Review of Unforgiven (1992) by Cameron H — 10 Jun 2017

Western films are not for everyone. Many, if not most, of them are packed full of dated notions as to what it means to be honourable, be the best killer, be a man. I would be quicker to recommend Unforgiven to people who don't like Westerns (at least for the reasons I mentioned) than to people who do.

From a distance, it may seem like a modern Western which studies the moral compass of when it is morally right to use the deadly force of gunfire. In depth, not quite. That theme is actually pretty common in classic Westerns.

Unforgiven argues that such questions are not even relevant, once the moment comes to use gunfire. The primary characters in the movie -- played with great sympathy by Clint Eastwood (also the director), Morgan Freeman, and Gene Hackman -- are esteemed shooters well past their prime.

They are each in situations where they would most like to settle down and be away from the violence of their past, but for one reason or another, they have found themselves ready to kill. Eastwood and Freeman, partners in crime, try to rationalize their deeds for justice, while Hackman, the "antagonist", tries to rationalize his deeds for peace.

Overtime, the violence desensitizes from a intense perspective of the shooter -- "Can you live with yourself, if you pull the trigger?" -- to ruthless apathy, patiently and effectively paced by director Clint Eastwood.

In the film Unforgiven, whatever it means to be a "man", it has long been too late for anyone to walk away in the "right." All that counts is who is lucky enough to walk away at all, and get the chance to continue walking.

If you see classic Westerns as the testaments for true heroes, you may not like how Eastwood and screenwriter David Webb Peoples try to shatter those images. For everyone else, you're in for a treat.