Doc Holliday's Revenge (2014)

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Sadly Over-hyped

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

"A judge can only go by the facts in hand and then he must use his best judgment." In 1882 after the shootout at the OK Corral the Clanton gang was not happy with the Earp's or Doc Holliday. Soon after the gunfight Morgan Earp was shot and killed but because of lack of witnesses the killer was never convicted and is free. Not a group to rest Wyatt Earp and his friend Doc Holliday have been canvasing the Tuscon area looking for the killer. Joseph (Voitila) and Elizabeth (Hayes) Cooley are staying at a logging camp when a wounded person shows up at their door. They attempt to help him but when Doc Holliday shows up things begin to change and no one knows who is in the right. There really isn't too much to say about this movie. This is yet another nearly unwatchable cheesy western with awful acting. The main star in this is Tom Berenger. He plays a judge that really has nothing to with the story other then to explain what is going on in a voice over. It may be because I think Tombstone is one of the best movies of all time and it's hard not to compare anybody's portrayal of Doc Holliday to Val Kilmer but this guy was bad. He was only in it for a few minutes though so that helped. This is nothing but a bad western that was really a struggle to get through. Overall, a movie that was really hard to watch and not laugh at. I give this a C-.

My wife picked this up at a redbox with a free code, and it wasn't worth the money. The writing was just atrocious, they didn't even try to get the dialogue to sound like it was anywhere near the 1880s. The acting was so bad I actually joked to my wife that it was the acting of a porn without the benefits, and come to think of it, the writing fits this description as well. As a whole, this movie looked like it was put together by a seventh grader during his free time. Not sure what they were thinking putting this out, but I'm sure the budget was so low that they'll end up making money on this thing even if they only sell 10 copies of it. Don't waste your time, it was so bad I didn't even get 10 minutes into it before we returned it.

I have seen TV commercials with better actors! This is another movie I couldn't sit through. Between the paper thin actors and their badly timed attempts at dialogue, and scenes like Tom Berenger sitting at a judge's bench - obviously without a live audience, they show the cheapness of this film and guarantees that it definitely didn't go over-budget (undoubtedly a tiny one). We all get old, but Eric Roberts' choppers sound like they just came out of a glass, and Tom Berenger looks like he's ready to explode. The score was also cheap, and reminded me of 1970s TV. The director chose some shots that make me think he has about as much experience at this as a teenager directing an 8mm school project. Why either Tom Berenger OR Eric Roberts would ever choose to be in something this lame is beyond me. My theory is they owed one of their kids a favor and pulled a Ricky Ricardo. I give what I saw 2 stars, and that's being generous.

Why did Tom Berenger lend himself to this obvious low budget film? One can only guess. Early indicators for me were the cheap effects that were meant to set the historic context, but blurred faces and two bit actors shooting at each other for minutes in brown-tone? Tom appears first as if in a documentary talking with a badly done - ghost like - cut out effect that sets him against a 'western' landscape, introducing more of the context - later on the same effect is used in a court scene, making him look even more like a ghost. These wishful attempts to give the story substance fail and only amplify the minimal acting and storyline. 2 points for the effort.