If you are expecting a shoot 'em up western, look elsewhere. If you're looking for a film that examines the aftermath of the Civil War in somewhat brutal terms and offers a "that was then, this is now," perspective to the average, impoverished white Confederate soldier coming home from the war, this is your film.

Editing could have been tighter while keeping the pensive tone. There's some elements of metaphor that should have gone just a little deeper with another draft on the script (who perishes, who survives & manner of disposal). It seems that most apt films about the South are made by foreign directors, starting with Renoir's The Southerner. The Aussie director gets a lot of things right, and for that, I will indulge some of the dialogue and pacing issues.

Ethan Embry disappeared into his role, and the film is worth watching for that.

Could have done without the graphic bedroom scene early on (not that I'm opposed, just that it wasn't necessary to establish the character as evil), but I'm guessing it was supposed to be a metaphor for how the wealthy barons of the South raped it even after it was no longer the Grand South?

If that's the case, then the character is both baron and carpetbagger in one, which is a little odd, but we'll roll with it.

This film keeps you entertained enough to remain waiting, and waiting and waiting. Then, it's over. Not a great product but not too terribly bad either. William Forsythe is the hard-to-like character highlight and the most renowned actor on this film. Not much action but when it does finally come, it may at least surprise you.

This is the worst western I've seen since 1974. That was the summer I filmed my best friend, Jimmy R, with my new Kodak Super 8, wearing a Cardboard Stetson, shooting rubber tipped plastic arrows off the back porch of the ranch he shared with two siblings and his mother and father....When I say ranch, I mean a single level modern home. This was Chicago after all. How is it possible that a screen writer could lay out dialog this unrealistic? This was so off period (If I may coin a phrase) that it seemed to be a sketch for a TV variety show. Western set in the nineteenth century? Please say you're kidding me. These characters speak as if they're millennial's chatting at a Starbucks. I have written several short stories, published a couple. I'm a hack with degree in Creative Writing who's best quality is recognizing great writing, rather than writing great. I suppose that it is for that very reason that I get so irritated when I read a novel, or see a film, that money, a lot of money, has been spent on its production. Nobody saw this coming? Somewhere there is actually an executive producer who read this screen play, stuck a finger in the air, and called out, BRILLIANT? The only redeeming aspect of this two hour cattle pie is a few of the actors who tried very hard to pretend they were in the atmosphere and situation that the set and script called for. Valiant efforts to be sure, but not near enough to prevent me from wanting my money back. And it's sad. I love a good western. Who doesn't? There are several factors that go into writing a screenplay, rules that need to be followed to keep the story flowing smoothly toward its climax. And the rules are followed here. The screenplay and script seem to have been put together well. Technically, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Echoes Of War. It's just a bad bad boring movie that moves along slower than a 90 year old break dancer. Echoes Of War is to be missed. Life is way to short to spend any of it on this film. Trust me on this.