...at the hacienda. Joe would have had a lot of explaining to do at the end, after all he was number one suspect in the beginning. Would the police not wonder why he was found with the gang all dead?
At the hacienda there was a constant switching back and forth of who played top dog with about four fights the winner being the one with the gun, in the end it completely lost me.
It was all well crafted and made sense up to that point.
I don't think so. Tim, the former cop, said that his tip was Joe and vouched for him and that would be enough. The other three are dead and with Tim dead, the case gets closed.
shareExactly. Thank you! I couldn't have said it better myself.
shareI didn't realise at first but the guy, Scott Andrews, who'd come down at Foster's behest worked for the bank's insurance company, not the police (he was the one in Rolfe's interrogation offering him a reward to confess), so he was primarily interested in recovering the money, not trying to implicate Joe.
share
Agree with the OP. The film starts out marvelously, then starts to
meander when Payne arrives in Mexico. The Coleen Gray character is
poorly conceived and it just feels like 20 minutes of Cleef has the gun,
now Payne has the gun. The film should've been about 20 minutes shorter
and the ending is pat and ridiculous, with one of the silliest death
scenes (Preston Foster) I've ever seen. The writers lost the ball.
I, too, agree. Great start and pacing until we get to Borados and then the wheels start to come off. I didn’t buy that Helen would fall so hard and fast for Joe, especially given his shady dealings, her dad’s warning, and Joe’s harsh rebuff. I also found it ridiculous how many times an unarmed Joe managed to safely disarm Kane and/or Romano.
shareIt was easy to follow. You've just got to pay attention.
share