The basic storyline being based on a real person and real events was OK. It was in my opinion quite good for a low budget movie. But, the flaws were in the acting (some characters over acted whilst others under acted). I guess this is down to the director as much as the actors.
Some of the scenic photography was OK whilst the action scenes were somewhat thwarted and lacked fluidity. The end "shoot out" was apalling. Again no fluidity, no direction and rather scenes just did not work. As an example the "taking out" of the sharp shooter "California" was pathetic and unplaisible with a single shot from the protagonist taking him out whilst completely hidden whilst hundreds of simple shots with targets in plain sight failed to hit their mark. So whether it was director or editor to blame it just did not work.
Last of all the research was very flawed with one of the "baddies" pulling doemwn his zipper. Baring in mind that the zipper was only invented in 1893, and the movie was set in 1893 but the zipper did not go into production until 1913!
Result poor show on many fronts.
Some of the scenic photography was OK whilst the action scenes were somewhat thwarted and lacked fluidity. The end "shoot out" was apalling. Again no fluidity, no direction and rather scenes just did not work. As an example the "taking out" of the sharp shooter "California" was pathetic and unplaisible with a single shot from the protagonist taking him out whilst completely hidden whilst hundreds of simple shots with targets in plain sight failed to hit their mark. So whether it was director or editor to blame it just did not work.
Last of all the research was very flawed with one of the "baddies" pulling doemwn his zipper. Baring in mind that the zipper was only invented in 1893, and the movie was set in 1893 but the zipper did not go into production until 1913!
Result poor show on many fronts.