$20.


Wow is that all each gunmen were getting paid? 4-6 weeks of risking death for a menial payoff. Gufawwwww!!!!

reply

That was sort of the point: gunman were not in demand anymore and not worth much. For comparison, from https://outrunchange.com/2012/06/14/typical-wages-in-1860-through-1890/ the average pay for a laborer was $.15/hour. So $20 then would be like $1000 now, give or take. Not much for six weeks even with out the risk.

reply

A wage of $0.15/hour is $6/week. So they're accepting 3 weeks of pay for 6 weeks of work?

reply

Gufawwwww!!!!
That's kind of what they were all saying ... before they took the job.🐭

reply

They weren't in it for the money. If you have a chance to see the trailer, it features a god-awful song that, we can be thankful, didn't make it into the movie. The lyrics state that they did it to redeem themselves for the sins of their past lives. That's less explicit in the film's dialogue, but it's there.

reply

I did not know there was a song with this movie.

reply

$20 was worth rather more back then, equivalent to several thousand now. It wasn't wealth, but enough to live on for weeks or months.

So it meant these guys were risking their lives for minimum wage, rather than pocket change.

reply

"$20 was worth rather more back then, equivalent to several thousand now."

More like $600.

reply

Not really, a decent job paid 30 bucks a month. 20 bucks would be fair for one week of hazard pay, not 4 to 6 weeks.

The gunmen wanted the excitement, and maybe to apply their skills for a good cause.

reply

It wasn't about the money. However that was considered significant back then. Believe it or not I've never seen this one....until now. Update: okay, now I've seen it--no longer a Mag. 7 virgin! Anyway it was good (sorry not great) because of first the music, 2nd the actors. But face it, the script was weak. The '60s westerns spaghetti and otherwise later in the decade were superior.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a159xGKsDvg&t=4s

reply