Critics’ reviews

One-Eyed Jacks (1961)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 80: 7 positive, 1 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of One-Eyed Jacks

80
Positive
7
Mixed
1
Negative
0

Most critics rate One-Eyed Jacks highly, and the praise clusters around Brando, both in front of the camera and behind it. His performance is singled out for its control of image and gesture, and his direction is called fascinating, powerful and, for a debut, remarkably assured. The Monterey coastline photography draws repeated notice, as does the film’s frankness about sadism and perversity for a Hollywood western of its period. Several critics place it as a revisionist western that looks forward to Peckinpah, and a recent restoration is credited with reviving its reputation.

The reservations are few and mild. Variety finds some of the secondary villains one-dimensional, and Time Out is more guarded, calling the direction fascinating without going much further. The spread is narrow and tilted upward: The Skinny gives full marks, and the single mixed notice sits closer to good than to poor. The New York Times is warm too, its only regret being that Brando never directed another film.

Slant Magazine
24 November 2016 · ★★★★½ · Chuck Bowen
90

Bowen celebrates the film as an influential, introspective western that merits renewed respect. He singles out Brando’s control of image and gesture, alongside Criterion’s ravishing restoration.

Read the full review →
The Guardian
22 June 2017 · Guardian staff reporter
85*

The critic considers the film possibly the best Western since Shane and praises its revival of period and community. They single out its family and fiesta scenes as capturing the communal humanity of the genre.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · William Thomas
80*

The critic calls the revenge western a remarkably powerful and winning directorial debut. They single out Brando’s performance, strong supporting turns, and especially the breathtaking Monterey coastline photography.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Tony Sloman
80

Sloman calls the film a stunning, deeply satisfying psychological western. He praises its distinctive treatment of sadism and perversity for a Hollywood film of its period.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1960 · Variety Staff
75*

The review finds the film strong in its central characterizations, though some secondary figures are one-dimensional villains. It praises Brando’s substantial performance, Malden’s vivid portrayal, and the production’s visual artistry.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
21 October 2001 · Elvis Mitchell
70*

The critic views the film positively and regrets that Brando made no other film as director. The article’s headline singles out its status as Brando’s sole directorial effort.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· TM
65*

The review describes Brando’s direction as fascinating, but the available text does not reveal its overall verdict. It singles out the revenge story, in which an outlaw returns to haunt the partner who betrayed him.

Read the full review →
The Skinny
13 July 2017 · ★★★★★ · Ian Schultz
100

The review presents the film as a harsh, influential revisionist western that bridges older westerns and later work by Peckinpah. It singles out the film’s violence and Catholic symbolism, and notes that a new 4K restoration has helped revive its reputation.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate