A very poor western.


Bottom line is that this was soo silly and blatantly bad that I can't believe I sat through the whole 78 min. It was in fact many times laughable, starting from the point Scott ties the 3 up at the hideout right up until the end. Boetticher really lost it in this one. Scott ahs you thinking that he has something great up his sleeve the whole time, but each and everytime he's up against the wall, he fails horribly each time with the exception of the end. 3 out of 10 and thats comming from a big Scott/Boetticher fan.

reply

come on, buchanan rides alone is the best boetciher scott western - the other boether westerns are great, especially if you're in a sombre mood, but they can be talky and the dialogue is the same such as the villian's sidekick always mumble 'she is nice woman.' and i prefer a villian to be villian, not half nice, the other side rotten. i prefer pre-scott-boethicer westerns -they're fun and action packed and to the point - none of this - she's a nice woman repitition that bogs the story down. and i found seven men fron now a bit boring, albiet good story.

reply

I found it thoroughly enjoyable from beginning to end.

reply

yeah, i liked the whole thing.

reply

Yea, some parts were silly. Leaving the bad guys loosely tied up with their horses and guns right there, and the worst part of it, Randolph Scott giving up every time, and letting the bad guys shoot him in the back without trying to get away.

reply

I loved it but I really just started watching westerns...I find them incredibly interesting now. This was the first I've seen. I guess it doesent give me much credibility considering I saw it on demand. I'm now watching Death of a Gunfighter.

reply

It's good, goofy fun! The judge is so campy he could have starred in a soap opera! I love this ubashamedly silly western. Randolph Scott OWNS!

reply

Just a good 78 min of fun and entertainment.

reply

Wrong!!! This 1958 film is a damn good stand-alone B-Western. In fact as westerns go, other than the classic and absolutely excellent "Ride the High Country" - 1962 which was Scott's last, this film was one of his best.

Remember, this film was not meant as an Old West history documentary, it was meant for pure enjoyment. So try it again some day and just - enjoy!

reply

I agree with the OP. The fact that some apparently think it has comedic elements is proof of how poor it is; it wasn't supposed to be funny. Instead we have Scott treating death's door like he's going in for a shave rather than a hanging or being shot in the back in the desert; as wooden as a tree. Also the whole Agry family reacts the same to the young Agry being shot. Everyone sleepwalks through this thing. And Boetticher's visual style makes it look like an episode of Gunsmoke or The Rifleman, not exactly cinematic.

Boetticher is highly overrated. There's nothing wrong with the screenplay, it's just handled very, very badly.

reply

My point exactly! It was , indeed, made just for fun. And there's only one point you and I disagree on- I think the comdey aspect was intended. Keep in mind, this was not an western effort of the caliber of John Wayne's "The Searchers" or Gary Cooper's "High Noon."

Randolph Scott was always good at delivering 'off the cuff' comedic lines and facial expressions, as he did in one of my favorite B westerns, "Return of the Badmen" - 1948. See IMDB User Comment below:

User Comments (Comment on this title) "Return of the Badmen"
11 out of 12 people found the following comment useful:-
Decent B Western, 2 January 2003


Author: mschrock from United States

This movie surprised me. I don't care for Randolph Scott, and reading the description of the movie to include Billie the Kid, Youngers, Sundance Kid, and the Daltons, etc. This seemed like a joke. Clearly a bad movie to waste time on, but I couldn't resist watching it start to see all these headliner bad guys in one gang. I expected to rate the movie no higher than 3.....if I even made it past the first 30 minutes.

Turns out, the movie caught me off guard. In the context of a B Western, it actually works. Seeing Gabby in a 'non-side-kick' role wasn't the disappointment I expected. Seeing them "throw" bullets out of the guns (the classic snap the gun down and fire in one motion), and taking about 2 seconds from pistol blast till the bullet strikes the rock in front of the bad guy, was ok, cause that's classic B Western stuff, and after all this was B Western in the 1940's.

If you're looking for a good old B Western that doesn't have the Duke in it, try this out. I gave it a 7 in spite of myself.


reply

Boetticher overrated? Never. Watching this film reinforces how little interest Boetticher had in crafting action narratives, and quick dramatic turns. This is by far the most plot-centered film in the whole ranown cannon, but it sorts of explains why the other efforts tend to have extremely similar structures. This is really the only Boetticher film that I can think of that comes pretty darn close to being a conventional “exciting” action movie, which certainly isn’t a problem for me. As usual, the visuals and Scott’s acting are enough to overcome any tiny problems. It’s not as amazing as Boetticher’s best work, but it is a really accomplished piece of arty “genre” cinema.

reply

This movie is SUPPOSED to be funny. And it is funny. Budd Boetticher and Burt Kennedy (who rewrote the script uncredited) are on the record as saying they consider this picture to be a comedy. Much of the dialogue was ad-libbed. It's intentionally hilarious and is best watched after seeing the others in the series because it sort of mocks them all. I love BUCHANAN. It's very entertaining, easygoing and enjoyable to watch and listen to.

reply

This is my first Randolph Scott movie. I've always been a fan of westerns but was more drawn to the italian and more sparse westerns of the 60s and later since that was my early childhood era.

I just saw this today. Never knew much about Randolph Scott but he seemed to be a pretty cool actor as were most of the cowboys from the early westerns. However, I have to agree with the OP. This movie was a mess. The last half hour is just a bunch of double-crosses that goes back and forth and gets tiring. If it was supposed to be funny, it wasn't. It just seemed pretty silly. Maybe I have to see the other Buchanan movies to appreciate it as a comedy.

Is it me or is the Amos character the spitting image of british actor Timothy Spall? They could have been fraternal if not identical twins if they were the same age.

reply

I agree with the OP. This is far and away the worse of the Scott/Boetticher Westerns. I like the others fine--with Ride Lonesome the best of the lot. That's a terrific film. Not this. The only redeemng aspect of this is L.Q. Jones. The character of the fat brother, Amos, is totally absurd and yes, the shoddy tie-up scene is ludicrous. They would have at least takien the men's horses so they could not be followed.

reply

Horrible movie, and easily the worst film of the Boetticher/Scott collaborations, EASILY! The original OP nailed everything on what makes this an almost flat out embarrassment. It doesn't even come close to any of the great ones they did together, and I've seen them all, and I count "Ride Lonesome" as their best. The people here who rave this film should have their heads examined. Especially when they claim it to be a comedy! If it were, then this was one of the unfunniest comedies of them all. I mean really, no critique or re-evaluation needed. Just horrible. I'm so disappointed in it.
Apologists need not apply.

reply

Me, too. It was very poor, an embarrassment, really. And I am a big Randolph Scott western fan, liked "The Tall T" the best.

The only good thing about it is the great, but meaningless here, title -- Buchanan Rides Alone! It made me hope for a good/great movie. Also, Craig Stevens looked and dressed real cool! Except for L. Q. Jones' character, none of the other characters impressed me. They all seemed to walk through their parts showing little emotion or interest; I didn't care about any of them. Just one example -- when the jury found him not guilty, everyone seemed bored. The plot was from hunger; it was unconvincing on any level. And --again-- I am a big Randolph Scott western fan.

reply

I think Decision at Sundown is the worst of the bunch. Buchanan Rides Alone has a lot of great dialogue. Neither film is in the league of Seven Men from Now, The Tall T, Ride Lonesome or Comanche Station. Those four are the true Ranown Westerns and the ones featuring the Boetticher/Scott/Kennedy collaboration. I think Seven Men from Now is the best of the bunch.

"All this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks and that's all." -- Matt Hooper, JAWS

reply

[deleted]

I know I'm bumping an old thread but I saw this for the first time today. I'm not a Randolph Scott fan but I do love Westerns. Scott in too many movies is wooden & doesn't possess much character. Plus, him beating up much younger guys at his age seems a bit contrived.

That aside this movie started okay but then it falls into one silly trap after another. Doesn't Scott learn anything after being captured? The most absurd part was them tying up the three guys (they called that tying up?), leaving them with their weapons & ammo AND their horses! Of course the bad guys catch up to them within 15 minutes or less. In this case I almost hoped the good guys would get killed- talk about dumb!

Sorry, I gave it a 5 b/c it just wasn't gripping or real.

reply

[deleted]

I just finished watching this a short while ago and I agree with the OP and those that agree with him.

"That dingaroo killer is as slippery as an eel in a bucket of mush!!".

reply

I thought of Blazing Saddles whilst watching this and that's not a good thing.

I'm rec' his final two "Scott" productions Comanche Station
Ride Lonesome, Camanche Station as vastly superior to this flick to those who might think Randy had just given up on things.

Kisskiss, Bangbang

reply