"The Way West" could have been a classic. Kirk Douglas plays a driven wagon master determined, like Burger King, to have it his way -- the goal being to herd pioneers to Oregon, to fulfill his dream of establishing an ideal city, with a crystal-covered playground for the kiddies.Unfortunately, Douglas quite fails to engage with the character or his situation. He is so distant and (generally) uninvolved that he might just as well delivered his lines from a Barcalounger. The rest of the actors rarely show much interest, either.The potential for intense drama and powerful emotion is present, but unrealized. The flabby script doesn't help, and first-time director Andrew McLaglen (son of Victor) has no idea what to do about it. * Only Jack Elam (arguably one of the all-time great actors) survives this snooze-fest, delivering a pitch-perfect turn as a minister.The fun moments come during an attempt to lower the pioneers over the edge of a high, steep cliff to the river bank below, one at a time. The first to go down dies when the wagon bumps against the cliff wall, and he -- or rather, an obvious dummy -- is thrown out.After Douglas unconvincingly convinces the pioneers to keep truckin' on down with him, he, too, (or rather a re-dressed dummy) also falls to his death when Psycho Sally cuts the rope to spare the pioneers having to put up with this monster of a man."The Way West" is inexcusably bad. Unless you like being bored to death by annoying films, the funny stuff takes too long to arrive.* His poor direction is particularly noticeable when the wagon train reaches a fort near the end of their journey. The commander has an Indian sidekick who insists on shaking Douglas's hand, and won't let go. A smart director would have built up the part a bit, to add some badly needed humor.

"The Way West" came from a Pulitzer Prize winning novel, with Kirk Douglas, Robert Mitchum , Richard Widmark and a fantastic young Sally Fields on the cast. That should make it a winner, right? But Andrew McLaglen, even being a good director ,with minor flaws, is no John Ford or Anthony Man or Budd Boetticher. Also McLaglen was ordered by David Picker, vice president of production of United Artists to cut the first 20 minutes of the film (from an interview, "The Westerners:Interviews with Actors,Directors…" C.Courtney Joyner). The result was that the movie was a disappointment to those who had great expectations, which were many. But the disappointment changes into a happy surprise when one see the film now. There are the great scenes with Sally Fields, the cinematography of William H. Clothier, the good screenplay, but still those twenty initial minutes are missing,

This is what you call a sprawling western with a vast array of big name stars, scenery, action, and characterization. There is never a dull moment. Its got tons of adventure and action mixed with important character points along the way. Widmark was best when he got away from his sadistic bad guy roles. Here, he plays a reluctant hero, and to be honest, the parts were well written and directed. The actors added their talent, and the results are a larger than life spectacular show. Douglas is very believable as the man who begins good and descends into a horrible human being. The way different characters handle revenge is stunningly poignant. The chief who lost his son could easily wipe out the whole band, but his love of justice makes his unseen presence totally visible. A monumental bit of writing to do this, to make such a character who practically never appears for all intents and purposes. The scenery is vivid and spell binding. Mitchum's role is one that any actor would covet, and he handles it with aplomb. Sally Field plays maybe her best role ever. he movie is never mentioned by critics, but is the unsung hero of westerns, and a great example of how superior they were before 1970.

The Way West is an epic western, but unlike another epic western How the West Was Won, it isn't a very good film. The main problem here is that the script writers and the director have got carried away, and have tried to cram far too many events and subplots into the two hour running time.The main plot thread follows an ambitious and cruel visionary named William Tadlock (Kirk Douglas), who dreams of taking hundreds of people into the vast, unexplored wilderness of the Wild West and starting up a new town. His ambition is an obsession. It drives him and dictates his every move. Even his own family come second in his list of priorities. During the journey, his behaviour towards the other pioneers becomes increasingly irrational and unsympathetic, and in the end he loses the respect of his fellow travellers.There are some good moments in the film. The climax is really surprising, with a twist that few viewers will predict. Sally Field has some interesting scenes as a young girl who undergoes a sexual awakening during the trip. There's also a well done scene in which a man who has killed an Indian child by accident is hanged. However, the abundance of plot threads, characters and subplots is a big drawback. The makers should have concentrated on a few elements and done them really thoroughly, instead of cramming in so much and only dealing with the themes in a shallow and all-too-brief fashion. This is not bad, I suppose, but it could have been oh so much better.