Charley-One-Eye (1973) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
10 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
British Western with a good cast and completely set in the sunny desert of Tabernas , Almeria , Spain
ma-cortes3 August 2017
An African-American deserter (Richard Roundtree , known for Shaft) and and his crippled American Indian hostage (Roy Thinnes , known for The invaders) form a strained comradeship and partnership in the interests of surviving against enemy attacks . A bit later on , they take on the advancing threats of some Mexican bandits (Aldo Sambrell , Rafael Albaicín) and later on , there appears a ruthless bounty hunter (well personified by Nigel Davenport) who attempts to reckoning on the escaped soldier . Somebody told the black man he wasn't a slave anymore , somebody told the red man this land was his, somebody lied , somebody is going to pay.

The flick has undeniable tendencies to symbolic events that overkill the nimble developing of the story . The film is slowly paced and spite of setting on exteriors , it feels itself some claustrophobic . The plot is plain and simple with a few roles , a strange duo faces off neighboring bandits and a racist , brutal bounty hunter . Director copes well this thrilling Western helped by the Spanish desert from Almeria where in the 60s and 70 were shot lots of Pasta/Chorizo Westerns . The picture draws magnificent acting from Richard Roundtree as the black , Union Army deserter and Roy Thinnes as the Indian outcast , both of whom encounter common ground in oppression eventually incarnated by Nigel Davenport as a cruel bounty hunter . Furthermore , brief appearances from Spanish actors as Aldo Sambrell and Rafael Albaicín , both of them usual to Spaghetti/Paella Westerns . This one results to be a British Western film along with ¨Hunting party¨ by Don Medford , ¨Catlow¨ by Sam Wanamaker , ¨Eagles's wing¨ by Anthony Harvey , ¨Shalako¨ by Edward Dymitryck , most of them starred by great players and shot in Almeria .

The motion picture was well directed by Don Chaffey , though results to be a little bit boring . Don began directing in 1951 , often working on films aimed at children , as he directed various kiddies films as ¨Magic of Lassie¨ , ¨Greyfriars Bobby¨, ¨The horse without head¨, ¨3 lives of Thomasina¨ , ¨Pete's dragon¨ , ¨Ride a wild Pony¨. He branched out into television in the mid-'50s, turning out many of the best episodes of such classic series as ¨Danger Man¨ (1960), ¨The prisoner¨ (1967) and ¨The avengers¨ (1961). Although he worked in many film genres , such as Romance/drama : ¨The gift of love¨ , ¨Four wishes¨, Prehistorical : ¨Creatures of the world forgot¨ , ¨One million years B.C.¨ , Thriller : ¨Casino¨, Comedy : ¨Dentist in chair¨ , ¨A matter of Who¨, his best work is generally acknowledged to be the crackerjack fantasy ¨Jasón and the Argonauts¨ (1963). On the other hand, he was also responsible for the lugubrious, box-office disaster ¨The viking queen¨ (1967), one of the few productions from Hammer Films that lost money. In the late 1970s Chaffey traveled to the US and worked primarily there, often in made-for-TV movies .
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Stark...
poe42623 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Westerns are sometimes westerns by default. Horses, men with guns, barren, sun-baked landscapes, American "Indians"... To most of us, these ingredients add up to one thing and one thing only: a "western." A genre film. (An "oater," if you will; a "shoot-'em-up.") But all is not always as it may seem. THE BALLAD OF GREGORIO CORTEZ, for instance, while a "posse" movie, is hardly a "traditional" western. Unlike many of the John Ford or Howard Hawks westerns, it wasn't "storyboarded" by Fred Remington (or would that be "production designed" by?). BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID was a more traditional "chase" film, but far superior to most thanks to brilliant writing and direction (not to mention the performances by two of the Big Screen's most stellar stars). Although it, too, is a "chase" film, CHARLEY ONE-EYE is about as unconventional and as stark as they come. The storyline is sparse but nonetheless compelling; it unravels slowly but realistically, with men pitted both against the elements and one another. Beautifully shot and directed, CHARLEY ONE-EYE rates a look.
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Interesting film
denzil-094342 December 2018
The production values of this film are spectacularly poor. Especially at the beginning. In spite of that it's a fairly gripping drama that leaves the viewer with plenty of food for thought. Well worth watching. Don't let the first 10 minutes put you off.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
The American Indian
Oslo_Jargo28 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
*Plot and ending analyzed*

Charley-One-Eye (1973) is one of those odd films that come across the TV late at night. I really enjoyed it, since it was a new take on the Western. It has a black man, of recent from the Union Army, now a deserter, and his injured American Indian hostage. I didn't recognize Roy Thinnes as the Indian and Richard Roundtree as the black man. Richard Roundtree shot some Union officer and seems to be on the run. A mean-spirited Bounty Hunter is on his trail, played by Nigel Davenport (Sands of the Kalahari (1965), A Man for All Seasons (1966)).

There's a lot of oddness in the interaction between the black man and his injured American Indian hostage, who are fighting for survival in the desert. It was filmed in Almería Spain, the locale for so many Spaghetti Westerns in the 1960's.

It is interesting to note how the relationship develops when they are by themselves and threatened by an outsider group. The ending was very melancholy. There is also a similar film, Eagle's Wing (1979), where Sam Waterston plays an American Indian. Grayeagle (1977) also has Alex Cord as an American Indian.

Charley-One-Eye, like Eagle's Wing (1979), were both British productions.

Charley-One-Eye is a chicken that the American Indian has taken a fancy to and perhaps is symbolic of how American Indians were treated.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
More Drama than just Western
noisyb16 January 2004
Warning: Spoilers
An Indian and a deserted Soldier (africa-american) meet in a desert (probably in Mexico) and both are trying to get something like a new life. They become friends and want to start a farm or something like that. The Indian goes to a nearby town to buy some chickens. In his absence the deserted soldier is stoned to death by mexicans who seem to hate everything american. When the Indian returns he seems to fall apart.

However, I highly recommend this movie.
8 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Two Victims of Racism Struggling to Stay Alive
Uriah436 February 2023
This film begins during the Civil War with an unnamed "Black Soldier" (played by Richard Roundtree) being caught in bed with his commanding officer's wife. Needless to say, this infuriates the white officer who immediately goes for his pistol but is shot and killed for his efforts. Realizing that he will surely hang for this, the black soldier immediately deserts and runs as fast as he can for the Mexican border. The scene then shifts to an "Indian" (played by Roy Thinnes) sitting alone in the Mexican desert when he is suddenly attacked by the black soldier and taken prisoner. It is then revealed that, because the Indian is partially crippled and of mixed blood, he has been kicked out of his tribe and forced to make it on his own. So, despite the black soldier's cruel treatment of him, the Indian takes things in stride without complaining. Be that as it may, they eventually come upon an abandoned mission and--because it offers shelter from the sun and has source of water--decide to stay there for a while. But what neither of them realize is that there is a bounty on the black soldier's head, and this will soon create all kinds of problems for all concerned. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that this was an interesting film which exposed some ugly truths about racism and the miserable conditions it creates for those affected by it. Unfortunately, the film seemed to focus too much on the ill-treatment of the Indian and this got rather dull and tedious after a while. That being said, while not necessarily a bad film by any means, I didn't particularly care for it all that much and I have rated it accordingly.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Prime candidate for a remake!
alan-nutter13 September 2022
Prime candidate for a remake!

It's frustrating that so many movies are remade that were already great films in the first place.

As others have said, the acting in this movie ranges from poor to over the top and the pacing of the movie isn't ideal.

The two main characters could also be put in more jeopardy than we see here

The basic premise of the story is very good though and it could become great as a remake.

Would love to see this happen.

I can't remember another movie where I have rated it 7 out of 10 when the acting has been this much below par.

Glad I stumbled across this. At the time of writing, it is available on Amazon Prime.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Wow
zanegoldy28 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
What an overlooked gem this film is. This is a great movie, for a few reasons. One is the acting, when you start this movie you may think god, this acting is atrociously over the top with the characters laughing hysterically for seemingly no reason and the less than natural dialogue. But Ben is just a free soul on the run who is lovable in every way. And the Indian starts as a stoic, cold character then becomes free willing and funny character, the arc is beautiful. This film's plot isn't the best but it gets the job done but it's really about the characters. The villain in this film is great, bringing a new layer of creepiness and intensity to this movie, which amazingly segwayed from a fun, sometimes dark movie to an all out melodrama. As soon as he cocks his gun at the church door, you know this won't end well. Without giving anything else away this is a fantastic diamond in the rough and is DEFINITELY worth a watch.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
UK RETRO CHANNEL CHOPPED THIS FILM IN HALF
alanwriterman9 July 2019
I've been looking for this film for years so last night I recorded it from the UK Retro Channel and when I watched it back it had been edited down to 45 minutes!

I don't remember Nigel Davenport appearing.

Hilarious but disappointing!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the weirdest western ever
searchanddestroy-15 April 2024
Obviously inspired by THE DEFIANT ONES, this western is totally in the good fashion of its period: late sixties and early seventies; civil rights, sex freedom, war in Vietnam, reject of the valors, pacifism, feminism. So, this was not that surprising, but it remains daring, bold, and worth watching. There are many ways to understand, read this film. Don Chaffey was also a very strange director: he made thrillers, fantasy movies involving Ray Harryhausen's special effects, and this offbeat western. Another UK director made the same: Jim O'Connoly. I know western waas not a genuine British genre, but that doesn't explain everything either. I would have never expected finding Roy Thinnes and Richard Rountree together in such a film. Shaft - for Roundtree (SHAFT series) - and David Vincent for Thinnes (THE INVADERS)- together....
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed