Is this a flawless film? Not at all. However, it is much better than most people give it credit for. It is very obvious that Alan Ladd was in bad shape (Much sicker then he was in "Shane" (Let alone "The Glass Key")). But Ladd in a Western is always worth watching. In fact, he was one of our greatest Western Stars (And not just for "Shane"). It is unusual to see him as a villain ("This Gun For Hire" was the only other one that comes to mind), and his Mitch Garrett is a real evil character. Spoilers Ahead: People overlook the fact, he is not a sympathetic character (Wanting revenge for his wife's death), he is someone who believes he is superior to others, which is why he selected four people who in his opinion, 'Had no right to live' to help him with his plan to kill the people responsible for his wife's death, and rob the town. If he would have done it on his own it would not be as bad, as using people like Dan Keats (Don Murray), who was a drunken former Confederate Soldier (Not a criminal), and Julie Reynolds (Dolores Michaels), who was a prostitute, not an evil character. Neither of them deserved to die for their various mistakes. A big mistake that people have made in reviewing the film is saying there are no heroes...There is one that is Keats. Keats gives up drinking, and thus is able to save himself and probably Julie (Mitch said he was not going to kill Julie, but I doubt it), from their fate, and spoilers ahead: After Julie kills Mitch (Saving Dan), It is Dan's idea to return the stolen money, and bring her back to his farm in Tennessee, after facing justice for their part in Mitch's plan. I give it 9/10 stars.
Review of One Foot in Hell
