I guess "White Comanche" interested me for its fascinating history (made during the hiatus of Star Trek, and that Shatner tried to get NBC to purchase it for television) and Shatner's involvement more than anything. Joseph Cotton's name attached to it is also a plus with me, but sometimes a presentation hampers any chances of actors being able to lift a film out of the doldrums. In the case of White Comanche, Shatner is unable to balance dual roles without going to two wide extremes. His Notah Moon is a highly energized, totally savage, and psychotic "half breed", leading the Comanche on stagecoach raids and killings of White folk, while Shatner's interpretation of Johnny Moon is monotone, flat, devoid of any color at all. Two ends of the spectrum, but for whatever reason, he remained watchable just the same. I have to tell you, some of Shatner's best work came later in years, but he had some doozies in his prime, too. But here, he seems to be indifferent as how to handle a double-part. That's not to say he isn't capable, but maybe this film in its construction, while Shatner was there acting in it, he knew it was a turkey.It has a dull script and ratty dubbing with rough noise in the background when the cast speaks. There's the customary fisticuffs as Shatner's Johnny Moon must defend himself against the young buck brother of a land baron in a bar fight (yep, tables and beer bottles break), and shootouts (two rival land barons have their hired guns shooting it out in the dusty streets of Rio Hondo, the town setting for most of the film).Cotten is the sensible sheriff who just wants to keep the township safe, and obtain law, and peace. Well, with land barons shooting at each other, the Comanche's reservation some miles distant (riled up by the violence-minded Notah), and a Wanted poster with a price for Notah's hide due to his stagecoach murders, Rio Hondo's safety might not be so assured. Even a little boy that had bonded with Johnny Moon gets shot when accidentally walking into the line of fire. Rosanna Yanni (while quite easy on the eyes) is a boring romantic love interest (no emotions register at all but her beauty indeed does) for Johnny Moon, although her rape at the hands of an excited Notah is rather devastating.There's a huge body count and plenty of head shots, blood, and bullet fire. Shatner never looked comfortable to me as Johnny Moon. It was a "going through the motions" boredom that emerged in every scene Moon appeared to me. It was essentially a paycheck role. Cotton deserves better than this but he was a trooper, giving his sheriff a willingness to defend his town and not back down from the money men that were blowing smoke at each other over land rights. However, the film itself just kind of lays there on the screen and never seems capable of taking off. There's no energy. There's this pastiche of elements from westerns past, but White Comanche doesn't necessarily incorporate anything interesting or inspired in its own storytelling.Shatner's "brothers dual" on horses with guns blazing at the end doesn't give the viewer the big conclusion a final showdown normally does when a film builds towards it. Because the film's plot paints itself in a corner with the twins-at-odds final gunfight, it was a given to fail rather miserably. You can't really see anything, and the director/editor has to shoot the film to avoid the glaring problem facing them: how do you get two Shatners appear in the same frame with guns out shooting? Much less, how could they on horses, passing when effects weren't quite there to do so in the late 60s? And the score…this music applied to the film is a mess that rarely amplifies or ignites the drama or action on screen.If anything, the score just makes the film look foolish. That, and the editing and shot selections. This is just a badly produced, directed, edited, acted, dubbed, and scored western dud. It's not the worst film ever made, just a rather poor western that never amounts to much. It has enough violent bits and action to be somewhat effective on occasion.And it does have shocking moments like the little boy being shot and killed and a rather nasty piece of work in a pregnant Comanche squaw of Notah's who takes a knife to a "rogue Comanche" who warns Johnny of a potential attack on the town of Rio Hondo. There's also the aftermath of the land barons' shootout with all the bloody bodies, and the rocky cliffs and vistas in Spain that are nice. But, I don't think anything remotely sustainable leaves an impression after this is over. It is rather forgettable.

This movie gets extremely low ratings and rankings on almost every website you look at, but this is one of the best westerns I have seen. Yes, it's low budget, 1960's foreign attempt at an American Western, but somehow it manages to be one of the best westerns ever. Somewhere over the years this film seems to have slipped into the public domain because it's on a lot of the big multi-pack movie sets from Platinum DVD, TreeLine, and Mill Creek. It's also available for free on several legitimate websites. So, since it's free online, and only a few pennies to get on DVD you should give this one a look if you ever enjoyed a spaghetti western, or ever feel nostalgic for old 1960's westerns.

By now you probably know this is one of those hysterically bad movies. It really looks to be made that way, for a worst film festival, something Elvira could laugh at.Captain Kirk beams down to Earth (okay, I'm trying to make it more interesting, it's just Shatner), and is split into his evil and good self (okay, it's just twins raised by Comanches.) The evil twin is evil. The good twin is accused of the evil one's deeds.Pretty much every cliché is in this movie. I don't think it's a spoiler to say that although you want it to happen, Spock and McCoy DO NOT beam not and save him at the last minute. And this is amazing, considering how DeForest Kelly was a staple in old Westerns.So, if you can be amused by the worst film festival entries, you may go for it, because that's what this is, plain and simple.

It's a good thing that Star Trek prime became such a cult item. I would hate to think that William Shatner would have his career judged by this monstrosity of a western.It's probably well that critics remember that at the time this film was done, Star Trek was not the big cult item it became. It was an ambitious science fiction show in its first run that drew a loyal steady audience that NBC decided to cancel after three years. It's fan base grew in syndication and THEN Star Trek became an industry unto itself.So William Shatner in accepting this part had no idea what his future had in store for him. I think if he had he wouldn't have done this film.It's just plain terrible. It's poorly dubbed, it's music score is the worst I've heard for a western since The Outlaw, the acting is terrible and the plot line ridiculous.Shatner plays twin brothers who are from an anglo father and a comanche mother. One of them identifies with the whites and the other the Indians. Come to think of it there was an episode in Star Trek prime where the transporter divided Captain Kirk into a good and evil self. That one was far better done than this film.I'm sure Shatner might have thought he would go the way of Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson in spaghetti westerns. But I think he knew early on what a dog this film was and he overacts outrageously. Especially as his Indian self. Joseph Cotten is around for this also and he looks like he misses those good old days with Orson Welles.Just think when Bill Shatner did Comanche blanco he had no idea that his immortality was already sealed.