Unlike some of the other reviewers, I liked this Western and thought it quite good. I watched it tonight, in a blu-ray print from Kino Lorber, in which that fine company did an excellent job of restoring the Cinecolor process in which the film was made back in 1950. Cinecolor has its own distinctive look. It is not nearly as lush as Technicolor, but in some ways that is a plus, because with Technicolor, the colors are often so vibrant that its's something of a distraction. Cinecolor is more subtle. The Kino Lorber restored version dates from 2016, so some reviewers may have seen the earlier, unrestored version.
As to the story: I found it well paced, with a good balance between action and character development. Randolph Scott's kindliness and humanity show here, as he stays patient with his bitter partner, Bill Williams. As is always the case, the biggest asset any Randolph Scott movie has, is that he is the star! Scott is a tremendously appealing person, and, in my opinion, he makes any movie he is starring in worth one's time.
It is true, that this movie does not have a larger-than-life, dynamic villain type; Victor Jory as the head villain is shown to be rather cowardly and sneaky, and I have a feeling that Jory had a lot of fun playing him that way.
The scenery is often breathtaking, and a real pleasure to see (the movie was filmed in Colorado). The mountain vistas are truly impressive, with a sense of the big outdoors. That is an aspect one is always glad to see in a Western. I would say, the visuals alone lift this movie well above the average. It is much better than just "a routine Western." Routine Westerns do not have the striking cinematography of the outdoors that we see here.
The supporting cast are all good. Karin Booth is beautiful. She paid her dues with a lot of very small parts in earlier years, and I enjoyed seeing her in a starring role here.
The screenwriter, Frank Gruber, was the author of many short stories and novels about the Old West, and he knew his stuff.
When other reviewers talk about a Western being "routine," I'm not sure what they mean. What is a "non-routine" Western of this period, the 1950's? The Searchers? Rio Bravo? A movie can be a very good Western without having John Wayne starring, or John Ford directing. Randolph Scott is as good a Western hero as John Wayne, any day.
As to the story: I found it well paced, with a good balance between action and character development. Randolph Scott's kindliness and humanity show here, as he stays patient with his bitter partner, Bill Williams. As is always the case, the biggest asset any Randolph Scott movie has, is that he is the star! Scott is a tremendously appealing person, and, in my opinion, he makes any movie he is starring in worth one's time.
It is true, that this movie does not have a larger-than-life, dynamic villain type; Victor Jory as the head villain is shown to be rather cowardly and sneaky, and I have a feeling that Jory had a lot of fun playing him that way.
The scenery is often breathtaking, and a real pleasure to see (the movie was filmed in Colorado). The mountain vistas are truly impressive, with a sense of the big outdoors. That is an aspect one is always glad to see in a Western. I would say, the visuals alone lift this movie well above the average. It is much better than just "a routine Western." Routine Westerns do not have the striking cinematography of the outdoors that we see here.
The supporting cast are all good. Karin Booth is beautiful. She paid her dues with a lot of very small parts in earlier years, and I enjoyed seeing her in a starring role here.
The screenwriter, Frank Gruber, was the author of many short stories and novels about the Old West, and he knew his stuff.
When other reviewers talk about a Western being "routine," I'm not sure what they mean. What is a "non-routine" Western of this period, the 1950's? The Searchers? Rio Bravo? A movie can be a very good Western without having John Wayne starring, or John Ford directing. Randolph Scott is as good a Western hero as John Wayne, any day.