As the line in the song goes, "Whatever happened to Randolph Scott?" I really admired Scott in his pre-Western days. And, although I (along with the rest of America) grew very tired of Westerns by the end of the 1950s, I always looked to Randolph Scott Westerns as being pretty good for the genre. Here, however, I have to agree with a handful of our other reviewers who find this film a confusing mess! Let's see, some sheriffs are good guys, some are bad guys; some outlaws are good outlaws, others are bad outlaws; and some good sheriffs hang out with outlaws. That about sums this movie up. Oh, and I almost forgot that practically every real outlaw ever mentioned in cowboy movies is in this film...even though there is no historical evidence they were together in the period of lawlessness in what became the Oklahoma panhandle.So, is there any reason to watch this confusing mess? Well, yes. Gabby Hayes, certainly the best cowboy sidekick in the business, is prominent in the film...although not exactly as a sidekick, but rather as one of the orneriest of the bunch who seems to be treading a fine line between the good guys and the bad guys. And, it's still nice to watch Randolph Scott, even if the plot is shaky. And, one of my favorite character actors -- Ray Collins -- is along, although I don't see this as one of his better roles.There are lots better Westerns out there...and lots worse. This film is in that middle ground -- not memorable, but "decent" (at least in terms of keeping your interest). But this is FAR from "Rio Bravo" or "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence".

Perhaps the most disjointed, incomprehensible major studio film I've ever seen. I defy anyone to accurately encapsulize the plot in a sentence or even ten. I just watched this film and have no idea what it is about. Now, I love Westerns. I am almost fanatic in my appreciation of Randolph Scott and George 'Gabby' Hayes, and both of them are terrific in this movie. But the script is word spaghetti. The leading lady, Ann Richards, speaks with a British accent for no discernible plot reason, and she gives a performance slightly less believable than might have been obtained from a brick. Outlaw gangs from all over the West and all over the 19th century are thrown together without much apparent purpose other than their name value. Nothing much of interest or accuracy happens with any of them. Nestor Paiva, quite at home playing Italian peasants or gangsters, is bizarrely cast as Texas outlaw Sam Bass, who in real life died at 27, fourteen years younger than Paiva. Chief Thundercloud portrays the Arapaho chief Tahlequah, despite the fact that Tahlequah is a Cherokee name. Geography is tossed about like a piñata; Scott takes a pleasant little day ride on horseback from one end of Oklahoma to the other and back, an actual distance of about 750 miles, and the geographical location is actually referred to officially as "Badman's Territory." As if. None of this would matter if the movie were any good. History, geography, and real-life logic have been tossed willy-nilly into the air quite entertainingly in many movies before and since. But with the entertaining ones, it was possible usually to follow the story. It's great fun to watch Scott, and Hayes gives a particularly enjoyable and offbeat performance. But that's all, brother.

Old-fashioned: yes, but in the best sense of the phrase. This film has a kind of charm, without being too cornball. It isn't slow but is perfectly well-paced. The black-and-white photography is not as good as some Scott westerns but this is not a scenery type of western story. The sound recording must have been done on the cheap, but it doesn't really matter because this is a western and it surely wasn't made for the purpose of selling a soundtrack.Movies of all eras (especially today) substitute macho posturing or posing instead of manhood as it was defined in the old days. In contrast, there are two scenes in this film that offer good examples of how things might have really occurred back then. First, the scene where Scott's character just walks squarely into the corral and shoots the horse thief contains no dialog and doesn't need it (good representation of an old corral by the way). The other scene shows Gabby's character refusing to submit to the lawman's demands, knowing that he is about to be shot. He is shot with minimal dialog in a room quietly occupied by the two men alone.The fine line that was walked (and sometimes crossed over) between lawman and badman in the lawless areas of the west is well depicted in this film. I have used words like "depicted" in this review because the movie is intended as entertainment, not historical accuracy.Randolph Scott, Gabby and others in the cast did more than merely stroll through what could have been just another formula western. They give a good effort and movie fans are the beneficiaries.

In this minor but fun western various characters (including the James gang and the Dalton gang) wind up in a lawless town. A lot of shooting, just enough story and even a horse race. See Gabby Hayes get shot! 7