Is The Missouri Breaks Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, The Missouri Breaks is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 126 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:The Missouri Breaks is a confirmed HIT based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.5/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Western, Drama genre.
Answer: Yes, The Missouri Breaks is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 126 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1976, The Missouri Breaks emerges as a significant entry in the Western, Drama domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of When vigilante land baron David Braxton hangs one of the best friends of cattle rustler Tom Logan, Logan's gang decides to get even by purchasing a small farm next to Braxton's ranch. Unlike standard genre fare, The Missouri Breaks attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Western is often anchored by its ensemble, and The Missouri Breaks features a noteworthy lineup led by Marlon Brando . Supported by the likes of Jack Nicholson and Randy Quaid , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of The Missouri Breaks (1976) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.5/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: The Missouri Breaks is a Western, Drama film that presents a compelling narrative that engages viewers from start to finish. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: The Missouri Breaks concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to western resolution.
The emotional climax centers on character transformation, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of The Missouri Breaks reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Production Budget | $10.0M |
| Worldwide Gross | $14.0M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |
The estimated production budget for The Missouri Breaks is $10.0M. This figure covers principal photography, talent acquisitions, and visual effects. When accounting for global marketing and distribution, the break-even point is typically 2x the base production cost.










MGM Plus Amazon Channel
Amazon VideoAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.5/10, and global collection metrics, The Missouri Breaks stands as a successful venture for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1976 cinematic year.
The Missouri Breaks has received mixed reviews with a 6.5/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
The Missouri Breaks is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Western, Drama movies, but read reviews first.
The Missouri Breaks is currently available for streaming on MGM Plus Amazon Channel. You can also check for it on platforms like MGM Plus Amazon Channel depending on your region.
_**Brando plays a fearless sharp-shooting NUT**_ A rich, big-time rancher (John McLiam) in late 1800's Montana hires an eccentric sharp-shooting assassin (Marlon Brando) to take care of a gang of rustlers, led by Jack Nicholson, who are severely diminishing his profits. Arthur Penn's "The Missouri Breaks," starring Brando and Nicholson, was a flop when it was released in 1976. Leonard Maltin rates it a "BOMB" in his movie guide. The question is: Is it the reputed flop, unworthy of your time, or not? Let's start by exploring if there's any character for which to root. John McLiam is very unlikable as the rich rancher, Braxton. His "family" is completely dysfunctional: His wife ran out on him years before and the film hints at the reason why; his daughter, played by Kathleen Lloyd, is so mentally warped and starved-for-love that she jumps in bed with the head outlaw that's stealing from her father the first chance she gets. Jack Nicholson as Tom Logan is certainly likable in a down-to-earth type of way, but the fact is that he and his gang are thieving scum. It makes no difference that Braxton is unlikable. He certainly doesn't deserve to be ripped off as he toiled hard to build his ranch over many years. This leaves us with Brando's character, Lee Clayton, the Irish sharp-shooting assassin, who's a serious nutjob. This is an intriguing character, to say the least. He's utterly fearless, eccentric and intimidating. Despite Clayton's weirdness, I was definitely rooting for him in the story. I wanted him to annihilate the criminal scumbags. Hey, they CHOSE to make their living outside the law and so they must reap the wages of their actions. Living on the Western frontier was hard enough without having to contend with outlaws who want something for nothing. One of the rustlers gets a break in the story; let's just assume he learned a lesson from his bad experiences and goes on to live a more honest, productive life. One great scene is when Clayton visits Logan's farm, which is actually a relay station. He makes it known that he KNOWS Logan is one of the rustlers and not-so-subtly warns him in a decidedly intimidating way. There's an odd bubble bath scene where Brando's character, Clayton, is threatened with a gun. His initial reaction is typically fearless and bizarre, yet then strangely turns his head and body as if to submit to it. This made no sense to me at first. It later dawned on me, however, that, despite his merry/crazy antics, great skills and evident genius, Clayton is a lonely, miserable outcast, a societal misfit. I think he was WELCOMING the man to put him out of his misery. "The Missouri Breaks" features numerous such intriguing contradictions and points to ponder. For instance, there's a scene showing an innocent colt stuck & dying in a world of man-made horror, yet it's ultimately rescued because of the compassion of a man, a criminal no less. One perplexing question is: Why does Clayton insist upon finishing his job (assassinating each member of the outlaw gang) even after Braxton states that he's not going to pay him anything? Clayton points out that he doesn't care about money. What then are his motivations? The simple thrill of killing? Or does he believe he's a some sort of righteous agent carrying out universal justice? The picture has a modern vibe and has therefore aged well, indicating that it was a good 15 years ahead of its time (by contrast, many Westerns, like "The Searchers" and "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance," are very dated). But I should emphasize it's not an action film and doesn't have that quick-editing style of many modern pictures. "The Missouri Breaks" is similar in style and pace to Clint Eastwood's hailed "Unforgiven" (1992). The locations are fabulous, by the way; the film was shot in the Billings/Red Lodge region of awe-inspiring Montana. Marlon Brando starred in three other Westerns in his notable career: The 1952 Mexican Revolution Western "Viva Zapata!," the 1961 masterpiece "One-Eyed Jacks," which was the prototype to Sergio Leone's spaghetti Westerns (albeit far more compelling storywise) and the less impressive "The Appaloosa" from 1966. CLOSING WORD: "The Missouri Breaks" is a well-made Western with top-of-the-line directing, cinematography, actors, locations, costuming, sets, realism and, perhaps most of all, it leaves the viewer pondering the experience afterward. The inclusion of acting giants Brando and Nicholson propel the picture to greatness. The film has great re-watchable merit; every time I see it I'm captivated and get more out of it. This is a sign of a great (or, at least, deep) film. The polarized reviews also show that it's a love it or hate it piece. As for the ending, it ends the only way I guess it could with one man redeemed and another finally released from his prison or getting his comeuppance, whichever you prefer. The film runs 2 hours, 6 minutes. GRADE: A-
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.