User reviews

This film was well hyped when released, with trailers and ads talking about the power and efficiency of the Ingram sub-machinegun, what happens when hunting trips go wrong, and revenge. The movie only lived up to the hype in the first, and last scenes, but the concept is still sound. This is a story that could be remade, or explored in a new film.

The story starts out with a great set-up when a group of friends (very good actors - Cliff Robertson, Ernest Borgnine, Henry Silva) venture out hunting in the Canadian wilderness. The story shifts when they encounter a "rival" group of hunters in the distance. After an accident of sorts, both sides retreat. When no one reports the accident from the other side, ex-military Major Cliff Robertson becomes convinced the other guys are plotting against them. Great set-up so far.

Here is where the film bogs down, way bogs down. It's like they had about fifteen minutes of information, and spread it out over the next hour giving us unnecessary details on character development, and wordy dialog that didn't properly explore the ethics of the hunter's situation and dilemmas. By the time the climax approaches you're almost asleep wondering what the heck too so long. However, when the final scenes finally do arrive and the story picks up steam again, it commands attention and will not leave you disappointed.

If you get a chance to see this movie, pay close attention to the beginning, don't worry about popcorn or potty breaks during the middle, and wake up for the ending.

As of August of 2006, you're going to have to look for this on Cable TV, or Ebay, as the VHS is long out of print, and the film hasn't be released on DVD, which is too bad considering all the junk that is out there.

I suspect the book this Canadian indie was based on is far superior to this low-budget adaptation. Two hunting parties cross paths in the Canadian woods, which ends with a man being accidentally killed. Cliff Robertson leads a group of military veterans, and when nothing is heard after the fact about the killing, he figures in his own bent way that the other party will be coming after his men and their families. He decides to take the offensive and leads his men back into the woods, this time armed with automatic weapons and full combat gear. Dull movie, mostly guys standing around talking. A great cast is largely wasted here, including Ernest Borgnine, Henry Silva, Kate Reid and Helen Shaver. Reid steals the show midway through as horny, drunken widow. But it's not enough to redeem this flick, which might have been better offered upas a made for TV job.

I honestly never intent to touch upon political themes in my film reviews, but I can't help establishing that some of the main topics in this 42-year-old movie are still incredibly relevant today. For you see, I'm writing this review just a few days after another terribly catastrophic mass shooting took place in an American high school (Parkland, Florida on Valentine's Day 2018) and naturally the debates regarding the controversial 2nd Amendment are held across the internet. These same socially sensitive debates are also already featuring in Harvey Hart's 1976 film "Shoot" and it remains a disturbingly realistic and uncomfortable sight to see how a man, with access to a nearly unlimited weapon arsenal, grows increasingly paranoid and bloodthirsty.

The film, adapted from a novel by Douglas Fairbairn that I would love to read, has a very simple but effective premise. Six middle-aged small-town buddies, former Vietnam veterans, meet on an ordinary Sunday morning to go hunting. They're strolling through the woods and make jokes, and then they spot another hunting party across a river. They first stare at each other when, suddenly and for no apparent reason, someone in the other group fires a shot in their direction. Wild gunfire ensues in which Zeke (Henry Silva) kills a hunter on the other side. When the group is back home, they are debating whether to report the incident to the authorities and they are quite astonished to learn that the other party didn't report it either. Rex, the self-declared leader of the pack, becomes more and more convinced that the other group is preparing a bloody retaliation and urges his pals to surprise them first.

Many of my fellow reviewers are giving a lot rating to "Shoot" because of its slow pacing and uneventful middle-section. It's undeniably true that the screenplay contains too many dull and overly talkative sequences, but the uncanny atmosphere remains throughout and the macho male performances keep you glued to the screen. Even during the slow middle section there are a few extremely powerful and memorable scenes, like when Rex visits the dead hunter's widow or when Ernest Borgnine gives his solid friendship speech at the meeting. The finale is vintage 70s survivalist/warfare spectacle. "Shoot" is not quite playing in the same league as "Deliverance" or "Southern Comfort", but it's nevertheless a highly recommended drama/thriller.

This hard to find drama about two hunting parties that decide to wage war on each other after a party member is killed from a previous encounter, seems at first promising, but after a ponderous snail-paced middle act, patchy characters and a somewhat unbelievable story to begin with, 'Shoot' begins to lose it's credibility with each slow moving scene.

Despite a half decent cast of it's day, the likes of Ernest Borgnine and Henry Silva have little to do, the pale script seemingly stretched just a little too thin for the film's running time, in fact the film seems a lot more suited to TV of which director Harvey Hart is more accustomed to. Cliff Robertson admittedly pulls off a hard driven performance as the unhinged Major Rex, however his character's actions do seem a little unbelievable and unintentionally funny at times as do the escalating events that lead the hunting party into more conflict.

Though an interesting premise, that could be easily mistaken for a John Woo plot if there ever was one, 'Shoot' suffers the most by it's shallow unlikeable characters and it's slow yet meticulous build up to the final bitter act, which when finally surfacing leaves the viewer feeling undeniably shortchanged.

A group of war veterans led by Cliff Robertson are ambushed while hunting in the Canadian hills and return fire.Suspecting a future retaliation they gather together more army comrades,stock an arsenal of weapons and head back to the hills for a final shoot-out."Shoot" is a Canadian survivalist drama with Cliff Robertson,Henry Silva and Ernest Borgnine.The film can be easily compared to "Deliverance" and "Southern Comfort".I must admit that the first and the final shoot-outs are very intense and violent,unfortunately the middle section of the film is too talky and suitably dull.The message of "Shoot" is pretty clear:an easy access to weaponry can turn peaceful hunting trip into war zone.7 out of 10.

I saw this movie when it first came out. I had seen the novel in the base exchange and since I was sticking around base, I read it in a few days. Interesting characters and plot, a Deliverance type of ethical dilemma and the inclusion of some good actors, I thought it would be a good movie. I was disappointed at seeing many of the characters wooden and shallow, unlike their motivations in the book. Several of the characters were WWII vets, with a Vietnam vet thrown in. Interesting in the book, slow and dragging on screen. When the final encounter happens, it is well done and it was shocking to see. It was one of a series of movies made in the 70s with a stark realism to its look, but the story line was far-fetched. Nothing I have read or done would lead me to believe that the novel or the movie though were based upon Soviet spetznaz incursions from Canada into the U.S. Just a good novel not particularly well done to screen.

I know this is a badly done movie but it is done in that special bad 1970's way that somehow makes it a tolerable odd movie that once you see it you will not forget it. I still remember seeing it the first time and it was so bad and such a dumb movie I recalled it in vivid detail.

After seeing a second viewing decades later it was even worse then I recalled and I remembered it being truly awful. Yet once I again I sat and watched it for a second time. I was fascinated by just how idiotic the entire group was, they had to be some of the daftest characters ever brought to screen. There is just no rhyme nor reason to why they whole movie plays out as it does, It makes no sense why any of it happens.

Now with all that being said if you have not seen it you should. Give it a watch, it will confuse and baffle you but one thing is for certain you will never forget it.

I saw this flick years ago when TV was still cool and they had late night movies on most stations instead of ridiculous talk-shows and infomercials. It was probably only on because it was Canadian, and stations were required to have so much Canadian content and back them Canadian movies were for the most part bad or non-existent. It had all the cursing blanked out but still I was old enough to infer what was said. But I was most impressed with this back then! It took me a lot of years to track down a copy of this on video, and now that I did and watched it again, I still thought that it was awesomely cool (even though I knew what the ending would be). The story is pretty simple. A group of hunters bored because there is nothing left to shoot, meet another group of hunters in the same situation. Then just like that, a firefight erupts leaving one of their group injured and one of the other group dead. From then on, it builds up from 'should they report it' to 'they be after us for revenge' and every level in between. So the hunters get all the guns and gear and able-bodied men they can and go back to the spot the following Saturday in anticipation of the other hunters being there to ambush them. Will they be there or is it just paranoia? I'm not saying but the ending is a surprise.

Brooding, big-haired Alpha dog Rex (Cliff Robertson) shoots to thrill in 70s Canadian backwood's bang-fest 'Shoot', with a boisterously bang-on cast of stalwart actors including the legendary Ernest Borgnine, James Blendick, and B-Cult hero Henry Silva! These noisome, smack-talking weekend warriors have their regular male-bonding weekend abruptly concluded with the sudden retaliatory shooting of some unknown, mysteriously trigger-happy fellow hunter, and the grim, existential malaise they all endure thereafter very soon escalates to our Gung ho, gun happy chappies making a fateful decision that puts them directly in the firing line for some heavy-duty retribution! Harvey Hart's excitingly tense, straight shooting boy's own yarn is loaded for bear, and while some may balk at the film's slow-burning fuse, the explosive climax is well worth the wait! I'm certainly glad I took a shot with 'Shoot', as sometimes big boy's just wanna have gun!' And I gotta give major props to funk master Doug Riley's gritty score which deliciously delivered some super-dope Lalo Schifrin-esque grooves! Right on!

Either I was watching an outdoors program on ESPN or just wasting 90 minutes of my time enjoying this little boring drama about a group of big-game hunters discussing and devising tactics to counter-attack a bunch of strangers who spoiled their weekend in the woods. The best part about it was the ending that compares to a classic Civil War drama with plenty of desperate lives at stake, but don't you agree that SHOOT delivers a plot that sounds too fishy to believe? You bet! If you can find it, give it to a loved one who's spent years of military training. Another sick casualty in the fight for survival in the video stores!

The IMDb doesn't have a great reputation these days for a number of factors which I won't bother going in to ,but if there's a film that the majority opinion has got right it's this one . SHOOT has a rather Luke warm reception with comments saying it's a film that's never as good as it could have been , or is a mediocre movie or is unrealistic . Certainly it's a film I'd never heard of until accidentally stumbling upon it and considering it has two big name actors in the shape of Cliff Robertson and Ernest Borgnine that alone tells you there's a reason as to why it's so obscure

SHOOT is certainly a film with great potential . DELIVERENCE had spawned a subgenre that subsequently become known as " Backwoods brutality " . The Vietnam war had just ended in inglorious defeat for America so right away you're watching a film with massive potential for structuralism and political comment . For some strange reason any political subtext remains unexplored and when someone states " They look just like us " when the two hunting parties come across each other you soon come to realise this is probably coincidence rather than writer Dick Berg making a wider anti-war statement . Instead of making any subtle points the film concerns itself far more with setting up a totally unlikely and melodramatic plot turn featuring revenge that'll have you shaking your head as to how this would probably never happen in real life and then nodding your head that the IMDb reviews saying that this is an unrealistic movie are correct

Another annoying aspect to the film is a very cheap budget which gives the impression that it's a TVM , so much so that when characters start swearing it almost comes as a shock to the system . The bleak , murky , grimy cinematography also adds to this impression . Would I be correct in stating this is a badly directed movie ? Regardless of this the majority opinion on this page that it's a ridiculous mediocre movie is correct

With Cliff Robertson, Ernest Borgnine, and Henry Silva on board, I was expecting a lot more than "Shoot" delivered. Character development is virtually nil, and Silva's part could easily been played by a no name actor. Sandwitched between the opening ambush and the final shootout in the snow, is some filler that has no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the movie. A chatty widow and a friend's wife throwing themselves at Cliff Robertson feels like nothing more than script stretching. "Shoot"'s similarity to "Rituals" and "Hunter's Blood", two other "Deliverance" clones is unmistakable, but they are far superior movies. A BIG letdown. - MERK

I am a sucker for survivalist films, men caught up in a situation, especially in isolated settings. This is that type of film, or at least starts out as one, but takes different turns that at first were disappointing, then when all was said and done were appreciated for their originality. The pacing, slow and thoughtful, throws some for a loop, but so did the climax for me, which shifts gears several times and catches you off guard before the credits roll. I defy anyone to nail where this film is going at any point, or figure out its message easily. Several social issues arise. I think you can project different meanings on this film. It has stuck with me.

Another thoughtful, slow and subtle film by the same director, in the Horror genre, is The Pyx (1973), also made in Canada. Director Harvey Hart has quite an interesting TV resume, including Alfred Hitchcock, Wild Wild West, Star Trek, Starlost and Colombo.

It feels more like a telemovie than a feature film, and yet the performances of Robertson and Borgnine in particular are still very watchable, even if somewhat uneven.

Robertson's unravelling happens too abruptly, and Borgnine's moral compass seems to be all over the place; one minute he's in, the next he's out, it's hard to keep pace. At least you know where you stand with Henry Silva, so no surprises he's the trigger man whose initial marksmanship either saves or condemns the hunting party to their fate, depending on your perspective.

Aside from a key scene-stealing performance by distinguished stage actress Kate Reid, Helen Shaver makes a brief sultry cameo perhaps just to further emphasise Robertson's immorality, and familiar Canuck thespian Les Carlson is also on-hand for some added firepower and Gung-Ho machismo.

The messages are fairly overt, there's no 'hidden' agendas here so you'll either agree or disagree with the treatment depending upon which side of the 2nd Amendment you camp. There's reasonable tension, and plenty of 'human drama' which some reviewers have labelled tedious, it's just a shame there wasn't a bit more time spent on the action which could've reduced those heckles.

Other reviewers have compared this with Deliverance, and I'd also throw "The No Mercy Man" in there for similar themes at a similar scale. Well-made, but overall impact is disappointingly average.

Great movie. Seen it twice now. Cliff Robertson is one hell of an actor. Watch him in "Dominique is dead" for one of the greatest performances ever on film!

I'm watching "Three Days Of The Condor" right now and started thinking about a movie I saw long ago called "Shoot". A very interesting story line that could today be much better, The Shooting in the woods with the hunters is classic,(happens even today), the ending about all the home boys going back to finish, is great. But the hour in between this movie is lost. What is this crap about having to use 10 lines!!! The movie does not deserve ten lines!! OK i'm going for ten lines or I do not no what the Hec I'm doing!.

Just a Thought

Andy

This movie is not fluff and is not meant to "entertain." It aims to make you feel at a visceral level AND to think, and it succeeds on both counts. This film is multi-layered in meaning and is a fantastic example of why the late 60's to late 70's, into the very early 80's was the greatest period in American film-making history.

FIRST: In the mid 70's, when this film was made, the Vietnam War was a painfully fresh event in everyone's mind, and the paranoia that embodied the Dulles Brothers' "domino principle" for east Asia was a very prevalent them in the American psychic. The movie "Shoot" can only be fully appreciated for its symbolism in that context.

SECOND: I grew up in a gun culture of Oklahoma in the 1960's - 1970's. I like guns for what they are in terms of practical tools and in terms of casual entertainment for target shooting. I started shooting with my dad when I was 7 years old, and the first gun I owned was a Winchester .22 pump rifle that I bought off of my grandfather when I was 9. So I'm NOT a hater/fearer of guns. BUT, that said, the move "Shoot" perfectly captured the utter craziness of what had come ot be known as the "gun culture." There's scene early on in "Shoot" in which Cliff Roberson is cleaning and oiling his deer rifle so tenderly and with such obvious care, as contrasted with Robertson's alienation from and utter lack of any intimacy with his spouse. This psycho-sexual dissociation rang true to me in 1978, knowing a few twisted people at the time who were pretty much like that. It's more prevalent today, I would note.

The POV final scene in the movie with Cliff Robertson reflecting on the errors of the decisions he made in his life is one of the most utterly chilling (and tragic) moments of any piece of movie-making I can bring to mind. In some understated ways, as an anti-war movie the impact of this film is on the level of that of Apocalypse Now.