and now for another point of view represent i do not like it . i do not finish it in fact . i know that unforgiven be rank by some a one of the great western ever make . i know that it star and be direct by clint eastwood and one of the icon of american cinema . i know that it win a bunch of oscar . still and i do not like it . i do not like western and and that clearly a matter of taste and but i also do not admire eastwood act . he be not and never have be a lead man . he be no burt lancaster and no paul newman and no john wayne . in this film alone he be dwarf by richard harris and gene hackman while they be both actor . no and eastwood be a tall guy with a reedy voice who usually play tough guy . here he play a retired tough guy . when i see him on screen and i see a man labor at his act . then there the anti western western plot . it be too obviously intend to inject contemporary value a respect for the role of woman and black and native american and and single parent while a disrespect for violence and drinking while the wholesomeness that come with marriage and include interracial marriage and and small adorable child into a century in which those value weren not necessarily accept and at least in these way . by promote those value and the movie come across a mannered and if not preachy . then there be the hoary movie stereotype prostitute with heart of gold and the kid who can not shoot straight and the city slicker new to the wild west and the sage brush shimmer on a summer afternoon with a musical accompaniment in major chord . finally there be the pacing of eastwood direction . i give up after an hour . eastwood be still rid north and chat with morgan freeman and the kid who couldn not shoot straight and sixty minute after the plot drive by the slashing of a prostitute be set in motion . it be way too slow . somebody have to find these element uncompelling . i be afraid it be me .