The Sheriff of Stone Gulch (1913) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Watch It for the Supporting Actors
boblipton24 December 2013
There aren't that many good movies surviving from Kalem. Between the lack of story logic from Sidney Olcott's unit and the awful Ham & Bud comedies, it is reasonable to conclude that the studio lived on good photography, the status of being part of the Patents Trust oligopoly, the voracious appetite for new movies, whatever the quality and a smart front office -- they were among the first studios to manufacture a screen star, offering Ruth Roland as an action heroine for the serials. She's also in this one, as is future director Marshall Neilan.

As for this movie, it's OK. The story of a man falsely accused, aided only by his love, the sheriff's daughter, is told almost entirely in titles. The rest of it is Kalem's typically highly competent cinematography. It's not a masterpiece, but it looks good and makes sense.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Decent Silent Western
Michael_Elliott9 March 2011
Sheriff of Stone Gulch, The (1913)

** 1/2 (out of 4)

One-reel Western has a man (George Larkin) wrongly convicted of a hold-up, which really isn't good because he's in love with a woman (Ruth Roland) whose father just happens to be the sheriff. The man is able to escape from his father and he has a limited amount of time to try and track down the real bandit. The Kalem company has pretty much been forgotten about as has leading lady Roland but at one time they were cranking out quality products on a weekly basis and people were standing in lines to try and catch the latest one. I'm really not sure which films are considered their greatest but THE SHERIFF OF STONE GULCH is a fairly good one even though there's certainly nothing ground-breaking going on. The story is pretty simple and something we've seen countless times before (even in 1913) as the good guy gets shown to be a bum so he must fight to clear his name. I really didn't care too much for Larkin in the lead as he really didn't do much for the character and never really managed to make us care about him. Another problem is that he simply didn't have much charisma to rank up well against other hero/cowboys from this period. Roland was cute enough but for a "star" her role here really wasn't all that good. With all of that said, the film is just over ten-minutes and it's certainly never boring but at the same time it's doubtful anyone other than silent buffs will find it worth viewing.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed