There were so many westerns made, that it has to have a unique angle or something memorable, to sick its head above the parapet. Did I enjoy this movie? Without a doubt. The characters were strong and likable and I really found myself rooting for the young lad. Location? Excellent. The great expanse of the country was well portrayed and the shacks, houses and barns were all spot on. Acting? Good overall. All utterly believable and gave a strong sense of family unit. Storyline? Well this is maybe where the movie didn't quite do itself justice. The story was okay, but has, with variations, been told hundreds of times and it didn't bring much new to the table. But at 80 minutes, it wasn't too long and I found myself glad to have watched and enjoyed it.

Purportedly High Lonesome was shot in color for the transoceanic company Eagle Lion Pictures. But all I saw was a pretty bad black and white print rented on Amazon. John Drew Barrymore who with his sister Diana carried the most famous thespian name in America stars in this film playing a youthful loner type whom we just know as 'Cooncat'. In a part that Steve McQueen would have probably phoned in with a good performance, Barrymore plays a troubled youth who is a runaway from an abusive home in Texas. Unfortunately in his travels he walks into an area where a whole lot of unsolved murders are taking place and he gets good and tagged for them.Not believing him, but taking him in anyway the better to keep an eye on him is rancher Basil Ruysdael with two pretty daughters, Lois Butler and Kristine Miller. Only Miller believes in Barrymore. In the end all is revealed as that Belgian sleuth was wont to say.Poor Barrymore like Diana he did some unmemorable films for the most part, the pressure of the name a bit much to handle. High Lonesome is one of those films. Maybe the color might have helped, but I have to judge on the print available.

Oddball Western drama. There's no commanding central character to hang your hat on. Barrymore Jr. headlines, but his "Cooncat" stands more for misunderstood youth than as a force for good. Actually, several characters alternate in the spotlight, crippled old Davis (Ruysdael) being the most commanding, with his spirited daughter Abby (Miller) not far behind. Then too, there's a very un-Western hint of the spooky in the "ghost" figures lurking in the background. That "horse dragging" sequence is unusual and more brutal than expected. If Barrymore had padding to ease the abrasion, I couldn't spot it. It's a pretty cluttered screenplay with a number of characters and episodes drifting in and out that makes it difficult at times to keep up with. Nonetheless, it's a good original story with a number of nice touches, including the barn dance; plus, the wide open vistas of southwest Texas (where the epic Giant {1955} was filmed). I also like the way that underneath the sub- plots, the film is really about the hapless kid finding a home. Note that the character Cooncat foreshadows a popular theme of the coming decade—misunderstood youth, especially as popularized by James Dean several years later.I expect the un-tried Barrymore was given top billing for box office purposes. He tries hard, and after all his character is based on anger and frustration since nobody believes him and is about to hang him. The only scene I can spot where he clearly over-acts is when describing the two horsemen to Boatwhistle (Wills). Otherwise, I see him as giving a logically emotional performance. Anyway, I liked the film as an entertainingly offbeat Western.

John Barrymore Jr. brings a Sean Penn-like quality to the portrayal of his character Cooncat in "High Lonesome", although that probably has more to do with his similar looks than in acting ability. This was Barrymore's second appearance in a leading role following "The Sundowners" which came out the same year. In my review of that picture, I opined that it's doubtful daughter Drew ever saw him in that film; my suspicion is that it's probably true here as well.When the picture was all over, I found myself scratching my head. What started out as something of an off-beat mystery Western, this wound up being a story that didn't make much sense. No reason was ever offered as to why the characters of the Smiling Man (Jack Elam) and Roper (Dave Kashner) ever hung around following the murder of Jim Shell in the abandoned trading post. Stealing Cooncat's money was one thing, but why all the other intrigue of lurking in the shadows; the disappearing duo gimmick got a little tired after a while. And what about all the men killed on both sides of the 'Jessup' fence when the Davis crew went out to tear it down? Are we just supposed to forget about all of that like it never happened? And by the way, who killed Pat Farrell's (John Archer) parents? They were dead a whole week before their bodies were discovered, and the idea was that 'maybe' Cooncat was responsible. Well, he wasn't. So who was? Oh, never mind. See what I mean - story elements were brought in and then discarded as if no one was bothering to pay attention.One thing I did like though - this was the only time I've ever seen Jack Elam's lazy eye referenced in a story. As he describes the men who instigated him to go after Jim Shell, Barrymoore's character states - "He had a cast in his eye so you couldn't tell which eye was pointin' where". I just wish they had taken a great line like that and gone somewhere meaningful with it.One last thing in the 'it doesn't make sense' department. Remember the finale? - Smiling Man and Roper have rancher Davis pinned down with gunfire after shooting Cooncat. So what does Davis do? He manages to swing around and just walk into the bad guy cabin through the back door! What??!! How did he do that? I don't know, and you won't either.