GamerTab That was an excellent one.

GazerRise Fantastic!

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Neil Welch What an oddity this is.If you put to one side the Louis L'Amour source novel, and Woody Strode in the supporting cast, this traditional western has no US input at all. Even the spaghetti westerns usually had a Yank at the top of the cast list.This European western has quite a high profile cast list - Sean Connery (Scots), Brigitte Bardot (French), Stephen Boyd (Irish), Peter van Eyck (German), Jack Hawkins and Eric Sykes (English) - none of whom would be obvious choices for a western. The Spanish locations are, I suppose, redolent of some American desert areas, but still aren't really the sort of places which evoke the US places where one might expect a European hunting party to visit.This sense of geographical dislocation gives the movie a weird feel. When you factor in the fact that this is quite a sadistic picture, with a level of violence not commonly seen in westerns in 1968, you get a movie which doesn't easily bear comparison with anything else. It's like wandering through an art gallery looking at portraits by old masters and suddenly seeing a landscape painted by Steven Spielberg - yes, it's a painting, and yes, Spielberg is undoubtedly a man of great artistic vision and ability, but this particular item simply doesn't fit.Is it any good? It's OK, and I think it would be better if you could shake off the air of weirdness which is there whe whole time you're watching it.

xredgarnetx Based on a Louis L'Amour story, SHALAKo is a standard Western about an ex-Army colonel (a miscast Sean Connery in a really silly cowboy hat) trying to keep a party of Europeans alive after they have invaded Indian territory. A Spanish-made film, the only American in the cast is Stephen Boyd as the party's villainous guide, and he's OK. Well, and Woody Strode is the chief bad Indian! Otherwise, you have a broad spectrum of accents and acting to deal with here. Heavily eyelined Frenchie Brigitte Bardot is a countess from who knows where and German actor Peter Van Eyck plays a stiff-backed baron. Brits Jack Hawkins and Honor Blackman are a couple of English nobility. And so on. Even the butler is foreign. This is one of those glossy European flicks, of which there were quite a few made back in the 1960s and 1970s, and most of which never quite clicked here. In the end, the story comes to nothing. And the endless shots of Spanish desert wear thin after awhile. You may safely skip this one.

CinderellaWoman I thought Stephen Boyd and Honor Blackman were great in this movie. They are the only ones I really enjoyed watching here. Like someone else commented, Stephen Boyd is back in his element. He made a great villain. What a shame he died so young! Sean Connery and Brigitte Bardot on the other hand are awful to watch. He is very badly miscast.The script did not give a lot of depth to the character he portrayed,and they might as well have put a TV actor in (such as James Drury, Richard Chamberlain, or Chad Everett) that was trying to make their transition from television to films. Connery's tremendous talent was wasted here. Most of the time (except for the part where he sees Bardot giving herself a sponge bath) he looks like he can't wait for the scenes to be over. I found myself fast forwarding through his scenes as well. Perhaps he did try to give something to the character, but the script didn't give him much to work with.Bardot is interesting in the beginning, (and of course, interest piques a little during the sponge bath scene with Connery towards the end of the film) but in between she seems bored and just shrugs a lot, or pouts. At any rate, she too is badly miscast. Her hair and makeup are pure 1968, she doesn't look like she's in the 19th century at all, and her English is barely recognizable. They should have put someone like Liv Ullman or Catherine Deneuve in the part instead.Another flaw in the film is that the two major love scenes are badly timed. Stephen Boyd and Honor Blackman romp in the hay as the Indians are shooting, and one of the cowboys has to yell "Hey, Bosky! The Indians are coming over the wall!" He gently breaks away of course and begins shooting again. When Sean Connery and Brigitte Bardot are high in the mountains with the other Europeans, and the Indians could attack any moment, Brigitte is sponge bathing so Connery will notice her. Seems very out of place for people that are on the verge of being killed.If they would have changed the script to give Connery a more interesting character, and had him actually doing something, perhaps the film would have been better. Otherwise, Stephen Boyd and Honor Blackman are the only enjoyable characters in this film.

bearchaser69 This movie is the ultimate Hollywood camp classic Western!!! With a cast like Sean Connery and Brigitte Bardot...Honor Blackman and Stephen Boyd!!! What's not to like!!! And the theme runs through my head every morning I gargle. (Try it...you'll like it) Shalako is right up there with "The Man Who Loved Cat Dancing", another important classic western! And if you are a true Sean Connery fan, you must see Zardoz...Sean running around in a loin cloth and cavorting with Charlotte Rampling is enough to please anyone. Just feast you eyes on the Sean man and be at one with the world. Not to mention is host of co-stars that run the gamut. Peace and Love! BC69