darbski **SPOILERS** Great movie. Set the stage for a run of really good westerns starring Eastwood as a hard bitten, cynical survivor type, who's "Been There; Done That".Just a small point about this story, though. Besides Reno, who stole his saddle, they didn't have much on anybody. Sure, they TRIED to kill Cooper by lynching, but he survived. It would have wrecked the storyline, but, he shoulda took the bribe. If his case ever got to court, a good lawyer woulda got 'em off.

inspectors71 Okay, the whole thing reeks of a cheap knock-off of a Spaghetti Western (if that's possible), but there are some recommendables here in Ted Post's Hang 'Em High!Although it's a standard revenger, with Clint Eastwood as a former marshal, wrongly accused of rustling, and subsequently hanged by a lynch mob, only to survive the assault. Eastwood shows some inkling of being something more than a zombot, an actual actor. Pat Hingle is the judge who uses Eastwood when he recovers. Inger Stevens, easily the most ethereal beauty in 1960s moviedom, is the ubiquitous (only in moviedom) hooker with a heart of gold. Ed Begley is the leader of the lynch mob, and he is none too pleased as Clint starts dropping the not-so-much-baddies as stupidies. Throw in Ben Johnson, Arlene Golonka, James McArthur, Bruce Dern, and a bunch of other great character actors, and the cheapjackery of capitalizing on Sergio Leone's works begins to dissipate a bit.I don't like Hang 'Em High so much as I find it reasonably watchable. I'm enough of a movie nut that, if it's on, I'll sit down to see a good performance here or a nice touch there. But just for a few moments. Then I'll move on.After one viewing, so should you.

jimbo-53-186511 When Jed Cooper (Clint Eastwood) is walking along minding his own business when he is stopped by a group of men who accuse him of cattle-rustling. Despite Cooper's protests of innocence, the men decide that he is guilty and sentence him to death by hanging (albeit a private and unsanctioned hanging). However, Cooper survives this hanging and once his innocence has been proved, Judge Fenton (Pat Hingle) makes Cooper a lawmen and tasks him with the job of bringing all the men back to him alive so that they can be brought to justice.Hang 'Em High is another in a long line of Eastwood westerns and to date this is probably the weakest offering that I've seen. The problem I found with this film is that is that the story just wasn't all that engaging. At close to 2 hours it's far too long and I just found that so many elements of the film seemed to be drawn out for no real reason (the scene involving a group of men being hung about halfway through the film is a case in point). It also wasn't particularly exciting or entertaining and Eastwood is saddled here with a character that has no real character - no one-liners or humorous moments. This all just made the film rather dull. Director Ted Post also showed a lot of close-ups of several cast members which may have been the 'in thing' and I suppose it was intended to create suspense and tension, but looking at it today it looks ridiculous and rather cheesy.Where this film does deserve some praise is in the way that the writers expose some of the flaws in the justice system. Cooper is also a man that finds that his heart is telling him to get revenge on the men that left him for dead, but finds his head and conscience is telling him that they should be brought to justice and let the justice system decide their fate. This is an interesting aspect to the story which sadly for me didn't quite get enough focus.What makes this film slightly more disappointing is the final showdown which lacked any sort of intensity and was very anti-climactic.Taking everything into account, Hang 'Em High is an underwhelming and slightly disappointing film that just isn't as compelling or entertaining as many of Eastwood's other westerns.

utgard14 It was in the mid-90s when I first saw Hang 'Em High. I was new to Eastwood's westerns, having just seen the Leone films for the first time. All I knew of this one was a scene that I had seen in television commercials, where Clint says the movie's most famous line "When you hang a man you better look at him." So needless to say I was excited. The movie starts off well enough as innocent Eastwood is lynched by a group of men for cattle rustling, only he survives. From here you have a plot that Anthony Mann or Sergio Leone would have made into a masterpiece.Instead, what you get is a slow meandering film that fixates on and preaches about law & order, the dangers of vigilantism, etc. These kinds of plots were commonplace in virtually every western TV show from the 1950s and 60s. Hang 'Em High offers nothing new to a discussion that was already old by the time the film came out. Although I came into the movie predisposed to root for Clint, after awhile his character's lack of motivation at wanting revenge made me wish the lynch mob had done a better job and spared us an unfulfilling two hours.Like I said I first saw it in the 90s and was disappointed. I just recently rewatched it for the first time since then, hoping to see it with fresh eyes and enjoy it more. But I found myself feeling the same sense of disappointment and boredom I did all those years ago. As a western drama it's watchable and competently put together. As a western action revenge movie it's weak and should be avoided.