Ride with the Devil (1999)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Phil H

  
  Very interesting film which focuses on the American civil war but the Southern Confederate side as opposed to the more regular viewed Northern Union side. Its all based on fact (a book also) and the real leadership of 'Quantrill's' fighters in 1861, loosely depicting… More
  Very interesting film which focuses on the American civil war but the Southern Confederate side as opposed to the more regular viewed Northern Union side. Its all based on fact (a book also) and the real leadership of 'Quantrill's' fighters in 1861, loosely depicting events of that time. Its also quite unusual as its directed by Ang Lee who's films have been admittedly diverse in range but you wouldn't expect this kind of theme from him. The cast in this film is what impressed me the most really, Maguire, Ulrich, Wright and Rhys-Meyers stand out from the crowd but all perform well plus they all look great in their costumes, think of a cross between 'Interview with the Vampire' and 'Colonel Sanders' :) with their long flowing hair and thin sharp facial hair. I liked how the guerrilla's were dressed with their dandy outfits and feathered hats also, unsure if that's how they really looked but its different and visually striking. Location work looks great, filmed in Missouri with plenty of beautiful woodlands and some authentic sets as you would expect in a major western. Not allot of action in the film, only the real event of the Lawrence Massacre is all you get which is decent but not a classic historic movie moment. For a war film (of sorts) its more about the relationship between friends amidst the battles really, not overly epic and emotional as you might expect which isn't a bad thing but with a long run time some may get turned off.

• William D

  
  Every great director has one or two misfires. The Civil War drama "Ride With the Devil" is Ang Lee's, and it's a doozy. The photography is gorgeous at times; it captures the panoramic majesty of the American countryside. But everything else falls flat. The story is… More
  Every great director has one or two misfires. The Civil War drama "Ride With the Devil" is Ang Lee's, and it's a doozy. The photography is gorgeous at times; it captures the panoramic majesty of the American countryside. But everything else falls flat. The story is dull, the casting is spectacularly off, the actors were coached unbelievably badly, the editing is flaccid, the music is pedestrian, and the costumes and hair are downright laughable. Lee gives almost all the young male characters very long hair, making them look like girls. It's quite silly. Lee took a lot of risks with this film. He did not want to make a standard Western. This courage is admirable, but his judgment goes wrong at almost every turn. Chief among the disasters is the casting of Tobey Maguire in the lead role. I've never been a big fan of Maguire. His range is among the smallest of any big-name actor in American cinema today. All he seems capable of portraying is gentle, doe-eyed boys. His voice is so soft and high that you wonder if he ever experienced puberty. I like the idea of trying to build a Western around a girl-like male character. On paper it sounds interesting and innovative. But Lee was not able to make it work at all. His direction of almost all the actors was disastrous, and there are many of them -- far too many. Skeet Ulrich and Simon Baker are almost as bad as Maguire. Jonathan Rhys Meyers parades around like he's doing an imitation of Mick Jagger circa 1968. Jewel, making her acting debut, is bizarrely anachronistic, reeking more of 1990 than 1860. Only Jeffrey Wright, playing the one black character, knows what he's doing. Lee seems to have wanted to make a real effort to reach out to younger audiences. But filling his cast with Brat Pack youngsters isn't the way to go about that. He demonstrates here a real difficulty directing younger actors. The film Lee made before this was "The Ice Storm." After it was "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." What a stunning contrast there is between those two near-masterpieces and this goofy, boring dud.

• Bobby H

  
  Ride with the Devil was an interesting movie for me: For one it was the first movie I seen that actually had the ability to break Tobey MaGuires image of Spider-man in my head. I didn't once think he was going to spawn a web on any of the rider's that were approaching! :-)… More
  Ride with the Devil was an interesting movie for me: For one it was the first movie I seen that actually had the ability to break Tobey MaGuires image of Spider-man in my head. I didn't once think he was going to spawn a web on any of the rider's that were approaching! :-) On a serious note - This movie was based in Missouri during and post-civil war in which we seen the struggles within the state that led to a divide of union loyalist and confederate guerrilla's that were both willing to risk it for all their believes. This movie had some courage in a few different ways. I really enjoyed how one of the confederate guerilla fighters was a black man (as many are afraid to risks that and I've only seen it seconded in Gods and Generals) as well as it steered away from the typical Jesse James movies that are often the only Missouri based stories. We also get a viewpoint from the Confederate side of things which also is typically frowned on and not noted in movies for fear of scrutiny about those who wish to degrade heritage and truth. We now get a glimpse away from the legend behind Jesse James and Bloody Bill Anderson and focus on the everyday riders that never gained fame but only lost and sacrificed in the struggle that touched every American life somehow or another... The actors were amazing, the gory was awesome, the soundtrack, the emotion, the action, and the off season from the action tied in with a few typical western story twist (such as how one man in the group went on to become an outlaw like so many of these men did being they were already sanctioned outlaws by both the south and the north) all came together nicely. Personally for all that it risked in the story it told and viewpoints I took I congratulate this movie for taking men who were noted as 'cowards' (worse than that of the poor confederate viewpoint by those who are ignorant in history as is) by taking the lowest considered form of Confederate 'Freedom fighters' and telling their story in a way like no movie has ever had the balls to tell it like before. It's an amazing film and even if I wasn't a civil war buff and a historian at heart I'd still recommend this movie to many who wants a true glimpse in a film that approaches the civil war without any bias and sticks as close to historic truth as any movie I've seen that wasn't actually completely historical based (and does better then even some of those). Well done!

• Chris W

  
  The Civil War is one of those topics that is so popular that any sort of thing which uses it is basically guaranteed to get people to check it out. That said, I'm rather puzzled as to why this particular film is so underrated and underappreciated. The story here, based on the… More
  The Civil War is one of those topics that is so popular that any sort of thing which uses it is basically guaranteed to get people to check it out. That said, I'm rather puzzled as to why this particular film is so underrated and underappreciated. The story here, based on the novel Woe to Live on by Daniel Woodrell (the same guy who wrote Winter's Bone), concerns a group of men who take up the side of the Confederate sympathizing Bushwhackers during the Kansas/Missouri guerrilla fighting during the Civil War. Maybe one reason for why this film is underappreciated is because it tackles a part of the Civil War itself that is not as heavily focusd on, and that's a shame. Of course, I'm from Missouri, and I currently live in the southwst portion of the state, so this movie means a little more to me, especially since I've actually studied what it portrays under the tutelage of a historian. Now that I have my bias out of the way I can try to give this a proper review. What I liked is that this film is about the guerrilla fighting, and that it does shed light on a part of the war that hasn't been done to death. The fighting in the Transmississippi was very brutal, had little to do with big, broad politics, and was mostly concerned with local issues, and the 19th Century conceptions of honor and loyalty. Oftentimes, the proceedings were almost never clear cut black and white, and instead were a heavy shade of gray. What makes this film interesting is how it too shows the characters and events as complex and well rounded. Of the four main bushwhackers the film follows are a true blood rebel out for revenge, a southern gentleman fighting to preserve his way of life, and two odd, but not totally unlikely minorities (Roedel-a Gernan American, which is odd since Germans tended to side with the Union, and Holt- a freed slave fighting out of a sense of loyalty to his friend who bought then later freed him). It is these last two charactrers who get the msot screen time, and they are the most interesting, especially the former slave. With Roedel being of German descent, he is almost always at odds with most everyone around him who are frequently suspicious of his motives, and almsot never completely trusting of him. Holt draws attention simply since, at least on the broad scale, slavery was such a big issue for the war, so it seems odd that he'd fight for the side that's in favor of it. He has his reasons though, and they are passable, and make the character quite intriguing. I think that's what I appreciated the most about this movie. It has its moments of action and violence, but its more of a study of character and personality, and the dynamic of these things within the context of the larger events going on. In a lot of ways, this film is like a nentertaining version of a scholarly text. What's probably the most interesting thing of all though, is who directed this, and that is Ang Lee. Who would have ever thought a film about the American Civil War would be directed by a guy from Taiwan. It seems odd, but this actually allows him to see things from an outside perspective and thus be more objective in how things are treated. He does a really good job of handling the material and executing the action scenes. He's done period pieces before, so it's no surprise that that aspect is also top notch. Like all history based films, this film can't be 100% historically accurate, and this has its fair share of errors, but it's more accurate than not, and what good attention to period detail there is is much appreciated. I did like this film, but it's got issues aside from authenticity.The writing seems uneven, and some of the subplots need to either be cut out completely, or expanded upon more. The film is long, and the pacing is rather on the slow side, but, even though it does need to be tightened up and quickened some, it doesn't drag as bad as I was led to believe. The cast has some real notable names here. Tobey Maquire, Skeet Ulrich, Jewel, Simon Baker, and Jeffrey Wright all have big roles, while people such as Jonathan Rhys Meyers, James Caviezel, Tom Wilkinson, and Mark Ruffalo all show up at various times for varying lengths. Their performances are uneven, with some being more wooden and stilted than others, but Wright does a great job, Maguire is passable, Ulrich is decent, and Jewel is not completely terrible. It sucks that this film has the status thast it does. I'm biased, and I admit it, but even then I think this film is worth a look. It does have some problems, but until more people (if any) decide to give this part of the Civil War another cinematic treatment I suggest you come to it with an open mind and just be thankful that this film tried to deal with it to begin with.

• Clintus M

  
  Set during the guerilla war in Missouri and Kansas during the Civil War, this film is a magnificient coming of age story. Tobey McGuire, Jewel, Jeffrey Wright, and many others deliver riveting, graceful performances. It is much better and more authentic than many better known Civil… More
  Set during the guerilla war in Missouri and Kansas during the Civil War, this film is a magnificient coming of age story. Tobey McGuire, Jewel, Jeffrey Wright, and many others deliver riveting, graceful performances. It is much better and more authentic than many better known Civil War films. A remarkable look at the maturation of its characters and the rebirth of a nation, this film is a little known gem. Call it a character study in the midst of misery and violence, Ride With The Devil is an unflinching look at honor, friendship, and brutality.

• Luke B

  
  Lee can take on any period, any place and any genre. He is a master filmmaker who not only slips silently into his role but also offers films with a different edge to their counterparts. Ride With the Devil is one of the most under appreciated films ever made. It is a gem of a film.… More
  Lee can take on any period, any place and any genre. He is a master filmmaker who not only slips silently into his role but also offers films with a different edge to their counterparts. Ride With the Devil is one of the most under appreciated films ever made. It is a gem of a film. On its western/civil war merits it has fast paced well edited shoot outs with hard hitting violence worthy of Peckinpah. The characterisation is excellently handled especially from Jeffry Wright who doesn't play your average black man in a civil war movie as he "sides" with those who are against his freedom. It's a complex affectionate role, which you have to see to understand his loyalties and platonic love for another man. It was this role that supposedly killed this film at the box-office as many found it hard to accept. This is also supposedly why Wright doesn't appear on any DVD covers or posters despite being a main character. It's sad that such an excellent tale that tried something different was killed because of it. As well as those exciting shoot outs and horseback chases are more human moments such as Maguires readings of others letters. His "army" just wants to hear what is written though not addressed to any of them. Each character takes something a bit different from such a quiet moment. Beautifully crafted but as always with Lee very accessible.

• jay n

  
  Interesting idea with good cast but somewhat dull.

• Wildaly M

  
  I loved it and I'd like to watch it again.

• Dean M

  
  Powerful civil war film about two guerillas are keen to fight against the onslaught of the North.

• Walter M

  
  "Ride with the Devil" starts towards the beginning of the American Civil War in Missouri as Jake Roedel(Tobey Maguire) is almost late to a wedding held at the family home of Jack Bull Chiles(Skeet Ulrich). Despite coming from very different backgrounds, the two men are the… More
  "Ride with the Devil" starts towards the beginning of the American Civil War in Missouri as Jake Roedel(Tobey Maguire) is almost late to a wedding held at the family home of Jack Bull Chiles(Skeet Ulrich). Despite coming from very different backgrounds, the two men are the closest of friends and share very similar political beliefs against the Union. Despite this, Jake's father(John Judd) wants to send him to Kansas City where he will be safe with relatives. Before that can happen, however, Union sympathizers torch Jack's home, while he barely makes out in time. A year later, the two are fighting on the side of the Confederacy as irregulars. Directed by Ang Lee, "Ride with the Devil" is a compelling and suitably epic, if uneven, movie that succeeds in its attention to detail in dramatizing the guerrilla war in Missouri during the Civil War.(Sometimes graphicly so, especially when Jake has part of a finger shot off.) What is notable is the part that identity plays in such a conflict. Jake and Jack may no longer consider themselves Americans as such nor they go fight in the Confederate Army either, preferring instead to fight for their home state with help from sympathizers who get caught in the middle. Jake is as much a citizen of Missouri as his comrades in arms but they call him Dutchy after his European parentage. Further confusing matters is Holt(Jeffrey Wright), an illiterate and former slave, who fights with him. While Jake sees his participation as mainly defensive, others take advantage of the situation to kill wantonly.

• Cameron J

  
  Wow, in 1998, he was riding with Hunter S. Thompson, and now Tobey Maguire is riding with the Devil, himself, so on the ladder of crazy companions, Mr. Maguire seems to be, well, going down, because the stuff Hunter Thompson was on would make the Devil say, "Man, I should… More
  Wow, in 1998, he was riding with Hunter S. Thompson, and now Tobey Maguire is riding with the Devil, himself, so on the ladder of crazy companions, Mr. Maguire seems to be, well, going down, because the stuff Hunter Thompson was on would make the Devil say, "Man, I should probably try a hit of that." Of course, then he started climbing back up that crazy companions ladder, starting with Willem "More Than Enough Crazy in His Jaw Alone" Dafoe, and finally working his way all the way to the biggest nutcase of all: Himself in "Brothers". I haven't seen the film yet, but from the bits and pieces I've looked at, wow was ol' Toboy out of it, proving that he can be taken seriously. Of course, we didn't know that back in 1999, so maybe he's not the manliest cowboy in the world, but hey, this is the same director that went on to do "Brokeback Mountain", so what did you expect? For a second there, I though that this was actually the origin story of Jack Twist (Yeah, I memorized the names of the mains in "Brokeback"; it was still a great movie), and when it came time for Maguire to reprise the role, even Ang Lee mistook Jake Gyllenhaal for him. Hey, I can't blame the guy for making the mistake, not just because Maguire and Gyllenhaal had to have been some kind of cloning experiement, but because these boys know how to deliver some good performances in westerns. Still, don't go thinking that this is even nearly as an excellent of a western as... "Brokeback Mountain" (Man, even I had to take a break to process that), which isn't to say that it's bad, but it is to say that it's not without the Devil on its back, riding it through quite a road-full of flaws. As much as I associate a film's dryness with dullness, a film doesn't have to be boring to be, atmospherically, as dry as a bone, and if you don't believe me, then you clearly haven't watched too many Ang Lee films. His film's are rarely dull, but they are quiet and dry, with this film being as dry as they come. The story will really pick up here and there, but there's very limited resonance and comfortably organic story, rendering much exposition in the film to fall so incredibly flat, that you actually forget early pieces of the film "while you're still watching the film"! Well, to be fair, the exposition is pretty limp on paper to begin with, with little meditation on our characters' situation and motivations. There's limited resonance and exposition that sews this film together and keeps its flow consistent, and with this being a story of many layers that dived into one after another, with transition tainted by the flaws in exposition, the film is rendered jarringly inconsistent, as it boasts too much material that is never meditated upon enough for it to all fit. That is the mark of a forgettable film, and typically, this is where I would come in say "But this film, on the other hand", but I can't, because this film does not deliver enough for it to stand out among westerns. However, neither does it stand amongst the mediocres of the western genre, because although the full product lack enough memorable oomph, what this film does deliver on is worth remembering as its savior. Even with his missteps in this film and that disaster of a "Hulk" film, I would still consider Ang Lee an excellent director, and while he doesn't deliver even mildly as sharply as he should with this film, as I said earlier, there are high points in this film, and boy do they hit, with compelling resonance that wakes you up when the film hits some of its deepest, during which, it needs those emotional bursts the most. Something more prominent, though still underused, and yet still just as satisfying are the action sequences, because, you have to remember, Ang Lee... is Asian (I know, with a name like that, I thought he was Portuguese too), so of course the boy knows crazy action. Well, sure enough, while this film doesn't have any kung-fu, it's frenetic, intense and - woah boy - violent, and Lee pumps all of that type of intrigue into the atmosphere in the midst of the slick staging and snappy editing to produce some rare, but always awesome action sequences. Still, all of the emotion and action is so far and few between, that the film runs the risk of easily being, for the most part, lifeless and mediocre, nonetheless. However, what keeps this film riding with that devil are, of course - seeing as I have to mention them in every review -, the performers. The acting is competent, and outside of the aforementioned intense moments, where the acting really comes to life, it never really rises above that, but there's still charm amongst every member of our cast, and that charisma, as well as the chemistry, really gives this film the human touch that the lack of exposition all but wipes out, with Tobey Maguire particularly impressing as this young, relatively innocent man who taps more and more into his inner darkness and the darkness of his environment closes in. I wish I could say that this human touch was enough to really pick the film up, yet as things stand, the charisma, action and some other aspects are impressive and memorable enough to render the film consistently watchable. At the end of this ride, some major potential goes squandered by a bone-dry atmosphere that dilutes already lacking exposition and messy storytelling - plagued by jarring major storyline shifts -, rendering the film, as a whole, not all that memorable, but with golden moments of resonance and action breaking up consistently sharp charisma and chemistry between the leads, "Ride With the Devil" stands as a generally enjoyable western, for what it's worth. 2.5/5 - Fair

• Alec B

  
  I give the film props for objectively exploring events in the Civil War that are rarely discussed, however the majority of the film focuses on boring characters that we just don't care about.

• Marcus W

  
  It all looks very pretty, but there's no plot and too much sitting around nattering. Shame, I usually like Ang Lee.

• Jonny C

  
  I'm a big Any Lee fan, so I was curious to see his venture into the Western genre. Ride With The Devil is a great movie, with authentic dialogue, strong performances, and impressive camera work.

• Moe E

  
  Great period costuming and dialog! But, the plot left much to be desired. Tobey, Skeet and even Jewel did the best they could, given what they had to work with.

Read all 15 featured audience ratings