Beautiful music signed Bruce Langhorne. Otherwise, the film does not say much. Because it's not happen much. And what is happening, is not at all justified. Why is shot Dan Griffen (Robert Pratt), the young companion of Harry Collings (Peter Fonda) and Arch Harris (Warren Oates)? Nobody knows. Then, why is taken prisoner Arch Harris? I wonder if the writer Alan Sharp knew. I doubt it. Warren Oates is a very good actor. But here he does not have much to do. Peter Fonda is just the son of his father(Henry Fonda, for those who don't know) and the brother of his sister(Jane Fonda). I think he wanted to look like Clint Eastwood in those movies with dollars, but without being a Western. All the fault of the same Sergio Leone. But, how many people know or realize that?

It is hard to believe that this film has toiled in relative obscurity for so long. This is a wonderful western with a great cast, shots and a mesmerizing score. The movie is deliberate, and allows the viewer to contemplate all that occurs. Peter Fonda has done away with overblown action scenes to craft a real character study with consequences we can all identify with. If you are a fan of Unforgiven do not miss this!

Movie is boring... Just watch sergio's & tersntino's westerns & spare this one

To call this picture a Western is to diminish it, although it is in fact a Western; to call it a picture about male bonding is to do likewise, although it is most assuredly about that. It is so much more. Like the greatest works of art in any narrative medium, it concerns human relationships, including a person's relationship with the self. Because the story is presented with unrelieved seriousness it will not come close to appealing to everyone - but neither will the classic novels, plays, poems, etc. As an example of cinematic art, this obscure film belongs among the greats. All aspects of filmmaking are handled with a firm but sensitive touch. Its obscurity is difficult to explain, and impossible to justify.

I just saw this film at the Maine International Film Festival and it was a real surprise. Sure it's not perfect but it is the most realistic, sensitive portrayal of the west I have seen on the big screen. Jane Fonda called it the first "feminist western" but I disagree. It does have the strongest female role you may see in a western and Verna Bloom is fantastic! Peter Fonda is excellent in his role, also, and does brilliant direction. The cinematography is a big heavy handed on the special ethereal effects for such a realistic film, but it does not distract too much from the underlying story and excellent acting. A must see!

This unheralded subtle film should be a "must see" for students of western US history and film buffs alike. The plot is a believable story involving characters that are NOT larger than life. These are people we could expect to know - only 125 years ago. As others have observed, Verna Bloom is THE western/frontier single mother in this film. She looks the part and shows us the day-to-day hard work of her life. Warren Oates has always been the classic prototypical "cowboy" and never elsewhere is he more perfectly cast. Finally comes Peter Fonda. Who could have thought that he could go from the drug-running renegade of Easy Rider to the thoughtful character struggling with deep conflicts of loyalty and justice? It is a tour-de-force that creeps up on you in its quiet way. This film works on many levels. The story, the characters, the cinematography, the music, the dialog are all top flight - especially since the dialog is sparse and punctuates moments of thoughtful non-verbal imagery. If you want to see it your best chance is on Bravo or some public broadcasting service station. Please, PLEASE - somebody put this one on video or DVD. In genre this film deserves a solid nine out of ten. In general at least a 7.5 out of ten - try to see it!

I enjoyed The Hired Hand because of its simplicity. I like a slow moving western in which the characters can be developed. The Hired Hand had three interesting characters who used dialog sparingly(Fonda, Oates, Bloom). The movie had a sense of believability to it. It is a well done movie and I applaud its creators. I had not heard of this film until stumbling across it yesterday. I plan on recommending it to friends. The realism contained in the acting and scenery make it stand out. Although it contains some violence, it was secondary to the build-up of tension that led to it. I enjoyed Fonda's quiet nature and Oates' sincere friendship he had for Fonda. Movies this good that you have never heard of before are hard to find.

If you're into film that has to have a cut every 3 seconds to stay interesting, skip this one. But if you're into film as an art form, this is a must see. The photography is masterful by Vilmos Zsigmond. From the deeply rich silhouettes made with the natural light of a sunset to the shading and textures of lamp and fire light, this film is a profound lesson in painting with light. The montage scenes blend the beautiful images into a pensive and graceful passage of time. The editing creates a deliberate pace that recreates a time when a horse trot was the natural speed. But when the gun battles begin the pace quickens to a gallop. The delicate music is perfect blend of instruments for the visuals and provides the emotional depth that music should. Under Peter Fonda's creative direction the film's elements deliver a story of a man who returns home to make things right because he had the courage to change. And just when the man and his wife restore their love and trust in each other, he had the courage go away again to save his longtime friend.

Peter Fonda's career in westerns was about tearing down everything that his father, Henry Fonda, ever stood for. Where Henry Fonda was a top gun in most westerns, Peter Fonda is more like a sad and thoughtful loser. Where Henry Fonda always had women lusting after him in the westerns, Peter Fonda's movie wife, Verna Bloom, does not want much to do with him. While traditional western women are faithful to their men, Bloom is open about screwing all of the men she hires to help at the ranch, because her husband was away, and she needed sex. This movie throws a lot of darts at the westerns that Henry Fonda made. In many ways, it is an anti-western, and anti-Henry Fonda. As a movie, while the photography is beautiful, the actual story is very lame and boring. Peter Fonda loves to have close-ups of his face. It is like he is in love with himself. There is not much story here. One day Peter Fonda decides to go home to see what happened to his wife after seven years of abandonment. Warren Oates, his best friend, tags along. That is the whole movie. The end of the movie was badly choreographed and features a sub-par shootout that once again contrasts the difference between the great Henry Fonda, and his stoner son, Peter Fonda. This is a space cadet Western for flower children.

I rented this, sight-unseen, because of the scads of uniformly adoring reviews lavished on this movie here at IMDB (where you can always count on at least some users to trash even good movies, seemingly for the sheer joy of doing it). "How," I reasoned, "can I go wrong?" Now I know. I'll say that I can see why the folks liked it, and if I could have given it 1.5 stars for SOME of the acting, scenes, and sceneries, I would. BUT.... The opening five minutes alone give fair warning for what the rest of the movie will be like. Odd, quirky, go-nowhere music, annoying photography, and a loooong progression of a scene, all building to an ultimate "Huh??!" payoff. And that's pretty much the whole movie. It is a succession of involved scenes, odd music, irritating photography, all ultimately with a "HUH??!" payoff. My son Matthew and I would say that it is a semi-decent 30-minute movie crammed into 90 minutes. It will make your brain itch.