Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Frances Chung Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Tymon Sutton The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

phanthinga I love when a movie with a genetic plot surprise me with a cool twist but in this case with Diablo screw the plot twist cause there nothing wrong with being a genetic movie as long as it entertaining and don't hurt your brain.At the time Diablo is the first western movie with Scott Eastwood son of the legendary Clint Eastwood so I know alot of people hope this movie will mark the new badass cowboy in town but it turn out that Scott only got some part of his dad face and none of his dad charistma.Every single person Scott met along the road fear him like he is the reincarnation of Satan or something when they got plenty of chance to kill him right from the get-go so when the movie hit it climax with a shoot-out I can only rolling my eyes while watching Scott acting like a maniac that too good for his own good until the movie end

mmartinez-04028 One must wonder what some reviewers are talking about when they pan this film. Eastwood was accused by at least two of bad attempts to mimic his father's mannerisms. Perhaps he picked up some of his father's behaviors, as sons sometimes do and perhaps as he is an individual those mannerisms have his own touch in them. So perhaps, instead of accusing him of trying to look and act like his father, but failing, we could understand that he is not his father though he looks and acts somewhat like him. One reviewer took the movie to task for the fact that "they couldn't hit him from 30 feet. I wonder if that person ever fired a pistol at a person they know to be a deadly killer who had the wherewithal to return fire. I myself have not. I'm fairly deadly to a paper target from 30 feet. At 50 feet, with something to rest the gun on and plenty of time to aim, I'm not a bad shot. I can't help thinking as decent a shot as I am, I cannot say with any confidence that I could shoot and kill a killer gunman who was shooting back. That scene at the farm yard, The shooters were I'd guess, at least fifty feet from Jackson(Eastwood), a long shot for a pistol with a target that does not pose a mortal peril to you. That reviewer should read up on his wild west history. The shootout at the OK corral? Lawmen & outlaws were around 20 feet of each other and I forget how many bullets were recovered for the Earp's murder trial(they were acquitted) but it was a lot and those men were all very proficient with handguns. The most unrealistic part of the movie as I see it is the peyote trip. I have eaten peyote and the portrayal of the hallucination Jackson had was ridiculous. It looked as thought he was just darting his eyes round and round and up and down very rapidly amidst the trees. In fact the only things accurate in that whole scene is that some Native American peoples do use it for ceremonies, and you usually throw up a while after you eat the buttons, right about the time the trip is getting started. Peyote trips last for hours. Very shortly after Jackson runs from the sweat lodge to hurl, they decide he is evil and so must go immediately, yet as the boy leads the horse to his stashed gear he is no longer tripping. I love that they portray what must be PTSD. I thought to myself, I don't remember Another film dealing with it from the civil war. It's reasonable to presume it afflicted soldiers then as now, they maybe called it something else or didn't call it anything. In WWII and The Korean war they called it shell shocked. The reviewers who ripped on this movie with invective and hyperbole should calm down before they give themselves a nose bleed. Diablo might benefit from a little better direction, But the acting was excellent. What can one say about the inimitable Walton Goggins? Bravisimo! It was a good story, creative and somewhat original screenplay. It has beautiful scenery. Not sure where one reviewer got the idea that it was supposed to be California. Jackson said they took the trail down to New Mexico. No trail in Cali goes down to NM. Sure, the scenery Doesn't look like country I've seen in Colorado, which I have traveled in a bit, nor indeed NM, which I have lived in for the vast majority of my life. It's called suspension of disbelief, people and if you find that short leap too difficult, if that is something that "Ruined" or "rendered in-watchable,' this movie I'm afraid you have many more disappointments in store if you continue to view movies. One reviewer said it isn't a western, but a horror story. He and I obviously have divergent definitions of Horror story. As I say in my summary, Diablo is a psychological thriller in western clothing. Don't let the naysayers throw you off. Give it a watch. You'll be surprised (unless You read a spoiler).

merklekranz I was mainly interested in seeing how much Scott Eastwood reminded me of his Father in those highly entertaining "spaghetti westerns". To be certain there are similarities and mannerisms that are spot on. Perhaps a bit more squinting might nail it? As for the film itself, "Diablo" is a confusing entity. This might have worked better as a simple revenge western without the gimmicky good/evil flip flop. I was impressed however with the cinematography, which is outstanding, however pictures alone cannot make up for the scattered story line, and an ending that screams "out of money". The movie is watchable, especially for those who are curious about how "Clint-like" Scott Eastwood appears to be. - MERK

Mentose3 (mmcqueenbey) To begin, this is a very good movie. The actors and acting was terrific. I love setting and theme of the story. The supporting cast was pretty good and they played all of their roles wonderfully. But to the main character, Scott Eastwood, he was wonderful in this movie. Watching it made me feel like I was watching his father. The directors style looks exactly like a Clint Eastwood western movie. The story itself was terrific, it definitely catches you off guard and you must keep your eyes glued to the screen in order to understand it. But after watching this movie a couple of times you definitely will have your eyes glued in and you won't want to take them off. It gives you a feeling of being there with Scott and you want to tell him what to do and what not to do. This movie should definitely get more credit than it received because Scott made this movie just like his father made his movies.