Randolph Scott plays a man who worked, briefly, for Quantrell and his evil raiders during the Civil War. However, Quantrell's actions (he was more a terrorist and thief than a real soldier) soon disenchanted him and he left to serve in the regular Southern army. Soon the war ends and Scott is hated for his war record and people don't want to give him a chance. After nearly being killed by a mob on a riverboat, he decides to head west and lands in the middle of a terrible town run by cut-throats. Eventually, Scott gets rid of some of the baddies and makes it a nicer place to live.
I am a huge fan of the westerns of Randolph Scott and have seen several dozen of them. In general, his later ones made from about 1956-1962 are the best and this film comes from his more inconsistent period. While this is not among the very worst of this period, it is not a particularly good film for a variety of reasons.
The biggest problem is that Scott's character never made much sense and it seemed as if the writers really had no idea where the story was going. It just seemed that his character wasn't sure if he was good or evil or anything in the middle. You just had no idea what his plan, if any, was and by the time the film was over, you just felt a bit disappointed in the whole thing.
In addition, there were some other serious problems. While this is a relatively common problem in Scott films, the stunt doubles were just awful. In particular, the guy who doubled for Ernest Borgnine looked nothing like him and it was VERY obvious that is wasn't him in the fight scenes---very, very obvious--almost comically obvious! The other problem is that originally this was a 3-D movie and the 3-D direction was about as subtle as a 2x4 upside your head. Way too many times the characters tossed things towards the camera or pretended to be punching the camera. A little of this might have worked great, but as much as they did made it look like a "cheese-fest"!! The Three Stooges' 3-D short was more subtle than this!! My advice is unless you are the most rabid and die-hard fan, skip this one or save it for after you've seen his later work. Otherwise, you'll get the impression that his films are pretty ordinary--which is not really the case.
I am a huge fan of the westerns of Randolph Scott and have seen several dozen of them. In general, his later ones made from about 1956-1962 are the best and this film comes from his more inconsistent period. While this is not among the very worst of this period, it is not a particularly good film for a variety of reasons.
The biggest problem is that Scott's character never made much sense and it seemed as if the writers really had no idea where the story was going. It just seemed that his character wasn't sure if he was good or evil or anything in the middle. You just had no idea what his plan, if any, was and by the time the film was over, you just felt a bit disappointed in the whole thing.
In addition, there were some other serious problems. While this is a relatively common problem in Scott films, the stunt doubles were just awful. In particular, the guy who doubled for Ernest Borgnine looked nothing like him and it was VERY obvious that is wasn't him in the fight scenes---very, very obvious--almost comically obvious! The other problem is that originally this was a 3-D movie and the 3-D direction was about as subtle as a 2x4 upside your head. Way too many times the characters tossed things towards the camera or pretended to be punching the camera. A little of this might have worked great, but as much as they did made it look like a "cheese-fest"!! The Three Stooges' 3-D short was more subtle than this!! My advice is unless you are the most rabid and die-hard fan, skip this one or save it for after you've seen his later work. Otherwise, you'll get the impression that his films are pretty ordinary--which is not really the case.