It is a performances centric movie

best movie i've ever seen.

Absolutely Fantastic

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The titles are the same as the content for sure but Crichton was set in Victorian Britain in 1864 while here it's America! It's amazing how baby cinema had already create his own visual langage and in less than 10 years: the movie is dynamic, the angle are inspired (it's nearly VR on the top of the train) and maybe the difference with BTF3 or Indy 3 is only the issue of sound and score! For sure i waited the moment when those bandits would be caught because i couldn't imagine a Doberman movie at this time! Moral is safe! The final shot of this bandit shooting the audience at close range is fantastic because it embodies truly what is cinema: a virtual reality filling you with emotions ranging from all the spectre, good to bad! Sure, the action is crude, limited but it's like videogames: the first games invented everything and today games are just the old games done with better technology! At last, with this movie, i finally reach my destination also because i have now watched 1 movie by year between cinema birth and mine! I really expected that this earlier movies would be boring but they surprise me to be as good (or even better) than today ones and with as talented people: Méliès, DW Griffith, Mary Brian, Louise Brooks and German productions...

I would say watch this movie with the intention in mind that film had only really existed for about 15 years maximum considering I've seen footage from the 1880's. I will say that back then there was no story to speak of with any movie at the time and I don't think many people saw the potential for what it could do. So this gave birth to film editing. I will say the plot is really nothing special but being that this is the first go at editing in history I thought I should talk about the technical elements. I was impressed by how much this felt like it was The Wild West and I also liked how many people they took in to get this made when at this point, film was just a cheap amusement to the public eye. But there are some weaknesses with it, To say the number of robbers in the robbery is inconsistent is an understatement. First there's 2, then 4, then 3 it's a mess. That and I don't know what the significance of the last shot is. It's one of a guy in a stationary location that has nothing to do with what has been seen looking directly at you and firing a gun. I guess because back then editing was a new concept that they could get some of the cheap amusement side of it that it was at the time at the ending but I don't think it ages well. All in all, I would say watch it if you're a fan of westerns or want to know about film history.

A group of bandits stage a brazen train hold-up, only to find a determined posse hot on their heels.At only ten minutes, in black and white, with no sound... modern audiences may not think much of this simple train story. Heck, even the "special effect" of throwing the man (clearly a dummy) off the train is silly. Modern audiences who think this are dead wrong.Released in 1903, the film looks like it could have been from the 1920s. The film quality is amazing and there is nothing about it that gives the film away as one of the earliest films ever made. Sure, technically, they had been making movies for more than a few years... but if there is one that came out earlier and looked this good, I sure have not seen it.

When people talk about very early silent film masterpieces, this is usually one of the first mentions apart from Méliès' "Voyage to the Moon" and some of his other works. And there is the famous story about "The Great train robbery" that people were leaving theaters with fear when that final cowboys bandit appears as they thought he would shoot them. Film really was a very new medium back then and most weren't getting it yet. Edwin S. Porter was one of the most prolific filmmakers of all time and this is probably his most known work. I personally believe it's worth a watch for its historic relevance, but not really for the movie itself. Neither the drama, nor the action, nor the thriller aspects and nor the western elements managed to convince. It's 10 minutes for film historians and silent film lovers, but not really for anybody else. Also, lets not forget that when you see this with some wonderful soundtrack coming with it, this music was not a part of this film very early in the 20th century, but it was added later. That's also why people mistake this for being a classic. If you want to see what it really was, you need to turn the volume silent. And a lot of its impact is lost, so you will realize this is nothing more than an okay movie at best. Also the film's story is definitely not easy to understand, so maybe you won't even be able to get the very basic action unless you read a summary beforehand, but no film should rely on you having to do that in order to understand it. Not recommended.