Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

classicsoncall There's a saying about not letting the truth get in the way of a good story, and I think that might have been the film maker's approach here. The picture is riddled with inaccuracies throughout, and if the story had left out the names of Frank and Jesse James it might have been more serviceable as an entertaining Western. I'm not necessarily a stickler for one hundred percent accuracy in historical movies, but this one fell short by a long shot.The casting here is a little suspect too. I can't picture Rob Lowe as the outlaw Jesse James. But since he got the nod, I thought he should have exhibited some of the maniacal excess that Emilio Estevez showed in portraying Billy the Kid in the 'Young Guns' films. The 'real' James/Younger Gang was formed by Frank James and Cole Younger, but it was the much younger Jesse who rose to prominence because of his brash and outspoken style. The inclusion of Randy Travis here as Cole wasn't too bad, but I had to wonder how much of his casting was dependent on someone singing 'Auld Lang Syne' in the latter part of the picture.Ticking off some of the historical errors - the gang never met Allen Pinkerton during a train robbery, Jesse's wife Zee never killed anyone, it wasn't Jesse's idea to head for Northfield, Minnesota, and Cole Younger didn't shoot brother Bob while on the run. Maybe there will never be a film that's totally accurate about the James/Younger Gang, but a couple of them get close - "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford" and "The Long Riders" are both pretty good, and the earlier film has that very cool horse jump through the storefront windows during the Northfield bank raid (which didn't actually happen, but is more believable than most of this picture).As if to add insult to injury, I happened to freeze the frames of the newspaper headlines about the James Gang exploits during the movie, and the underlying text had nothing to do with such captions as 'James Gang Robs Train' and 'Charlie Ford Captured'.But probably the biggest problem I had was in the depiction of Jesse's murder by the Fords. It appeared that Jesse was in some way sacrificing himself with his outstretched arms in supplication, as if to atone for his ruthless outlaw life. The implication of self directed suicide by leaving his gun on the table was just too blatant, right after watching his wife and young son agonize over their next move as a family. A movie by any other name would have been more satisfying.

marschab As much as I keep hearing the mantra on here that the historical inaccuracies are forgiven if it is a good movie. Well, it is extremely inaccurate and it is not a good movie.If you would like to make a western and ignore the majority of the facts, go ahead, just change the names of the characters and there will be no problem. Maybe it is because I live in the area that this movie is located, but it makes me cringe when I see Jessie's home as a two story mansion in St. Joseph when I have toured the actual home many times and the house is no bigger than my living room. The Northfield raid was horrendous with more inaccuracies and contrived stunts that seemed to be added to the movie just because they were filmed.The acting was bad with Lowe looking like a glamor shots version of Jessie and Paxton alternating between playing Frank James as Frank James and Frank James as Doc Holiday. I give this movie a 5 just because it is a western and it could be a serviceable story if they would have just changed the names.All in all, there were many times I was just itching to reach up and grab my 'The Assassination of Jessie James by the Coward Bob Ford' DVD and throw it in, but I waited to watch all of 'Frank & Jessie'. If you have the choice, just watch 'Assassination' again (which was extremely accurate and well written and acted), and you'll be better for it.

Spikeopath You know, I always find myself tutting and shaking my head after viewing a film about the infamous outlaws, Frank & Jesse James. Not because of the quality of each film, which ranges from good to awful over the years, but because of the tired old statements about accuracy that scream out from critics both amateur and professional. I'd be screaming too if the makers of film's such as this one proclaim it to be " thee" true story of the James boys, but since no publicity about such things like "facts" was to be found, I was able to venture into a mid 90s Western with no expectation of historical accuracy and hopefully be entertained by a movie that follows more the myth of the men than the reality. And entertained I was too.Frank & Jesse stars Rob Lowe as Jesse James and Bill Paxton as Jesse's brother Frank James. The story picks up following the Civil War where the two brothers, recently stung by the senseless murder of their younger brother, hook up with the Younger brothers - Cole Younger (played by Randy Travis) and Bob Younger (Todd Field), Bob Ford (Jim Flowers) and Charlie Ford (Alexis Arquette), Clell Miller (John Pyper-Ferguson), and Arch Clements (Nick Sadler), and start to fight back against the Chicago railroad investors. They set off on a trail of crime, robbing banks, trains and enacting stage holdups whilst evading the dogged pursuit of Allan Pinkerton (William Atherton) and his detective agency. But as Jesse's fame grows on account of an adoring public led by the press imagery of the man, so the gang get closer to being caught, or worse still, killed.Directed by Robert Boris, Frank & Jesse was a limited release in 1994/95. Tho obviously a TV movie In all but name, it does however boast a more than admirable cast. Lowe, in spite of looking uncomfortable on a horse, looks the part and proves to be a good casting choice. His cocksure way about him fits nicely into Jesse's shoes, whilst the goatee beard steers one away from seeing the "pretty boy" actor instead of the character. Paxton is always solid and reliable, and no change here, with one naked bathroom scene an absolute delight. It's a scene that sees Frank meet his future wife Annie, here played by Dana Wheeler-Nicholson, and Western fans will note that that pairing sees the actors re-teamed after appearing together in Tombstone 1993. Of the others, Travis stands out as the most believable of the support rogues, while Nick Sadler quietly gives the best performance in the movie as Arch Clements. A fine young actor who can be checked out in the likes of Twister, Disclosure, Scent of A Woman, & Mobsters.The writing is safe, if a touch too cliché riddled and hurt by some dialogue that doesn't belong in the time, while the action scenes are more than up to scratch. Notably a shoot out at Northfield, Minnesota, that's as good as anything in the afore mentioned Tombstone. Walt Lloyd does a good job with the cinematography, some nice hues used for the town sequences, tho your eyes may be dragged away by Mark McKenzie's score as it is unable to fully grasp the mood at times. But by and large there's more than enough here for the Western fan to enjoy. Unless of course you need a wall to wall history lesson in your Oaters that is? 6.5/10

chatroux13 I noticed that at least one commenter said that Bob Younger was depicted as deaf in the movie. He was supposed to be mute only, there was no mention of him being deaf. In the scene of Jesse being shot, it is clearly Bob Ford that shot him, but the narration, by Randy Travis, states that it was Charlie Ford. Obviously somebody wasn't paying attention. I can't believe that editing didn't catch it. Also, I don't know if any of the people who commented noticed it either. Another question that I have is why wasn't Martin Kove mentioned, even as uncredited? It was a small scene, but that face could not be mistaken for anybody else. Other than that, it was an enjoyable movie!!!