User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 176 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 17 out of 176
Watch On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 27, 2013
    5
    Moseying along for 160 minutes, this revisionist western by writer-director Andrew Dominik makes a wan attempt to present the Jesse James legend as the dawn of celebrity culture in America. This film is far too long but the central relationship of James and Ford is fascinating.
    ...it's got a title that perfectly matches its subject matter: They're both too long by half.
  2. DWilly
    Sep 28, 2007
    4
    Okay, you don't have to like characters to be interested in their story, but, really... let the dweeb shoot the psycho in the back and lets get it over with, already. The pictures are beautiful, there's a level of professionalism to the work and, admittedly, some dynamic scenes, but with narration tricky enough under the best of circumstances; how did they convince themselves Okay, you don't have to like characters to be interested in their story, but, really... let the dweeb shoot the psycho in the back and lets get it over with, already. The pictures are beautiful, there's a level of professionalism to the work and, admittedly, some dynamic scenes, but with narration tricky enough under the best of circumstances; how did they convince themselves they could get away with aping the narration from "Ken Burn's Civil War" without inducing groans. Expand
  3. JoyceC.
    Sep 23, 2007
    5
    I never thought Jesse James was going to be that bad.
  4. DaveL.
    Sep 30, 2007
    5
    Very good movie, but way too long.
  5. Rob
    Oct 22, 2008
    4
    Visually, very well done. But slow, and way too long. Unbearably so. Had it been a little faster I could have dealt with the length. But I had to watch it in two sittings, I couldn't watch it all at once, without falling asleep. Not a total loss though. It is very interesting, and I was very into it at the onset, but eventually it lost me in the middle, only to get me back interested Visually, very well done. But slow, and way too long. Unbearably so. Had it been a little faster I could have dealt with the length. But I had to watch it in two sittings, I couldn't watch it all at once, without falling asleep. Not a total loss though. It is very interesting, and I was very into it at the onset, but eventually it lost me in the middle, only to get me back interested in the end. Expand
  6. JayH.
    Feb 3, 2008
    6
    6.5/10. Beautifully filmed, but very very slow and way overlong. The acting is great by everyone, the cinematography is superb. It has amazing period atmosphere. Very well written. I am sure the slow pacing was deliberate, but that doesn't prevent it from being boring at times. Most of the rating here is for the quality of the production.
  7. JoyceK.
    Oct 11, 2007
    4
    Too long and boring.
Metascore
68

Generally favorable reviews - based on 32 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 32
  2. Negative: 1 out of 32
  1. This fascinating relationship gets smothered in pointlessly long takes, repetitive scenes, grim Western landscapes and mumbled, heavily accented dialogue.
  2. Reviewed by: Todd McCarthy
    90
    One of the best Westerns of the 1970s, which represents the highest possible praise. It's a magnificent throwback to a time when filmmakers found all sorts of ways to refashion Hollywood's oldest and most durable genre.
  3. 60
    Although not as radically defamiliarizing as Jim Jarmusch's avant-western "Dead Man," Jesse James has the feel of an attic ransacked for abandoned knickknacks.