It is a nice adventure film. We follow Kirk Douglas' Dempsey Rae as he goes through this one little town and gets embroiled into the various local dramas and situations. Each little events leading to a culminating feud that pits everyone against each other.
One great thing this movie does is carefully laying out the lifestyle of the West. It is very didactic in its approach and takes the time to present and explain all these little things and how they work. There is an amount of romantic admiration for that rancher lifestyle and the life on the frontier. It is harsh and unforgiving, and the film gives all of those pains mostly to the kid Dempsey befriends. But, it also infuses Dempsey with a carefree attitude that is obviously endearing. The first half of the film, when Dempsey takes the kid under his wing and they become ranchers, is wholesome, informative and fun. It is something you rarely see in film anymore: just a story of people getting a job, and doing said job.
The film somewhat breaks down when the idealised picture of the West is confronted with the plot. The first half has barely any drama in it. The second half is almost nothing but drama. The plot is interesting and also representative of the economics of the old West. Yet, it is tonally inconsistent with the quasi-wholesomeness of the beginning of the adventure. The movie turns dark pretty much without notice.
There is something to be said about the main character. It is at first established that Dempsey is against barbed wire in grazing. The film opposes a rather decentralized organisation view against a more monopolistic/predatory approach. That stuff is in itself great, it takes a rather obtuse economic concept and illustrates it clearly. However, later on the plot forces Dempsey to take a stand for barbed wire and spends most of the movie in support of that practice. There are action scenes of our hero putting up barbed wire. It cheapens a bit the character and you got the feeling that overall Dempsey is too removed from the central tension. It is a flip-flop on such a central issue of the movie; that it feels like he does not actually care. Therefore it softens the tension that would have been.
In my view, what the film does best is illustrating that the western genre needed an update in its form and function. That revolution would come with the Italian westerns, where the focus would go from the specific logistics and practices of the West to deeper emotional resonance and riveting characters arcs. Not so much about grazing rights and cattle management, but rather life and death; good and evil.
One great thing this movie does is carefully laying out the lifestyle of the West. It is very didactic in its approach and takes the time to present and explain all these little things and how they work. There is an amount of romantic admiration for that rancher lifestyle and the life on the frontier. It is harsh and unforgiving, and the film gives all of those pains mostly to the kid Dempsey befriends. But, it also infuses Dempsey with a carefree attitude that is obviously endearing. The first half of the film, when Dempsey takes the kid under his wing and they become ranchers, is wholesome, informative and fun. It is something you rarely see in film anymore: just a story of people getting a job, and doing said job.
The film somewhat breaks down when the idealised picture of the West is confronted with the plot. The first half has barely any drama in it. The second half is almost nothing but drama. The plot is interesting and also representative of the economics of the old West. Yet, it is tonally inconsistent with the quasi-wholesomeness of the beginning of the adventure. The movie turns dark pretty much without notice.
There is something to be said about the main character. It is at first established that Dempsey is against barbed wire in grazing. The film opposes a rather decentralized organisation view against a more monopolistic/predatory approach. That stuff is in itself great, it takes a rather obtuse economic concept and illustrates it clearly. However, later on the plot forces Dempsey to take a stand for barbed wire and spends most of the movie in support of that practice. There are action scenes of our hero putting up barbed wire. It cheapens a bit the character and you got the feeling that overall Dempsey is too removed from the central tension. It is a flip-flop on such a central issue of the movie; that it feels like he does not actually care. Therefore it softens the tension that would have been.
In my view, what the film does best is illustrating that the western genre needed an update in its form and function. That revolution would come with the Italian westerns, where the focus would go from the specific logistics and practices of the West to deeper emotional resonance and riveting characters arcs. Not so much about grazing rights and cattle management, but rather life and death; good and evil.