricone's goofy musical score tells us that he, at least, recognized this movie for the joke it was.