I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

With such a great cast, I expected a great film, but all it did for me was put me to sleep, or to be more precise, used the control to turn it off. The film was slow moving, predictable and the script left much to be desired.As much as there are some people that are trying to take us back to the "good old days", this film reminds me why I wouldn't want to. It seems like everyone is overdosing in testosterone and stupidity and where the absolute meaning of life is drinking, fighting, womanizing, and being an absolute jerk.Sorry, but with things as they are in the world today, I can't sympathize with a bully as a hero.Again, quite a disappointment with so many great actors in the film.

Set in the late 1940s, The Hi-Lo Country is a strange mix of drama, romance, western, buddy movie and something that can be best described as an Americana version of Latin America's magical realism: there's even a witch telling the future, and her prophecy fulfills! The movie does not offer much in terms of action: it rather sets out to be a "slice-of-life" piece, taking a look both at the events and the changes occurring in all the lead characters. I can understand this kind of approach can be disliked by some viewers; still, I found this movie interesting and somewhat underrated (picked it one evening on the cable). If you like a movie that emphasizes the mood instead of the actual action and with a strong cast ensemble (watch for Northern Exposure's Darren Burrows!), this is for you. 7 out of 10.

Overall I enjoyed this movie. It wasn't great, and yet it wasn't bad.I found Woody Harrelson's acting lacking; something about it just didn't make me believe him as the brash, swaggering cowboy. Billy Crudup's acting was very good and believable. Crudup did such a good job that it made me wish that they'd used someone as good as him for Harrelson's part; it would have the movie a lot better.The story was a bit hard to swallow; Crudup was in love with the same woman, Patricia Arquette, that Harrelson was, but she was too unlikable and shallow and I couldn't understand how he could have the hots for such a loser of a woman.The ending had a nice twist; the way the movie started it made you think it was going to end one way but it ended differently than you were led to believe. The ending was also bittersweet which gave it a nice finish.

Maybe it's the age we live in, but no one seems to be able to make westerns anymore. The last consistently good period was the late 60's and early 70's, with the works of Peckinpah, Pakula (Comes a Horseman), Blake Edwards (Wild Rovers). There have been a couple of good one-off's since - "Unforgiven" and "Silverado" perhaps. But there's only so many times that you can "subvert the genre" before you start repeating yourself. Maybe it's all Mel Brooks' fault."The Hi-Lo Country" tries to be a non-pc, macho Western, but it isn't comfortable with it and this comes across to the viewer.The script is all over the place, and the film never settles on what its major conflicts are supposed to be.The highlights are Sam Elliot's performance and a poker game with tragic consequences.The film makers also haven't grasped the fact that its difficult to empathize with lead characters who are assholes and don't know it. It's that old thing of behaviour which is acceptable in a 20 year old looks bad on a 30 year old.A waste of landscape and film stock. And an irritating title.