The Texas Rangers (1936) User Reviews

One of the Best Westerns of the 30s

[bsmith5552 · 7/10 · 10 March 2002]

"The Texas Rangers" tells the story of three pals (Fred MacMurray, Jack Oakie, Lloyd Nolan) who are living the lives of outlaws until they become separated when cornered by a posse. MacMurray and Oakie wind up joining the Texas Rangers while Nolan becomes the notorious "Polka Dot Bandit". Eventually you know that the two sides will have the inevitable showdown. Great action scenes involving an Indian attack highlight the film.

A very young clean-shaven MacMurray is good in the lead and Jack Oakie is..well Jack Oakie as MacMurray's trusty sidekick. Nolan is fittingly evil as the grinning villain of the piece. Heroine Jean Parker plays MacMurray's love interest who convinces him of the error of his ways.

In the courtroom scene, watch for "B" western favorites George "Gabby" Hayes as a judge, Fred Kohlor as the town boss and Charles (Ming the Merciless) Middleton as his lawyer.

If the story seems familiar, it was remade as "The Streets of Laredo" in 1949 with William Holden, William Bendix and Macdonald Carey in the MacMurray, Oakie and Nolan roles respectively.

An effort to broaden Fred MacMurray's appeal

[bkoganbing · 7/10 · 18 June 2005]

I'm sure in casting The Texas Rangers Paramount had it in mind to broaden Fred MacMurray's appeal by putting him in a western. MacMurray had been a star at Paramount for two years and had appeared in mostly light comic parts as he did throughout his career. I mean Paramount could have cast Gary Cooper or Joel McCrea, both of whom were available at the studio. MacMurray did the film and gave a creditable performance, but as he remarked, "the horse and I were never as one." He never really did feel comfortable in westerns and ones he later appeared in were long after his Paramount studio days were over.

The Texas Rangers film is based on stories derived from Walter Presscott Webb's authoritative history of the legendary law enforcement outfit which was only published a few years back. Fred MacMurray, Jack Oakie and Lloyd Nolan play three outlaws who drift into Texas and become separated. MacMurray and Oakie join the Texas Rangers and Nolan continues his outlaw ways.

Lots of good action here folks. A really great Comanche Indian attack sequence is well staged by Director King Vidor. Lots of familiar western faces support the leads like Fred Kohler and Gabby Hayes. Edward Ellis as the commandant of the Texas Rangers comes off a lot like Lewis Stone and had MGM instead of Paramount had made this film, Lewis Stone definitely would have been cast in Ellis's role.

Despite MacMurray's misgivings about westerns, The Texas Rangers is a pretty good action western with great character development for the three leads.

Good western for 1936, but anachronisms

[Marlburian · 7/10 · 5 July 2015]

The copy I watched courtesy of YouTube was clean and crisp, and the film itself was good by the standards of the mid-1930s.

Unlike some other reviewers here on IMDb, I've always thought Fred MacMurray an acceptable Western actor, and I found Jack Okie irritating in the first part of the film - especially as he rode along with MacMurray anticipating a romantic encounter with a señorita. The back projection was reasonable enough, certainly compared with that in "The Plainsman", issued in the same year.

With much of the film being set before Texas became a state (which happened in 1845), there were lots of anachronisms - relating to the Rangers' kit and weapons for example. And the telegraph system was very much in its infancy - I wonder if it had reached Texas?

One might also mention the unrealistic death following the shot under the table.

On the plus side, the fight between the Rangers and the Indians was excellent and Lloyd Nolan in his early scenes radiated charisma - before reverting to the sort of nasty character he was to portray in later films.

I saw it 5 times when I was 12. At 72 I still think it great.

[dilbert-11 · 15 February 1999]

This to me is a magical western of the straightforward "goodies in white hats, baddies in black" genre. It has style, humour and excitement and should be compulsory viewing for every 12 year old and above.

Guardians of the Frontier-Makers of Peace.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 22 January 2012]

The Texas Rangers is directed by King Vidor who also co-writes with Elizabeth Hill, Louis Stevens and Walter Prescott Webb. It stars Fred MacMurray, Jack Oakie, Jean Parker and Lloyd Nolan. Music is by Gerard Carbonara and cinematography by Edward Cronjager. Plot has MacMurray and Oakie as two outlaws who decide to become Texas Rangers, something which invariably brings them into conflict with another outlaw pal.

It showcases the good and bad of 1930s Westerns. The action is strong and vibrant, the landscapes appealing and the story as a premise is always interesting. But those good points are countered with weak scripting, goofs, logic holes and a mixed bag of acting performances. But all told, Vidor's movie comes through its problems to stay firmly on the good side of good for the Western fan.

It's good guys versus bad guys on the home front, with the Indians lining up in numbers to be the common foe. It's here for the latter, where Vidor excels, constructing the action scenes with great skill as a ream of extras in Indian attire attack in their droves, arrows and bullets fly with murderous worth, bodies hurl and fall about, it's exciting stuff. The highlight coming as the Indians start flinging boulders off of a cliff face down onto the Rangers down below; the sound work here especially great, as is the stunt work in this whole segment of the film.

MacMurray and Oakie make a likable pair, but both seem a touch out of place in this portion of the Wild West. But Nolan cuts a nice snarly figure as chief villain Sam "Polka Dot" McGee, and he gets to deliver the film's best (nastiest) moment. Parker is pretty but pretty much a token, while secondary support slots are capably filled by the likes of Edward Ellis, Benny Bartlett and Frank Shannon. Cronjager's black and white photography is on the money, neatly utilising the New Mexico locations as wide open vistas that impose on the characters. While Carbonara scores it with standard Cowboys and Indian flavours for the attacks, and bombastic machismo for the Texas Rangers patrols.

Full of formula and mixed signals as to what it wants to be, The Texas Rangers is none the less an enjoyable picture and one of the better Oaters from the 30s. 7/10

Footnote: A sequel followed in 1940 called The Texas Rangers Ride Again. In 1949 The Texas Rangers was remade as Streets of Laredo, with William Holden starring.

Entertaining Studio Western by King Vidor with Three Solid Leads

[museumofdave · 7/10 · 27 February 2013]

This Paramount studio effort stars Fred MacMurray, who many folks today only remember as the Dad in My Three Songs or the Flubber films. But MacMurry could do almost anything and do it well, from his cunning performance as the weak insurance foil in the classic noir Double Indemnity to his brilliant turn as the amoral business executive in The Apartment.

Here early MacMurray is pared with Jack Oakie, the latter an endearing studio performer who brings some genuine warmth and humor to what in many ways is a typical studio Western, but much richer than the usual B oaters churned out by Republic or Monogram; this is essentially a tale of cowboy reformation, as three thieving get separated by circumstance and two of them choose community and goodness, while one--the notorious polka dot bandit (!), played by Lloyd Nolan, stays outside the law. Nolan, who usually played good second leads or endearing detectives, effortlessly engages in a wee bit of method acting, convincing in his greasy charm, oozing villainy and malice.

While not a landmark film in any way, this is a casual, amiable entertainment, good for a lazy afternoon (coupled with a bowl of popcorn and perhaps a Charlie Chan mystery).

Fun A grade western with outstanding cast.

[mark.waltz · 6/10 · 16 October 2012]

Two Texas bandits (Fred MacMurray and Jack Oakie) join the Texas Rangers in order to avoid being caught and slowly reform. They take on raids by Native Americans and another bandit (Lloyd Nolan) while MacMurray further reforms thanks to a beautiful woman (Jean Parker). Exciting action sequences (particularly a scene with falling boulders)and humor by Oakie are among the highlights. MacMurray, then at the start of his lengthy career, is quite likable in spite of a tough facade. Benny Bartlett is excellent as the young boy MacMurray mentors initially against the law and later on its side. Parker gets some better material than most heroines do in westerns. This is a perfect old movie to introduce today's youth to the great westerns of yesteryear.

Time-bound western before the classics came

[mvanhoore · 6/10 · 28 February 2014]

In the mid-thirties the Western genre was very much in decline. After the introduction of sound in the movies the big studios and the stars of Hollywood almost showed no interest in the genre leaving it up to the independent companies and the B-stars. In 1939 this would change dramatically with the release of Stagecoach and a handful other classics and for many years the Western would feature the big stars of the screen and all the great directors of Hollywood. The Texas Rangers is shot a couple of years before the revival of the genre. King Vidor decided it was a good idea to make a movie to celebrate the centennial of the state of Texas. And what other way to celebrate this fact than to concentrate on the Texas Rangers, the mix of army and police force that became legendary during the formation years of the state.

The movie shows Texas as a modern Garden of Eden where hard working people tried to build up an ideal society and are impeded by the original residents (the Injuns) and villains. The solution is very simple: the Indians are tucked away in reservations (the least habitable regions) and the villains have the choice to became good citizens or been wiped out by the force of law. Sounds this a bit familiar? Wipe out all the undesirable elements in the society to create the ideal situation? Well it happened in a lot more countries in the period this movie was made. It wasn't till the seventies that another opinion on the treatment of the Indians penetrated Hollywood.

The story concentrates around three outlaws. Two of them, Jim and Wahoo, are looking for the third one (Sam) in Texas. They have difficulties finding him and because they are hungry and without any money sign in with the Texas Rangers. There is also the thought to make profit of their assignment to acquire information which can be used for their criminal efforts. But before any of that plans can be worked out they have to face an Indian revolt. Jim and Wahoo play a vital role in defeating the Indians and Wahoo plans to settle with the Rangers. Jim is less sure and when he gets the order to bring back Sam (who has become a notorious villain in the meantime) dead or alive he resigns only to be jailed immediately. In his place Wahoo gets after Sam and he is murdered brutally. Jim finally convinces the mayor that he is the right man to catch Sam.

The first half hour of the movie I found it very hard to enjoy it. There are a lot of scenes with studio backgrounds and a lot of wisecracks that belongs more in film noirs or screwball comedies. And there is Wahoo who rather plays a clown than an outlaw and is a very irritating character. Later there is the problem that the Indians are portrayed not as humans but as savage barbarians rather than as human beings. Their struggle for their rights and their suffering isn't mentioned and the only place they belong according to the heroic rangers is in their reservations. Also the struggle of Jim to become a good citizen isn't worked out well. He isn't a very believable outlaw in the first place. Furthermore he is put in jail because of his history after he played a heroic role in the battle with the Indians. And how are the "good citizens" beside the Rangers portrayed? As chicken-hearted cowards who don't dare to revolt against a villain who terrorize a county. So what's the reason for Jim to leave his past behind him? Love? Well, there is love story, but that is only a thin sideline in this movie.

There are some pluses to this movie. Sam is a convincing outlaw who with his good looks and smile is still believable in his role as villain. He is even more sympathetic than Jim. He only murders Wahoo after he is betrayed by him and he gives Jim the chance to reunite with him. Also the scenery is beautiful. Besides some studio shots the movie was made on location (although it was New Mexico instead of Texas). The murder of Wahoo is very brutal and unexpected (I thought the sympathetic clown would survive) and filmed in the later tradition of Hawks, Aldrich and Fuller.

So in the end I gave the film a meager six out of then because of the craftsmanship of King Vidor, the acting by Lloyd Nolan who plays Sam "Polka Dot' McGee and the scenery. Otherwise this movie is anything but a timeless masterpiece because of the one dimensional portrait of Indians, Rangers and most other roles.

Satisfying Action-Adventure

[FightingWesterner · 8/10 · 30 July 2011]

On a whim, bandits Fred MacMurray and Jack Oakie enlist in the Texas Rangers. The two partner up with old pal Lloyd Nolan for some crooked schemes, but soon hear the call of duty, putting them at odds with their criminal lifestyle.

Like his most famous film, The Champ, director King Vidor imbues this with depression-era sensibilities and sentimentality, having lovable bums MacMurray and Oakie find self-respect, romance, and a sense of selflessness, all with a young orphan in tow.

Photography, direction, and action sequences are all first rate. The performances were a little dated, but adequate. Unlike others, I didn't find Oakie's good-old-boy character annoying or unrealistic.

Cameo appearances by George "Gabby" Hayes and Charles Middleton (Ming the Merciless) were a lot of fun too.

another great movie ruined by Jack Oakie

[railyard · 7/10 · 10 July 2007]

All you Jack Oakie fans beware, I'm going to dump on him. Any time I see his name in the cast of characters, I think twice about watching that movie. There has to be a big-name leading man that I like enough to overcome the stupid shenanigans of Oakie. In this case, it was Fred MacMurray, of whom I am very fond. Why oh why do the heroes in the early westerns have Bozo the Clowns for partners? Gabby Hayes, Smiley Burnett, Pat Buttram, Dub Taylor, Al St. John, Fuzzy Knight, Max Terhune, Frank McHugh, Slim Pickens, Pat Brady and a score of others all set their sights on being as dumb as possible and hinder the hero in as many ways as possible. There were a few good exceptions, my favorite being Tonto of The Lone Ranger fame. In real life, would Lloyd Nolan put up with Oakie. I don't think so. The least he would have done is kick him out of the gang. Although I didn't approve of the way Nolan did in Oakie under the table, I was glad that Oakie was out of the movie, even though it was only for a short time before the ending. (See The Call of the Wild with Clark Gable if you want to see Oakie spoil another great movie). I loved the action and gunplay in this movie especially the Indian attack. Long-distance shooting with sixguns was a bit hard to take, but all the movie cowboy heroes did it. I thought the romance was particularly well done and I would have given in to Jean Parker a lot sooner than Fred did. Overall I gave this movie a 7, but it would have been an 8 if it took itself a bit more serious. I know a lot of you are going to disagree with me on the partners issue, but I like serious westerns, not comedy westerns.

"I'll be glad to get in the wide open spaces again"

[Steffi_P · 5/10 · 17 March 2010]

The Western genre was at a low ebb in the 1930s. It did not die out completely as has sometimes been claimed, but for the most part it was relegated to B-movie status (in fact B-Westerns were what John Wayne spent most of the 30s doing). It's also untrue that the genre was suddenly revived in 1939 by the arrival of Stagecoach. A-budget Westerns had been appearing for a few years before then, but they were odd affairs for the most part, born of a generation who had lost touch with the Old West.

The Texas Rangers was perhaps the first of these bigger Westerns, and in many ways it plays like a recap of genre conventions, particularly the more farcical aspects. We have bandits who are good guys deep down, and Indians who might as well be hordes of zombies. Some of the more fun clichés, like an alcoholic judge, are briefly touched upon, but only briefly. The screenplay is on the whole a rather amateurish effort, riding roughshod over logic whenever a gap in the plot needs sewing up. I mean, are we really supposed to believe Jack Oakie is off in the hills counting out his loot by night, and yet is still consistently able to get his job as Stagecoach driver back each morning? Silly, even by the standards of the genre.

And yet producer-director King Vidor was the kind of man to take such projects seriously. And he at least has a feel for the form. Too many of these 30s Westerns fail to make proper use of the open plains, which after all is what it's all supposed to be about. Not Vidor though – for him the seemingly endless vistas are an almost continual backdrop. Vidor's outdoor shots give you a real feeling of the emptiness, which is essential. You can't have a character singing "Bury Me Not on the Lone Prairie" unless the prairie looks appropriately lonesome. Vidor's direction of dialogue scenes is immaculate as always, generally holding the actors in long takes with occasional barely-perceptible camera shift, giving a real feeling of smoothness. His handling of action is the opposite, full of wild cuts and crazed angles to give a real feeling of frenzy. One of the most effective manoeuvres he pulls in The Texas Rangers is just before the heroes come face-to-face with the massive band of Indians. We begin with a tracking shot of them riding alongside a rock face, then the camera gradually turns, opening out the space, and eerily revealing the army of natives.

Unfortunately not everyone is so suited to the genre. I don't buy MacFred as a Westerner, let alone a bandit. He just doesn't have the demeanour of a two-baths-a-year man. Leading lady Jean Parker is simply bland here, as is her character. Fortunately we do get to see a lot of Jack Oakie, who still doesn't quite look the part but is entertaining nevertheless. Oakie may be a comic but he can really act, as you will see in the one or two scenes where he has to play it straight. Lloyd Nolan is great too – his face says things that aren't in the script. And any picture that has Edward Ellis in is bound to be a treat. He is also the only player with a real bit of Western grit about him.

The Texas Rangers may be the Western genre's reunion with big budgets and big stars, but it is really little more than a souped-up B-Western. It is directed with class, but the overall feel is one of shoddiness, mainly because the studios at the time weren't used to the form. They didn't have the stockpile of authentic performers or the ready-made frontier-towns at their disposal. We get the wide-open plains alright, but it takes more than chaps and Stetsons to conjure up the spirit of the Old West.

Well made Western - well worth seeing

[padutchland-1 · 8/10 · 28 December 2006]

This Western from back in 1936. It doesn't have the fancy special effects, nor color, nor big budget, etc. But it will stand up to just about any Western made today. In glorious black and white, it is one to see when you get the opportunity. Fred MacMurray is the star and does one of his best jobs of acting (seemed more relaxed), Jack Oakie (a great character actor with just the right touch of humor), Lloyd Nolan (who played the bad guy so well) and Jean Parker (the pretty girl who tames MacMurray). The story starts out with three friends who rob stage coaches until a posse catches up to them and they have to split up. MacMurray and Oakie become Texas Rangers with the idea of getting inside info for more hold ups. But experience with the Rangers and a smart girl turn the boys toward the side of the law. Problem is that LLoyd Nolan is still on the opposite side of the law and causing problems. Not to give anything away, but you can guess the ultimate showdown arrives. In between is plenty of action and exciting Indian attacks. Don't miss this one if you like Cowboys and Indians.

Good Film

[JoeytheBrit · 7/10 · 13 December 2008]

What looks on paper like a fairly ordinary entry in the Western genre actually turned out to be something much better than that. Fred MacMurray stars as one of a trio of villains (other members are Lloyd Nolan and Jackie Oakie, both good), two of whom hook up with the Texas Rangers after their stagecoach hold-up scam is rumbled. The duo - MacMurray and Oakie, who join to gain inside info on potential targets - are soon reformed by their experiences and find themselves at odds with former partner Nolan.

The writing is very good here at times - and incredibly poor at others. The kangaroo court scene in a converted saloon, which is presumably intended to emphasise MacMurray's conversion to law and order, simply makes him look like as much of a bully as the villain he is attempting to try. Oakie's death scene is very well written though and, despite the situation, its timing comes as a complete surprise.

In some respects it's a mystery how this one got past the censors considering MacMurray never really pays for the crimes he committed at the beginning of the film...

Average action film

[funkyfry · 4/10 · 14 June 2007]

King Vidor brings his usual sincerity and visual austerity to this tale of the early years of the Texas Rangers, as seen through the eyes of a pair of lawbreakers (Fred MacMurray and Jack Oakie) who join the force planning to use inside information to make their robberies more effective. But gradually through the course of the film first Wahoo (Oakie) and finally Jim (MacMurray) face responsibility and turn in the direction of the law. Jim is influenced in this regard by his love for his commanding officer's daughter, Amanda (Jean Parker).

This is one of those films that looks kind of important but ultimately feels like lazy film-making. For instance there are all these scenes with Jim and the Rangers on the top of a hill shooting Indians…. They're using pistols but somehow shooting them off their horses from hundreds of yards away. I know realism isn't always the requisite for Westerns, but at least in the matter of firearms that could be expected from a non-comedy film. It features put-you-to-sleep narration from the Ranger commander that feels like it was lifted out of a G-man film. Overall there's just a feeling of smallness, of a lack of aspiration surrounding this movie.

MacMurray struggles to give his character dignity. He's a good actor but he's been given a pretty standard character here. In fact all 3 villains just feel a bit too goofy and affable for us to believe they are "badmen" or for the possibility of reformation to feel really dramatic. Oakie's character is interesting because he begins as basic comic relief and ends up becoming the moral voice of the film. Lloyd Nolan gives probably the film's best performance as the third man in their partnership who doesn't want to "go straight." Not too much to recommend but it's not horrible, so it's the type of film to watch when you're bored and feel like an oater, but not something worth seeking out or re-watching in particular.

Lots of great elements a little mishmashed up, not bad, not terrific

[secondtake · 27 August 2011]

The Texas Rangers (1936)

Routine. There are elements here of Westerns earlier (there were hundreds of obscure ones) and Westerns later (including some well known ones), with stagecoach holdups and cowboy and Indian battles (the Indians lose again) and with pioneer justice. All of the above, plus a man reluctant to see the love of a lonely and lovely woman out on the edge of nowhere.

In a sense, it isn't worth watching if you have other Westerns up your sleeve. But--there has to be a but--the plot is interesting because it turns upside down more times than a tumbleweed, the filming (with Cronjager behind the camera) is straight up and strong, and we get an early look at unlikely Wild West hero, Fred MacMurray. For those who like Westerns, this is a decent mid-30s example, before the explosion of greater examples in 1939.

The title is exactly what the movie is about on the surface--the ragtag but well supported Texas lawmen known as the Texas Rangers (legendary enough to not only have a more recent widely panned movie about them made starring Ashton Kushner but also a Baseball Team). It almost is a promo piece for the group, with a voice-over in the beginning like those FBI films of the 1950s. MacMurray is actually a bandit, teamed up with a kind of goofy second lead, Jack Oakey. In fact, it seems like a comedy at first, and the lightweight air never quite lets up.

It does get more serious, though, not only about love (briefly) but about the honor and ability of the Rangers to fight not only Indians but outlaws. MacMurray gets in the middle of a major mess because he plays both sides of the game, as outlaw and newbie Texas Ranger. Lloyd Nolan enters the plot after awhile and is a great outlaw of his own. It's hard to take MacMurray seriously in this rough rough world, but the music pumps it up and the scenery is dramatic and he holds his own well enough for a middling movie.

And it's a bit long. Even if the plot seems to demand two hours with more and more twists, it loses something of velocity as it goes. King Vidor directed a number of notable silents in the 20s, and a few great 30s films (including the black and white parts of the Wizard of Oz). This one shows the solidity of a great director, and the wobbly backbone of a so-so script.

A surprise

[mgtbltp · 7/10 · 24 January 2009]

Jack Oakie a great comedian and character actor who has all but been forgotten plays Henry B. 'Wahoo' Jones and we see him driving a stagecoach against a backdrop of Texas prairie. After he has a funny bit of conversation with his shotgun rider the stage is held up by Jim Hawkins played by Fred MacMurray and Sam 'Polka Dot' McGee played by Lloyd Nolan who is equally great in this film.

The stage hold up is very picaresque with Oakie providing most of the humor, there is a sequence where he is crying crocodile tears when the bandits ask for his watch and he tells then that it was a memento from his father, a fade to black reveals, in the next scene around a campfire, that Whaoo, Hawkins, and McGee are all in cahoots and they split the loot and Oakie gets his watch back. After a short interval a voice calls out of the dark that they are surrounded and to get their hands up, and Hawkins kicks out the campfire and we get another fade to black with shots ringing out.

We next cut to Wahoo again driving a stage for what we expect is a repeat of the con. This time however the shotgun is a Texas Ranger and at a water stop another comedic display from Wahoo warns Hawkins minus a missing McGee who is planning to rob the stage not to attempt the con. The two outlaws decide that since the Rangers are a tough outfit to go up against maybe they should join them for wages rather than fight them. They get an assignment to track down cattle rustlers and discover their old partner in crime McGee driving a stolen heard with some Mexican vaqueros and they decide that they can con the Rangers using their inside information on money shipments with McGee doing the dirty work.

Anyway a love interest and a kid that they rescue from marauding Indians gums up the works and basically Wahoo & Hawkins get "religion".

As I started watching this as soon as I heard the name Wahoo a switch clicked and I realized that I saw a remake of this that was called "The Streets Of Laredo" (1949) with William Holden, and William Bendix as "Reuben Whaoo Jones" with a Brooklyn accent. That remake palled in comparison to "The Texas Rangers" the unrepentant bad guy in Laredo sucked compared to Loyd Nolan.

Also making a cameo is George "Gabby" Hays as a judge, all in all "The Texas Rangers" in Black & white and even with the predictable Hays Code redemptive moral ending is superior to the remake. Worth a look if you are interested.

From rustler to ranger to rancher

[weezeralfalfa · 7/10 · 1 July 2017]

This project was undertaken to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the existence of Texas as a political entity and the inception of the Texas Rangers as a paramilitary force to be reckoned with. Incidents were inspired by those reported in the 1935 book "The Texas Rangers, a Century of Frontier Defense". I wonder if the name of the outlaw Sam was inspired by that of outlaw Sam Bass, whose demise was largely attributed to the efforts of The Rangers?

The 3 main characters initially work as a team of thieves, robbing stagecoaches and their passengers. Usually, Wahoo((Jack Oakie) would serve as shotgun on the stage, gathering information about what was being carried of interest. Jim(Fred MacMurray) and Sam(Lloyd Noland,)would holdup the stage, Wahoo pretending to shoot at them and be a victim. But, one time, Wahoo served as driver, while a Texas Ranger served as shotgun. Wahoo called off the robbery, and that was the end of this career.

Thereafter, Sam split from Jim and Wahoo, pursuing rustling. In need of income, Jim and Wahoo were talked into joining The Rangers. They helped put down an Indian uprising or two, finally making the Indians retreat to a reservation, where they would be harmless. Thereafter, Jim is given the assignment to oust the menacing 'boss' of county Kimball. He insists on prosecuting the kingpin for a double murder. Everyone thinks he's crazy to risk his life, and theirs. During the trial, Jim senses that things aren't going his way. So, he badgers the reluctant key witness until he admits he saw the murders and who committed them. Then, he badgers the jury to come up with a guilty verdict. The judge gives him a 50 year prison sentence. In appreciation for instilling courage in the citizens of the county to overthrow their tyrant, they present Jim with a ranch in their county. The original idea was for Sam to become the new kingpin, but Jim nixed that idea. Interestingly, Gabby Hayes was the judge. This is the most interesting episode in the film for me.

After this turn of events, Sam proceeded to make his gang the terror of Texas, committing a variety of crimes, Sam being dubbed the PokeDot bandit for his kerchief. Jim is given the task of bringing Sam in, but he refuses and quits The Rangers. But, he is arrested for past crimes with Sam. Wahoo , instead, goes in search of Sam, but is killed by Sam, for trying to double crossing him. Jim then changes his attitude toward Sam, and receives a reprieve if he brings Sam in. He finds Sam and they have a standoff, neither winning. Inviting Sam to give himself in, Sam ignores this chance and Jim eventually kills him.

Especially, in the first half,Jack Oakie, as Wahoo, often acts clownish. Clearly, his brand of humor irritates some viewers, while others approve. I'm somewhere in between. I suspect that kids, in general, would give a higher approval rating.

Some complain that Indians are portrayed as only rapacious barbarians. Indeed, historically, some were at times, a charge that could equally be leveled at many Europeans.

Two women are featured at times. Jean Parker, as Amanda, daughter of the local commander of The Rangers. at first was put off by Jim's attitudes toward the proper rearing of a boy. But, she gradually came around, throwing herself at the confirmed bachelor, until he finally gave in....Then, there's Elena Martinez, who did womanly chores at Sam's headquarters, perhaps also serving as a 'comfort woman'.

In regard to the battle between the Indians and Rangers,, where the Rangers are way up on a mountain side, looking down at the Indians, many are hitting their target with pistols, which were designed for rather close range shooting. Also, some Indians get above them, and roll a bunch of large boulders down on the Rangers, like so many supersized bowling balls. Burt Lancaster did the same unlikely stunt in "Scalphunters"

See it in B&W at YouTube

"My Three Guns"

[zardoz-13 · 8/10 · 5 August 2009]

This is an amiable black & white, Paramount western about a trio of villains. Jim Hawkins (Fred MacMurray) and Sam McGee (Lloyd Nolan) hold up stagecoaches driven by their partner Wahoo (Jack Oakie) and make a good living at it. This is an interesting scheme, but eventually they are separated from each other. Sam goes on to become a notorious desperado, while Jim and Wahoo stop their stagecoach robbing scenario when Wahoo winds up driving a coach guarded by a humorless Texas Ranger. Indeed, the regular Rangers are a bunch of tough-looking, no-nonsense hombres, and "The Texas Rangers" is dedicated to them. "The Crowd" director King Vidor, who made several classics during his career, keeps thing moseying along in this outdoors drama. You can tell it's a morality play because our friends split up about half-way through with Wahoo turning goodie-two-shoes, while Sam rustles every steer in sight in south Texas. Actually, Jim and Sam are buddies up until the final quarter hour after Sam kills Wahoo in cold blood. Yes, there is a romance, but it is played more for laughs than love. MacMurray looks suitable for this kind of sagebrusher and Nolan is a dastard through and through as the Poka-Dot bandit. There is an interesting scene where the Rangers, out-numbered by Indians, take refuge on a mountain side and three braves start rolling boulders down on them.

Texas Rangers

[searchanddestroy-1 · 8/10 · 26 June 2022]

If you like old fashioned westerns speaking of friendship, vengeance, action, this film is made for you. King Vidor brings here a classic without any surprise, where everything is predictable, but it is a movie that is worth watching if you are a moviegoer in love with oldies; great acting and directing too.

fun-lovin', flippant frontier fellers

[racoom_bs · 8 May 2001]

This is my first recollection of Lloyd Nolan. He played "Polkadot Sam", the buddy who went wrong while Fred MacMurray and Jack Oakie became lawmen. Jack Oakie was the wise-crackin' comedy relief. Nolan's nickname came from the polka-dotted neckerchief he always wore. Wouldn't ya know it, Fred MacMurray had to gun him down at the end, and as he cradled his fallen former buddy in his arms we were treated to one of the tear-jerkinest death scenes ever in a western, on a par with Gary Cooper and Richard Arlen in "The Virginian". A lot of ridin' and shootin' made it a Saturday afternoon well spent.