There's something in its very weirdness that makes this almost worth watching - which is a positive, because there really isn't much in the story itself that would make it worth watching. Best known as the film debut of a very bosomy Jane Russell, the movie actually describes a completely fictionalized friendship between Billy the Kid (Jack Beutel) and Doc Holliday (Walter Huston). According to the story, Holliday arrives in the town of Lincoln, NM and meets up with his old buddy Sheriff Pat Garrett (Thomas Mitchell.) Their friendship is strained when Billy shows up on the scene and Holliday becomes more involved with him. That's really where the weirdness comes in. Although Billy and Holliday are supposedly in a romantic competition for Rio (Russell), this really comes across as a 3-cornered homo-erotic relationship, with Holliday jilting Garrett for Billy. In the scenes between any combination of the three of them, that's really the sense you get of the relationship. It's truly bizarre to watch, which is perhaps not surprising for a movie produced and directed by Howard Hughes, who was already in a period of significant mental decline while he was putting this out. Hughes' OCD undoubtedly led to the very realistic and surprisingly detailed sets, but there was a lot that didn't fit well at all - including a dreadful musical score and some ham-fisted attempts at humour. The movie also includes surprisingly little gunplay for a Western. There's really not very much of interest here, but for Russell's sheer beauty as well as the over the top bizarre-ness of the whole thing, it gets a 4/10.
116 Reviews
Run for the Hills
Bucs196023 August 2008
And run for the hills is exactly what Howard Hawks did after Howard Hughes couldn't keep his hands off the production. Mr. Hughes or someone took over direction and gave us the finished product which is a mess but a lot of fun just the same.
The build-up of Jane Russell (no pun intended) was one of the great publicity moves in film history. That famous shot of her lolling around on a bale of hay with her famous chest falling about was enough to entice most red-blooded males to this film And she didn't disappoint as Rio, the girlfriend of many, faithful to none. Throw in Pat Garrett, Billy the Kid and Doc Holliday (where did he come from?) and you've got a mix of relationships that vies with "Brokeback Mountain" for male bonding. And just for the hell of it, add some Indians which cause our heroes to embark in a cloud of dust across the landscape.
I found Jack Buetel (or Beutel) a rather attractive actor in a wispy kind of way. Jane Russell's chest probably weighed more than he did. Unfortunately he never recovered from this film outing and sank into oblivion This film is about as coherent as a Marx Brothers romp but not nearly as intentionally funny. The whole thing is contrived, there's a lot of talk, talk, talk, and if there is some underlying message, I missed it. BUT, you have to see it for the camp value......it's really more fun than it should be. Maybe Mr. Hughes meant it that way. On second thought, I guess not.
The build-up of Jane Russell (no pun intended) was one of the great publicity moves in film history. That famous shot of her lolling around on a bale of hay with her famous chest falling about was enough to entice most red-blooded males to this film And she didn't disappoint as Rio, the girlfriend of many, faithful to none. Throw in Pat Garrett, Billy the Kid and Doc Holliday (where did he come from?) and you've got a mix of relationships that vies with "Brokeback Mountain" for male bonding. And just for the hell of it, add some Indians which cause our heroes to embark in a cloud of dust across the landscape.
I found Jack Buetel (or Beutel) a rather attractive actor in a wispy kind of way. Jane Russell's chest probably weighed more than he did. Unfortunately he never recovered from this film outing and sank into oblivion This film is about as coherent as a Marx Brothers romp but not nearly as intentionally funny. The whole thing is contrived, there's a lot of talk, talk, talk, and if there is some underlying message, I missed it. BUT, you have to see it for the camp value......it's really more fun than it should be. Maybe Mr. Hughes meant it that way. On second thought, I guess not.
Broke Bra Mountain
n_r_koch17 December 2009
Made with big talent and deep pockets, this movie is almost as poorly made as an amateur film made by a rookie. The camera never moves and the actors don't move either. It is also surely the most flagrantly flaming movie of the Code Era, with the possible exception of COBRA WOMAN. Let's see, there's the triangle of a literally limp-wristed Doc (Hughes shows us this about five times to make sure everyone gets it), an sputtering old rejected Pat, and an energetic hot young buck (Billy) who also has time for Jane Russell. The three men do a lot of glaring at one another while they read innuendo-ridden lines in innuendo-laden blockings. The wah-wah-wah kicks in on the soundtrack whenever there's a really smoldery glare or argument. And so on. They do everything but hold hands. Russell isn't exactly beautiful by '40s movie standards, but she certainly is ripe. Hughes had the money to ignore the Censor, and watching it you can't help but wonder if all this wasn't meant as a joke on Mr. Breen himself. This movie is a little funnier if you see THE AVIATOR first.
a legendary and fascinating mess
IRVIN819 May 2004
Not too many movies create myths.
Anyone who read Harold Robbins', "The Carpetbaggers", (some 40 years ago) which in turn spawned "Nevada Smith", gets a superbly fictionalized accounting of Howard Hughes. Such fiction prefixes reality. It took a great number of years before I finally saw "The Outlaw" - an eagerly awaited event.
I've attempted to view the AMC-aired movie some three times - but got so antsy that I abandoned it. Few movies of this caliber have been so uneven. And yet it endures. Vintage alone gives the film status.
There's nothing wrong with anecdotal (vignette) - points-of-view movies, but in "The Outlaw", it was like watching one of those lumbering, exasperating silent films: where the actors stand across from each other, and each speaks their lines as if orchestrated by an off-stage conductor. Spontaneity is not this movie's long suit.
The actors: Jack Beutel is one of the most beautiful men to ever stand before a camera. His eyes are smoldering, his gaze laconic, his smile cheeky one moment and sensuous the next. Walter Huston is a young man in a middle-aged body; Thomas Mitchell (Scarlet's daddy in 'Gone With the Wind') is shifty, Irish, as conniving as Wally Beery, sniveling and crafty. And then there's the statuesque Jane Russell. Robbins gave us the intimate details of the suspension bridge-designed brassier - and Jane herself speaks of how she finally pulled the damn thing off and lined her breasts with a few Kleenex. She is as luscious as a near-nude Barbie doll, she is 19 years old, her lips inspire poetry - yet her voice is as monotonous as the Valley-inspired Val-speak of 25 years ago.
I wouldn't hazard to guess Howard Hughes' emotional consistency in the movie, however something went hellishly wrong. Someone fell on his face when it came to editing and scoring. Take the music, for example. It's Scoring 101, embarrassingly manipulative, often overriding the dialogue and ranging from 'Pathetique' to 'The Lone Prairie' mélange.
And then there's the acting: the Mexican senora rolls her eyes with all the panache of a 1940-Mexican B-movie bit actress. There is no spontaneity; she delivers her lines badly and with burning self-consciousness. And when Huston shoots Beutel in the hand, the latter doesn't even flinch; ditto, when he pierces both his ears with bullets. Staggering disbelief.
As to the scene where Jane Russell falls for Jack Beutel and kisses him, it's like watching two trains headed straight for each other. Overblown, top-heavy, agonizingly overreaching...it nonetheless has the sexual potency of an orgasm. The music, the god-awful Close-CLOse-CLOSE UP of Jane's lips bearing down on the half-delirious Beutel. Wow, what power! The men watching this film back in (ca) 1940 must have had to cover their laps.
I leave it to those with a sense of adventure to debate the movie's homoeroticism. There's no such implications from Beutel toward the two older men.
The movie, finally, has to be taken for the time in which it was made. The cinematography is as splendid as if it were turned 10 years ago. It is impossibly uneven, anecdotal, horrifyingly edited, pathetically scored, wretchedly acted...yet the actors are painful in their beauty. Many of the IMDb comments suggest that the film wants watching several times. I second that. It can be slow, cantankerous, giddy, sullen - but Jane's and Jack's beauty are undeniable, Walter is everybody's favorite grandfather. Toland can be thanked for giving us the movie's clarity. --And Howard... Howard was just having fun.
Anyone who read Harold Robbins', "The Carpetbaggers", (some 40 years ago) which in turn spawned "Nevada Smith", gets a superbly fictionalized accounting of Howard Hughes. Such fiction prefixes reality. It took a great number of years before I finally saw "The Outlaw" - an eagerly awaited event.
I've attempted to view the AMC-aired movie some three times - but got so antsy that I abandoned it. Few movies of this caliber have been so uneven. And yet it endures. Vintage alone gives the film status.
There's nothing wrong with anecdotal (vignette) - points-of-view movies, but in "The Outlaw", it was like watching one of those lumbering, exasperating silent films: where the actors stand across from each other, and each speaks their lines as if orchestrated by an off-stage conductor. Spontaneity is not this movie's long suit.
The actors: Jack Beutel is one of the most beautiful men to ever stand before a camera. His eyes are smoldering, his gaze laconic, his smile cheeky one moment and sensuous the next. Walter Huston is a young man in a middle-aged body; Thomas Mitchell (Scarlet's daddy in 'Gone With the Wind') is shifty, Irish, as conniving as Wally Beery, sniveling and crafty. And then there's the statuesque Jane Russell. Robbins gave us the intimate details of the suspension bridge-designed brassier - and Jane herself speaks of how she finally pulled the damn thing off and lined her breasts with a few Kleenex. She is as luscious as a near-nude Barbie doll, she is 19 years old, her lips inspire poetry - yet her voice is as monotonous as the Valley-inspired Val-speak of 25 years ago.
I wouldn't hazard to guess Howard Hughes' emotional consistency in the movie, however something went hellishly wrong. Someone fell on his face when it came to editing and scoring. Take the music, for example. It's Scoring 101, embarrassingly manipulative, often overriding the dialogue and ranging from 'Pathetique' to 'The Lone Prairie' mélange.
And then there's the acting: the Mexican senora rolls her eyes with all the panache of a 1940-Mexican B-movie bit actress. There is no spontaneity; she delivers her lines badly and with burning self-consciousness. And when Huston shoots Beutel in the hand, the latter doesn't even flinch; ditto, when he pierces both his ears with bullets. Staggering disbelief.
As to the scene where Jane Russell falls for Jack Beutel and kisses him, it's like watching two trains headed straight for each other. Overblown, top-heavy, agonizingly overreaching...it nonetheless has the sexual potency of an orgasm. The music, the god-awful Close-CLOse-CLOSE UP of Jane's lips bearing down on the half-delirious Beutel. Wow, what power! The men watching this film back in (ca) 1940 must have had to cover their laps.
I leave it to those with a sense of adventure to debate the movie's homoeroticism. There's no such implications from Beutel toward the two older men.
The movie, finally, has to be taken for the time in which it was made. The cinematography is as splendid as if it were turned 10 years ago. It is impossibly uneven, anecdotal, horrifyingly edited, pathetically scored, wretchedly acted...yet the actors are painful in their beauty. Many of the IMDb comments suggest that the film wants watching several times. I second that. It can be slow, cantankerous, giddy, sullen - but Jane's and Jack's beauty are undeniable, Walter is everybody's favorite grandfather. Toland can be thanked for giving us the movie's clarity. --And Howard... Howard was just having fun.
Lust in the dust.
michaelRokeefe16 November 2003
Highly anticipated. Hyped to the hilt. Howard Hawks directs with the aid of Howard Hughes. This western depicts the relationships between Billy the Kid(Jack Buetel),Doc Holliday(Walter Huston) and Sheriff Pat Garrett(Thomas Mitchell). Cowboys, Indians and gun play are not the main feature...the debut of Jane Russell is! This movie was filmed in 1941, but it took two years to pass the censors due to the shameless display of Russell's ample assets(36D). Aircraft pioneer Hughes actually designed the bra that helps showcase Russell. This is also Buetel's debut; but Huston is the one to prove his screen greatness. Probably the first sex western. Of course the fade outs leave a lot to the imagination. Worth the ballyhoo.
How fast was Billy?
beau geste 3824 February 2005
When I was 14 or 15, I sneaked into our local flea pit to watch this film. Billy the Kid was every kid's hero in those days. But the posters of Jane Russell was the main reason that I risked getting caught. She didn't let me down. Her first film, and it showed, but wow, she was a creature from another planet. I'd certainly seen nothing like her. Having been brought up on Johnny Mac Brown, the Durango kid, and the like, this film was, at the time, a revelation. My pals all wanted to know how fast Billy was. Did he shoot Doc Holliday? Did Pat Garrett shoot him in the back? All I wanted to do was describe Jane Russell.
I watched The Outlaw on TV this week, and was disappointed. Time had done it no favours. The background music, which I hadn't noticed the first time round, was truly dreadful (Tchaikovsky was it? mixed with cartoon type sounds) I still found myself admiring Russell, who for most red blooded males of my age has been a great inspiration. Like Shane, and others, I think this was a film of its time, and probably doesn't deserve to be judged by this generation, who are seeing it for the first time.
I watched The Outlaw on TV this week, and was disappointed. Time had done it no favours. The background music, which I hadn't noticed the first time round, was truly dreadful (Tchaikovsky was it? mixed with cartoon type sounds) I still found myself admiring Russell, who for most red blooded males of my age has been a great inspiration. Like Shane, and others, I think this was a film of its time, and probably doesn't deserve to be judged by this generation, who are seeing it for the first time.
Not good, but a sexy curio
fwmurnau30 July 2005
THE OUTLAW is wildly uneven and overall a failure. A couple of points: This film shows how much damage a bad musical score can do to a movie. This idiot composer thinks he's creating a new Tchaikovsky symphony (in fact he plagiarizes whole pages from some of Tchaikovsky's best-known works). The music is hyperactive, overbearing, overblown, and ludicrously inappropriate to this tough, unsentimental frontier story.
What does come across clearly is the powerful sex appeal of the two leads. Jane Russell, a former dental hygienist, supplies a sultry presence and bountiful bosoms in a pre-silicone era when such an endowment was really something special.
Less remarked-on is Jack Buetel, an insurance clerk who, unlike Russell, failed to become a star after this film. But no question he is one of the sexiest young men ever to appear in a Hollywood movie.
Some posters refer to THE OUTLAW's "homoerotic" qualities. I don't see anything like that in the story, but Buetel exudes such a powerful sensuality, he singlehandedly casts a homoerotic glow over the production.
Note: I just read Wikipedia's article on Buetel. It says Hawks wanted the young actor for RED RIVER, but Hughes wouldn't let him do it, so he cast Montgomery Clift instead:
"The film producer Cubby Broccoli who had worked with Hughes on The Outlaw, explained the reason that Buetel's career had been allowed to stagnate. He said that Hughes had coerced Buetel into a sexual relationship that began before filming started and which continued occasionally for the duration of Buetel's seven year contract. Broccoli explained that Buetel had refused to perform certain sexual acts and as a result had angered and frustrated Hughes, who was accustomed to aspiring actors and actresses being more compliant. The relationship was also described similarly by the author Lawrence Quirk, and by the assistant cameraman on The Outlaw, Lucien Ballard."
Wow, Scorsese should have used that to spice up THE AVIATOR, huh? LOL.
THE OUTLAW is no one's idea of a good movie, but it's worth checking out (even if you only see part of it)for Russell's auspicious, bodacious debut and moments, here and there, when the story actually works.
What does come across clearly is the powerful sex appeal of the two leads. Jane Russell, a former dental hygienist, supplies a sultry presence and bountiful bosoms in a pre-silicone era when such an endowment was really something special.
Less remarked-on is Jack Buetel, an insurance clerk who, unlike Russell, failed to become a star after this film. But no question he is one of the sexiest young men ever to appear in a Hollywood movie.
Some posters refer to THE OUTLAW's "homoerotic" qualities. I don't see anything like that in the story, but Buetel exudes such a powerful sensuality, he singlehandedly casts a homoerotic glow over the production.
Note: I just read Wikipedia's article on Buetel. It says Hawks wanted the young actor for RED RIVER, but Hughes wouldn't let him do it, so he cast Montgomery Clift instead:
"The film producer Cubby Broccoli who had worked with Hughes on The Outlaw, explained the reason that Buetel's career had been allowed to stagnate. He said that Hughes had coerced Buetel into a sexual relationship that began before filming started and which continued occasionally for the duration of Buetel's seven year contract. Broccoli explained that Buetel had refused to perform certain sexual acts and as a result had angered and frustrated Hughes, who was accustomed to aspiring actors and actresses being more compliant. The relationship was also described similarly by the author Lawrence Quirk, and by the assistant cameraman on The Outlaw, Lucien Ballard."
Wow, Scorsese should have used that to spice up THE AVIATOR, huh? LOL.
THE OUTLAW is no one's idea of a good movie, but it's worth checking out (even if you only see part of it)for Russell's auspicious, bodacious debut and moments, here and there, when the story actually works.
B-Western Deluxe
FightingWesterner23 October 2009
The Outlaw tells the story of Billy the kid's supposed friendship (and arguments) with Doc Holliday, his battles with weaselly Pat Garrett, and his romantic entanglement with a big-chested girl who nurses him back to health after being gut-shot by the dastardly sheriff.
A once scandalous adult western, this is decidedly less scandalous by today's standards. It's notoriety simultaneously launched Jane Russell's career as a sex symbol and hurt her career as an actress.
The overblown hype surrounding Jane's breasts, the film's reputation for being a vanity project for billionaire Howard Hughes, and the high expectations attached to anything directed by Howard Hawks weighs heavily on ones enjoyment of The Outlaw, but this is essentially just a long 1940's style B-western.When viewed through that prism it's fairly decent, if unspectacular entertainment with good performances by the stars. However, I would venture to say that it would have been better if it weren't two hours long.
A once scandalous adult western, this is decidedly less scandalous by today's standards. It's notoriety simultaneously launched Jane Russell's career as a sex symbol and hurt her career as an actress.
The overblown hype surrounding Jane's breasts, the film's reputation for being a vanity project for billionaire Howard Hughes, and the high expectations attached to anything directed by Howard Hawks weighs heavily on ones enjoyment of The Outlaw, but this is essentially just a long 1940's style B-western.When viewed through that prism it's fairly decent, if unspectacular entertainment with good performances by the stars. However, I would venture to say that it would have been better if it weren't two hours long.
Breasts
Ben_Cheshire13 March 2004
I would have preferred if there was no plot at all - Jane Russell is gorgeous, and Howard Hughes' meticulous efforts to emphasise her considerable bust make her quite a thing to look at. I would have preferred to see less of Pat Garrett and Doc Holliday, and more of Jane Russell. Even in the circumcised 95 min version i saw, there are shots of her cleavage, very rare for a 1943 film. There are other aspects of the movie which make it racy even by today's standards: one scene which made it to the most censored version involves something we don't see again till 1970 (Altman's MASH), far as i know. A man is sick, Russell is told he may die, she starts undressing, tells the maid to leave the room and tells the sick man: "I'll warm you up."
At times like this, there is a total fadeout to black and the music cuts out - something which never happens elsewhere in the movie. Its not hard to pick where bits have been cut out. I'd love to see the full version, available on the Criterion DVD. Plus, the transfer on the cheapie DVD i've got is not good, and Criterion always do a great transfer.
The sex caused the production enough trouble, however - getting it banned in several countries, and neutered in the US. Still, there are enough scenes of Russell looking gorgeous here to recommend it to you for that alone (best bits: Russell standing in front of a mirror, riding a horse, wearing that green shirt, getting wet... you get the idea). The shot of Russell in The Outlaw's photo gallery gives you an idea of the sultry sexuality Russell had. That's a publicity still, though, so she looks slighty more natural in the movie. The western-adventure plot is impoverished and eventually turns into a love triangle with Russell, which i would have recommended to Hughes instead of trying a straight western adventure. He clearly cared most about women and aviation, and since this movie involved no planes, he needed plenty of sex to keep him interested. Hughes's frame only comes alive when Russell is on screen. Luckily, she comes on screen quite often. Still, it never seems like enough. The only interest the other characters (none other than Pat Garrett, Billy the Kid and Doc Holliday) serve is watching how often their eyes stray to Russell's bust when they're in a scene with her.
Unexpectedly comic moment: in a shootout, one man refuses to draw, so the other shoots a big hole in his hand and out of his ears and he doesn't even react, as if he didn't feel it. I don't care how tough you are, you're gonna feel pain if you lose half an ear to a bullet.
At times like this, there is a total fadeout to black and the music cuts out - something which never happens elsewhere in the movie. Its not hard to pick where bits have been cut out. I'd love to see the full version, available on the Criterion DVD. Plus, the transfer on the cheapie DVD i've got is not good, and Criterion always do a great transfer.
The sex caused the production enough trouble, however - getting it banned in several countries, and neutered in the US. Still, there are enough scenes of Russell looking gorgeous here to recommend it to you for that alone (best bits: Russell standing in front of a mirror, riding a horse, wearing that green shirt, getting wet... you get the idea). The shot of Russell in The Outlaw's photo gallery gives you an idea of the sultry sexuality Russell had. That's a publicity still, though, so she looks slighty more natural in the movie. The western-adventure plot is impoverished and eventually turns into a love triangle with Russell, which i would have recommended to Hughes instead of trying a straight western adventure. He clearly cared most about women and aviation, and since this movie involved no planes, he needed plenty of sex to keep him interested. Hughes's frame only comes alive when Russell is on screen. Luckily, she comes on screen quite often. Still, it never seems like enough. The only interest the other characters (none other than Pat Garrett, Billy the Kid and Doc Holliday) serve is watching how often their eyes stray to Russell's bust when they're in a scene with her.
Unexpectedly comic moment: in a shootout, one man refuses to draw, so the other shoots a big hole in his hand and out of his ears and he doesn't even react, as if he didn't feel it. I don't care how tough you are, you're gonna feel pain if you lose half an ear to a bullet.
" Take a slice of Western History and put it into a blender, . . The Outlaw "
thinker169117 May 2011
Stories of the old West abound and Hollywood is no stranger to putting them onto the silver screen. However, tinsel town is not very careful when it comes to historical accuracy. Take this film for instance, the original script was written by Jules Furthman, for a special project directed by none other than Howard Hughes. The movie is called " The Outlaw " and is supposedly one of a few the late Hughes touted as his best. However, playing fast and loose with history is sure to cause historians to scratch their heads. In this fanciful tale, audiences are treated to a make believe story wherein we have two western legends 'Billy the Kid' aka, William Bonny (Jack Beutel) and 'Doc Holiday' aka, John Henry Holiday (Walter Huston) arriving in Lincoln, New Mexico and becoming fast friends. Unlikely as that is, we are also treated to Sheriff Pat Garrett (Thomas Mitchell) who comes to dislike both men. Not because they are outlaws, but because they form a closer bond which many suggest boarders on the suspicious. Jane Russell is the Buxom bombshell Rio McDonald, who was the surprising sex-sensation and X-rated Eye-candy of the 1940s. The actors are likable enough and carry the fictional story along to it's rather slow, almost torturous ending. The motion picture has its ardent proponents, which equal it's cinematic detractors. However, the special reason why this film is sought after is due to its depiction of Jan Russell in a 'super' bra (Which she never wore). Indeed, I watched the movie with anticipation and realized in the year 2010 we have a whole plethora of "Full-Figure' want-to-be's who've revealed more than Russell ever did. I believe that were it not for the trashing of western myths, this movie might rank as a Classic, but as it is, many would warn its director to stick to airplanes. ****
Famed and notorious western specially known for the busty beauty Jane Russell
ma-cortes5 January 2006
This famous western deals with the most noted gunslinger of the southwest , William Bonney , a juvenile tough, a teenager wanted dead or alive throughout the west . This is a fiction story of the strange teen-age desperado known to legend as Billy the Kid . Billy was said to be sympathetic , attractive and favourite with girls , these characteristics well represented by the protagonist (Jack Buetel) . He'll confront Sheriff Pat Garret (Thomas Mitchell) and Doc Holliday (Walter Huston) and falls in love for a wonderful girl (Jane Russell) . The film isn't based on real events , it's a fiction story by the prestigious screenwriter Jules Furthman with ironic dialogs and a plot with little sense. Thus , here don't appear Tunstall , Chisum , nor others roles , neither deeds (Lincoln county war or getaway from gaol) of the Billy Kid's life that have been treated in other pictures . Exception for historical character Pat Garret who has an important role , while actually Doc Holliday nothing to do with Billy . The picture is produced by RKO (Radio Pictures Inc) and Howard Hughes who at the time was Jane Russell's lover . Howard Hawks began the filming in 1941 and he shot scenes with the cameraman Lucien Ballard but had complications with Hughes and he took the direction hiring the excellent photographer Gregg Toland (Citizen Kane) . However , the censorship made him to modify numerous shots takes . At last, after three years delay , public saw a daring production exactly as it was filmed , with no a scene cut . It would become a mythical film as an erotic Western . That's why Jane Russell , as she appears moody , mean, magnificent and terrific , too startling to describe , Russell was an authentic sensation by the time , she keeps her better attributes on the bosom. Today all the fuss seem totally wrongly . The film has real sensations , thrills , pursuits , go riding , primitive love , action , but it results to be a bit boring .
In Response To Those Knockers...
Prof_Lostiswitz1 March 2004
...who think this movie isn't worth the time of day, I want to assert that it rises to an eminence that makes it the best western of the 1940's. Once you make an effort to penetrate the rough exterior and get the feel of it, you will agree that it is an unforgettable summit of achievement by all involved.
In particular, there are two prominent points that engage my attention. One of these is the complexity of the interaction between the four principal characters. They are forever brooding over the most murderous resentments, then turning around and forming alliances, often amorous. This continual shifting of balance is what drives The Haunting (1963), and is what gives this movie its peculiar interest. Most westerns from that era have good guys versus bad guys, very boring; here we actually get something to think about. The characters are clearly defined individuals, and they behave with consistency.
The other point is the musical soundtrack - it is the worst, I mean the very worst, in any movie. Tchaikovsky has never been so foully misused. Doubtless this was due to Howard Hughes' lack of taste, but the guy deserves some thanks for funding a movie no-one else would have touched back then. If the movie is ever re-released on DVD, there should be the option of squelching the music.
Critics who knock the movie draw particular attention to the wooden acting of Jane Russell, but it seems just right for her part - smouldering with resentment and desire, but all of it suppressed by her need to fulfil her social role.
So ignore the sniping from the boobs elsewhere at this site, and give The Outlaw a chance to capture you!
In particular, there are two prominent points that engage my attention. One of these is the complexity of the interaction between the four principal characters. They are forever brooding over the most murderous resentments, then turning around and forming alliances, often amorous. This continual shifting of balance is what drives The Haunting (1963), and is what gives this movie its peculiar interest. Most westerns from that era have good guys versus bad guys, very boring; here we actually get something to think about. The characters are clearly defined individuals, and they behave with consistency.
The other point is the musical soundtrack - it is the worst, I mean the very worst, in any movie. Tchaikovsky has never been so foully misused. Doubtless this was due to Howard Hughes' lack of taste, but the guy deserves some thanks for funding a movie no-one else would have touched back then. If the movie is ever re-released on DVD, there should be the option of squelching the music.
Critics who knock the movie draw particular attention to the wooden acting of Jane Russell, but it seems just right for her part - smouldering with resentment and desire, but all of it suppressed by her need to fulfil her social role.
So ignore the sniping from the boobs elsewhere at this site, and give The Outlaw a chance to capture you!
"A Sale of Two Titties"
Bored_Dragon17 December 2019
Howard Hughes' controversial Western is the film debut of Jane Russell, the girl who got the role after Howard's thorough pursuit of an actress as busty as possible. As much as it is Western, it is also a "sexploitation movie", even advertised with the slogan: "What are the two great reasons for Jane Russell's rise to stardom?" In addition to taking every opportunity to highlight Jane Russell's lush breasts, the film also contains a scene between her and Billy the Kid bordering on rape. The consequences of this approach were censorship and court proceedings, but also a large audience response. I too was attracted by advertising and I watched it solely because of the controversy it caused, but I have to say that I was not disappointed with the movie itself. The story is interesting and departs from the standard Western pattern, showing us the fictitious relationships of Pat Garrett, Doc Holliday and Billy the Kid in a way you will not encounter elsewhere and with a quite good characterization. It is far from a masterpiece of cinema, but I really did not have any major objections and I warmly recommend it.
7/10
7/10
Take Out Jane Russell And You're Left With A Crap Movie
Theo Robertson24 February 2005
OMG has there been a movie icon hotter than Jane Russell in THE OUTLAW ? I don't think so either . Her smouldering sexuality is the yardstick in which to judge all woman on Earth and the likes of Monroe are second best when compared to this definitive sex goddess . And to think some people describe the likes of Jay-Lo or Abi Titmuss as the most beautiful woman who has ever lived
Unfortunately Ms Russell is the only thing THE OUTLAW is remembered for , which is by no means a bad thing since this is an absolutely terrible movie . From the opening scene featuring a sheriff who gives a performance that resembles a circus clown giving a portrayal of a homo-erotic wet dream to the final credits this movie is an ordeal to sit through . It's badly directed with tons of very poor acting and ridiculous back projection and is so factually incorrect as to be laughable . Did I say it was laughable ? Maybe that's why the musical score has a comedy soundtrack complete with a WAH WAH WAH WAH sound that belongs in a three stooges feature ?
I would have happily given THE OUTLAW one out of ten but because of the presence of Russell we're treated to something of a movie landmark - We're treated to on screen sex . Billy The Kid ravishes Rio Mcdonald in a hay loft 30 years before Clint Eastwood did an identical scene in HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER and in a later scene Rio asks Billy if he'll look at her while he does it , and the audience is left in no doubt what " It " is . Boy this must have caused people to drop dead in their seats on its initial release .
Despite the controversy it's still an awful movie though
Unfortunately Ms Russell is the only thing THE OUTLAW is remembered for , which is by no means a bad thing since this is an absolutely terrible movie . From the opening scene featuring a sheriff who gives a performance that resembles a circus clown giving a portrayal of a homo-erotic wet dream to the final credits this movie is an ordeal to sit through . It's badly directed with tons of very poor acting and ridiculous back projection and is so factually incorrect as to be laughable . Did I say it was laughable ? Maybe that's why the musical score has a comedy soundtrack complete with a WAH WAH WAH WAH sound that belongs in a three stooges feature ?
I would have happily given THE OUTLAW one out of ten but because of the presence of Russell we're treated to something of a movie landmark - We're treated to on screen sex . Billy The Kid ravishes Rio Mcdonald in a hay loft 30 years before Clint Eastwood did an identical scene in HIGH PLAINS DRIFTER and in a later scene Rio asks Billy if he'll look at her while he does it , and the audience is left in no doubt what " It " is . Boy this must have caused people to drop dead in their seats on its initial release .
Despite the controversy it's still an awful movie though
Awful beyond belief and, therefore, fun.
Rockster-222 January 2001
There are films that are great, films that are not so great, films that are bad...and then there are films that are so bad, so grandly misconceived, one can only gape in wonder or roar with laughter (or both) at their foolishness. Thus an awful film can sometimes provide more entertainment than many good films. (THE DEVIL BAT, starring Bela Lugosi, comes to mind.) Watched THE OUTLAW on DVD the other night with some friends, and we were falling off the couch. I'd always heard there was a homoerotic subtext to the picture, but this was no subtext -- gay porn must be more subtle than this film! Walter Huston's Doc Holliday (or Halliday -- I've seen it spelled both ways in regard to this picture) is CLEARLY the stud, Billy is a petulant young hustler who piques his interest (despite his having stolen the older man's cherished horse!), and Thomas Mitchell's Pat Garrett (Doc's "oldest
friend") seethes with jealousy throughout until he degenerates into the very apotheosis of a passed over, frantic, shrieking old queen. "You're not going with him! Everything was fine between us till he came along!" It has to be seen to be believed. Hilarious! The film's musical score is the worst -- THE WORST -- I've ever heard. There's less Mickey-Mousing in a Three Stooges short. So I recommend this one highly for parties. I guarantee a laugh riot. The thought of the great cinemotagrapher Gregg Toland (CITIZEN KANE) laboring on such camp trash is depressing, but he did give the film a fine look.
friend") seethes with jealousy throughout until he degenerates into the very apotheosis of a passed over, frantic, shrieking old queen. "You're not going with him! Everything was fine between us till he came along!" It has to be seen to be believed. Hilarious! The film's musical score is the worst -- THE WORST -- I've ever heard. There's less Mickey-Mousing in a Three Stooges short. So I recommend this one highly for parties. I guarantee a laugh riot. The thought of the great cinemotagrapher Gregg Toland (CITIZEN KANE) laboring on such camp trash is depressing, but he did give the film a fine look.
It's a gay story folks
bkoganbing8 April 2004
Jane Russell and her bosoms got most of the publicity from this film and fortunately for her she got into other better pictures and had a career. The same could not be said for Mr. Beutel.
But Jane and her cleavage is superfluous to the story. This is about two middle-aged gay men, Walter Huston and Thomas Mitchell, jealous over the young hunk. It's the only way the plot makes any sense.
In Jane Russell's memoirs she recounts the difference in attitude of Thomas Mitchell and Walter Huston. Mitchell was moaning and groaning about how horrible the film was, why did he ever sign for it, the film would be his ruin, etc. etc.
In contrast Walter Huston's attitude was I've taken Howard Hughes's money I'll say whatever kind of drivel he wants before the camera and laugh about it later.
Also, I love Tchaikovsky themes, but I really think Howard Hughes should have hired Dimitri Tiomkin whose music really added something to a lot of great westerns to do an original score. Tchaikovsky was frighteningly out of place here.
The Outlaw has to be seen to be believed.
But Jane and her cleavage is superfluous to the story. This is about two middle-aged gay men, Walter Huston and Thomas Mitchell, jealous over the young hunk. It's the only way the plot makes any sense.
In Jane Russell's memoirs she recounts the difference in attitude of Thomas Mitchell and Walter Huston. Mitchell was moaning and groaning about how horrible the film was, why did he ever sign for it, the film would be his ruin, etc. etc.
In contrast Walter Huston's attitude was I've taken Howard Hughes's money I'll say whatever kind of drivel he wants before the camera and laugh about it later.
Also, I love Tchaikovsky themes, but I really think Howard Hughes should have hired Dimitri Tiomkin whose music really added something to a lot of great westerns to do an original score. Tchaikovsky was frighteningly out of place here.
The Outlaw has to be seen to be believed.
A Western Oddity
mpofarrell5 June 2002
A notorious sensation when it first opened in 1943 , reclusive billionaire Howard Hughes' western THE OUTLAW is noted today as the vehicle that launched the movie career of Jane Russell, whose sporadic film vocation was capped by modeling the "Cross Your Heart " bra on television and in print adds. The temptation to knock this production is tempting because so many great artists were involved at the behest of the wealthiest rank amateur of all time. Not satisfied with original director Howard Hawks' vision, Hughes fired the esteemed film maker and took over the directorial reigns (and in the process compromising the artistic quality of the film by being distracted by production red tape.) What emerged on the screen is a "what might have been" variation of The Billy the Kid legend, and in spite of pedestrian direction a fine cast makes the proceedings bearable. Walter Huston and Thomas Mitchell do their very best but are at the mercy of Hughes' guiding hand, where it seems as though each actor is just a few seconds behind a beat in responding to the other. Jack Beutel, a handsome newcomer playing Billy, has a smoldering presence that seems to be a harbinger of Brando and Dean, but he is thwarted by a lack of focus thanks to Mr. Hughes. As for the love scenes, they have an undeniable fascination and one can imagine this was "hot stuff" for the 1940s! Taken for what it is , this western is at best a curiosity, peopled with some of Hollywood's most remarkable talent . Cinematographer Gregg Toland gives the picture a great look in black and white and Hughes penchant for using classical music ( Tchaikovsky's Adagio from his 6th Symphony graces the opening credits and Russell's steamy love scene!) gives this somnolent oater a touch of class.
Walter Houston and Thomas Mitchell's embarrassment
denscul6 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Recently saw this film on TCM, and it seemed worse than ever. I first saw this film when the top of a woman's breasts were enough to get boys to spend a quarter to see a cowboy movie. Boy, were we disappointed. This was not a "cowboy" movie of the genre that we were accustomed to seeing. We couldn't figure out who was the good guy, and who was the bad guy. Even at our tender ages, we deemed the "action scenes" as decidedly corny. I didn't know who Howard Hughes was at the time, and now that I do, I think he should have kept to designing airplanes.
Its a shame that two academy award winning actors used up their time and talent on such a terrible movie. I would only recommend seeing this film, to see how bad it is. The only memorable item about this movie centered around breasts and bras, and today seems like a tempest in a tea pot.
Its a shame that two academy award winning actors used up their time and talent on such a terrible movie. I would only recommend seeing this film, to see how bad it is. The only memorable item about this movie centered around breasts and bras, and today seems like a tempest in a tea pot.
Naive Version of the Legend of Billy the Kid
claudio_carvalho22 August 2005
In the Nineteenth Century, in the town of Lincoln, New Mexico, the sheriff Pat Garrett (Thomas Mitchell) welcomes his old friend, Doc Holliday (Walter Huston), who has had his horse Red stolen by a stranger while coming to the town. They meet the thieve and realize that the guy is the gunman Billy the Kid (Jack Beutel). Doc becomes friend of Billy, but Pat invites them to leave Lincoln in the afternoon. There is an incident, Pat wounds Billy the Kid, and Doc asks his girlfriend Rio McDonald (Jane Russell) to take care of Billy while he would misguide Pat Garret t and his officers. There is a romance between Billy the Kid and Rio, and when the hit-man is healed, he disputes with Doc the possession of Red and Rio, with Pat Garrett chasing them. On 13 July 1881, this hunting ends in a tragic way.
After watching "The Aviator", I was very curious to see "The Outlaw", mainly because of the problems of Howard Hughes with the censorship mentioned in Martin Scorcese's film. It is amazing to see on the present days how a simple décolleté could provoke such a reaction in 1943. Further, presently "The Outlaw" is a very silly western, showing a naive version of the legend of Billy the Kid. The repetitive soundtrack along many dialogs is very boring, and in the presents days this movie could be a parody of westerns movies. It is worthwhile as an entertainment and to satisfy the curiosity rose in "The Aviator" about this polemic work of Howard Hughes. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "O Proscrito" ("The Outlaw")
After watching "The Aviator", I was very curious to see "The Outlaw", mainly because of the problems of Howard Hughes with the censorship mentioned in Martin Scorcese's film. It is amazing to see on the present days how a simple décolleté could provoke such a reaction in 1943. Further, presently "The Outlaw" is a very silly western, showing a naive version of the legend of Billy the Kid. The repetitive soundtrack along many dialogs is very boring, and in the presents days this movie could be a parody of westerns movies. It is worthwhile as an entertainment and to satisfy the curiosity rose in "The Aviator" about this polemic work of Howard Hughes. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "O Proscrito" ("The Outlaw")
Dreadful
Caz19646 November 2005
I bought this film recently for my husband,as he is a big Jane Russell fan,i thought id give it a look.I must admit she was a very beautiful woman i can understand why men loved her,but in this film she is totally wasted,Howard Hughes has cast her like a real bimbo,unlike her later parts as the tough intelligent,wise talking,calamity Jane in the Bob hope films,for these roles she should be best remembered.The whole time i was watching this film i couldn't wait for it to end,it seemed to drag on not making any point at all,the story had a very weak plot and was really over dramatised,especially with the music,which would have been very suitable for a romantic silent film.Everything about this film was wrong,the acting ,the script,music score,you name it.The only reason I'm giving this film 2 out of 10 is because i feel very sorry for Jane to be starring in this very chauvinist mess.
Takes the Young Guns 2 viewpoint
PatrynXX11 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Yeah it's a editors ,mess. Shots aiming into space way longer than needed. But Still a fun western. too much up close shots though during the horse running.
I say the Young Guns 2 approach as anyone knows Pat shoots and kills Billy except that isn't the case on Young Guns 2. Whether the crazy old mutt was telling the truth is blah. But Legends are created this way
Quality : 4/10 Entertainment: 7/10 Re--Playable : 5/10
I say the Young Guns 2 approach as anyone knows Pat shoots and kills Billy except that isn't the case on Young Guns 2. Whether the crazy old mutt was telling the truth is blah. But Legends are created this way
Quality : 4/10 Entertainment: 7/10 Re--Playable : 5/10
You would think then that the movie would be centered around Russell, but no, Hughes apparently (and unfortunately) attempted a legit Western.
eddax27 May 2009
The Outlaw is infamous for it being Howard Hughes' tribute to his discovery, Jane Russell, and her voluptuous breasts. You would think then that the movie would be centered around Russell, but no, Hughes apparently (and unfortunately) attempted a legit Western.
The movie tells the story of Billy the Kid and his numerous encounters with Doc Holliday and Pat Garrett, as well as his romance with Russell. The Outlaw runs a painfully long two hours and I don't remember much of the plot except that it had a lot to do with honor, a horse, and shooting or not shooting each other.
Jack Buetel, as Billy the Kid, was an attractive male counterpart to Jane Russell but both were new actors and could barely do more than smoulder, though smoulder well they did. Walter Huston did such an admirable job as Doc Holliday that it felt like his talents was wasted on this B movie.
The movie tells the story of Billy the Kid and his numerous encounters with Doc Holliday and Pat Garrett, as well as his romance with Russell. The Outlaw runs a painfully long two hours and I don't remember much of the plot except that it had a lot to do with honor, a horse, and shooting or not shooting each other.
Jack Buetel, as Billy the Kid, was an attractive male counterpart to Jane Russell but both were new actors and could barely do more than smoulder, though smoulder well they did. Walter Huston did such an admirable job as Doc Holliday that it felt like his talents was wasted on this B movie.
Nursing the Outlaw
wes-connors8 August 2007
Jane Russell nurses Jack Buetel back to health - but, that's not all.
I've watched the film three times. The first time, I resisted. I watched with amazement this movie has an incredible "look". I suppose it's a film made in the '40s, seen mostly in the '50s, looking very much like an early '30s "talkie" - but, ACTED IN SLOW MOTION! I wanted to dislike the film, but I really could not. I loved the saloon - reading the visible graffiti on the walls, never knowing who was going to shoot who, when, why...
When Mr. Buetel and Ms. Russell tumble in the hay, I recognized the scene from a dozen subsequent westerns; yet, it seemed suspenseful the way Mr. Hughes shot it here. I could not really state there is a rape (others may); and, I think, later scenes imply there was no rape. I believe the scene simply ended with her shirt torn.
There certainly is a lot of ambiguity! I agree there are some lines between the male actors which could be taken sexually. I caught those upon viewing the film during a second sitting. Early on, Mr. Huston wonders if Mr. Buetel might want to bunk with him if he doesn't "have a girl". BUT, Huston has Russell already lined up. There is also the age old question of whether the western hero needs his horse, or his girl, more. Of course, the western hero picks his horse! I believe these ambiguities add to the enjoyment of the film. They are additional things to think about during repeated viewing. During my second viewing, I just enjoyed the movie more it's just so unusually interesting. With all "classic" films, I think about different meanings, and things going on this movie has the ability to grow stronger thematically with repeated viewings. That's something I look for when rating a movie highly. A movie can take on a life of its own.
I love the performances Mr. Mitchell and Huston are older, more experienced actors while Buetel and Russell are younger. They all work well together. I especially enjoy "Billy" and "Rio" as she nurses him to health. The most recent viewing (today) had me wondering about how the peculiar "look" of this film was achieved. It's very claustrophobic, but has some "location" stuff. I watched those scenes more carefully. I watched Mr. Buetel's guns during his "exchange" near the end. I noticed Ms. Russell's attire became more alluring with each scene.
I noticed the tombstone closing: "HERE LIES " The tombstone is a "LIE". Could this play on words have been intended? This is a film I would call "chance art." I have no idea what effect the filmmakers were looking for - was it just intended as a showcase for Jane Russell's attributes? That was achieved. All the rest is icing. I submit that "The Outlaw" creates a unique and entertaining "world" of its own. The four main performers are riveting. I think "The Outlaw" is a world worth repeated revisiting.
Next, I need to keep my eyes on Billy the Kid's ears, and see when the blood drops appear on his shirt.
********** The Outlaw (2/5/43) Howard Hughes ~ Jack Buetel, Jane Russell, Walter Huston, Thomas Mitchell
I've watched the film three times. The first time, I resisted. I watched with amazement this movie has an incredible "look". I suppose it's a film made in the '40s, seen mostly in the '50s, looking very much like an early '30s "talkie" - but, ACTED IN SLOW MOTION! I wanted to dislike the film, but I really could not. I loved the saloon - reading the visible graffiti on the walls, never knowing who was going to shoot who, when, why...
When Mr. Buetel and Ms. Russell tumble in the hay, I recognized the scene from a dozen subsequent westerns; yet, it seemed suspenseful the way Mr. Hughes shot it here. I could not really state there is a rape (others may); and, I think, later scenes imply there was no rape. I believe the scene simply ended with her shirt torn.
There certainly is a lot of ambiguity! I agree there are some lines between the male actors which could be taken sexually. I caught those upon viewing the film during a second sitting. Early on, Mr. Huston wonders if Mr. Buetel might want to bunk with him if he doesn't "have a girl". BUT, Huston has Russell already lined up. There is also the age old question of whether the western hero needs his horse, or his girl, more. Of course, the western hero picks his horse! I believe these ambiguities add to the enjoyment of the film. They are additional things to think about during repeated viewing. During my second viewing, I just enjoyed the movie more it's just so unusually interesting. With all "classic" films, I think about different meanings, and things going on this movie has the ability to grow stronger thematically with repeated viewings. That's something I look for when rating a movie highly. A movie can take on a life of its own.
I love the performances Mr. Mitchell and Huston are older, more experienced actors while Buetel and Russell are younger. They all work well together. I especially enjoy "Billy" and "Rio" as she nurses him to health. The most recent viewing (today) had me wondering about how the peculiar "look" of this film was achieved. It's very claustrophobic, but has some "location" stuff. I watched those scenes more carefully. I watched Mr. Buetel's guns during his "exchange" near the end. I noticed Ms. Russell's attire became more alluring with each scene.
I noticed the tombstone closing: "HERE LIES " The tombstone is a "LIE". Could this play on words have been intended? This is a film I would call "chance art." I have no idea what effect the filmmakers were looking for - was it just intended as a showcase for Jane Russell's attributes? That was achieved. All the rest is icing. I submit that "The Outlaw" creates a unique and entertaining "world" of its own. The four main performers are riveting. I think "The Outlaw" is a world worth repeated revisiting.
Next, I need to keep my eyes on Billy the Kid's ears, and see when the blood drops appear on his shirt.
********** The Outlaw (2/5/43) Howard Hughes ~ Jack Buetel, Jane Russell, Walter Huston, Thomas Mitchell
The Outsider
michaelarmer26 March 2023
This was a pretty good western for its time, Its not historically accurate, and not too serious, and I suppose a bit daft in parts, but its still a pretty good film.
Jack Buetel was excellent in the lead role, but Walter Huston was the class act as Doc Hollday, Thomas Mitchell was ok as Pat Garrett, if not a bit wooden, despite his rating as an actor he was a long way off Buetel and Huston. But the lame duck was Jane Russell, she was a combination of a "rabbit caught in the headlights" and "without a clue" , she was supposed to be one of Hollywood's top beauties and female stars, but she did not look that great to me (although she had a lovely pair of knockers) and her acting was well off, so I am unsure what all the fuss was about, however this was her first film and she was only 20 years old when making it, so a bit of a learning curve.
The film was made by Howard Hughes and Howard Hawks, a legendary combination, and despite its lack of accuracy and odd style, they still manage to pull of a good film, the combination of Buetel and Huston with the direction seemed to do the trick.
I see the average rating on here is 5.4 stars at the time I wrote this, I don't know why, maybe other raters did not get that the film was not made to be accurate, nor taken too seriously, I reckon it was about 7 stars, and despite my criticism it was interesting to see Jane Russell, although she failed to live up to expectation. And it was a pity that Jack Buetel was prevented from making more films by Howard Hughes, he could have been a Hollywood great. When he eventually got out of Howard Hughes grip, his rising star had fallen. Shame
All in all it was a good movie for a Sunday afternoon.
Jack Buetel was excellent in the lead role, but Walter Huston was the class act as Doc Hollday, Thomas Mitchell was ok as Pat Garrett, if not a bit wooden, despite his rating as an actor he was a long way off Buetel and Huston. But the lame duck was Jane Russell, she was a combination of a "rabbit caught in the headlights" and "without a clue" , she was supposed to be one of Hollywood's top beauties and female stars, but she did not look that great to me (although she had a lovely pair of knockers) and her acting was well off, so I am unsure what all the fuss was about, however this was her first film and she was only 20 years old when making it, so a bit of a learning curve.
The film was made by Howard Hughes and Howard Hawks, a legendary combination, and despite its lack of accuracy and odd style, they still manage to pull of a good film, the combination of Buetel and Huston with the direction seemed to do the trick.
I see the average rating on here is 5.4 stars at the time I wrote this, I don't know why, maybe other raters did not get that the film was not made to be accurate, nor taken too seriously, I reckon it was about 7 stars, and despite my criticism it was interesting to see Jane Russell, although she failed to live up to expectation. And it was a pity that Jack Buetel was prevented from making more films by Howard Hughes, he could have been a Hollywood great. When he eventually got out of Howard Hughes grip, his rising star had fallen. Shame
All in all it was a good movie for a Sunday afternoon.
"He can charm a bird right out of a bush."
classicsoncall8 February 2008
Warning: Spoilers
What boggles my mind is why Howard Hughes would even attempt this garbled retelling of the story of three legendary Western figures. With Hughes' generally obsessive attention to detail in his aeronautical career, you would think that at least some integrity would be maintained with names and dates for historical accuracy, but nothing about the film makes any kind of sense at all. Only Jack Beutel as Billy the Kid comes close to matching his character's age at the time of events in the story. In 1881, Pat Garrett would have been thirty one years old, but Thomas Mitchell was fifty one when the movie was made. An even greater disparity exists with Walter Huston's Doc Holliday; at fifty nine, Huston was almost twice his character's age of thirty. And with all that, the grave marker showing Billy the Kid's 'death' on July 13, 1881 (he actually died on the 14th, but that was Doc Holliday in the grave), how would one explain Doc's resurrection to take part in the Gunfight at OK Corral (10/26/1881)? In all, just a complete mess regarding history.
What's not a mess is Jane Russell's film debut as Rio McDonald, Doc's girlfriend turned Billy's lover. Oh baby, how hot was she? At nineteen, it's a toss up as to who had the more sizzling screen presence, Russell here or Lauren Bacall in her first picture, "To Have and Have Not". I'm willing to call it a tie. But there again, Hughes had to go for that over the top close up of Russell's lips about to kiss Billy, it almost demands a laugh out loud reaction. And how about all those goofy Warner Brothers type cartoon music moments; didn't ANYONE have a clue that they didn't fit with the story?
You know, I'm usually the first to dismiss reactions to a film dealing with alleged homo erotic subtexts, but I have to agree with other reviewers on this board regarding the relationship between Doc and Pat Garrett. There's that conversation between the two just before Garrett takes out Holliday that's just mind blowing in it's suggestion. Just another element that digresses the entire story into never-never land.
I think what might have given this picture half a chance would have been to keep the famous gunslinger names completely out of it. Then at least you could have made a case for a somewhat offbeat Western. Still, I don't care how you might attempt to rationalize it, there's no way anyone in his right mind would take a strawberry roan in trade for Jane Russell.
What's not a mess is Jane Russell's film debut as Rio McDonald, Doc's girlfriend turned Billy's lover. Oh baby, how hot was she? At nineteen, it's a toss up as to who had the more sizzling screen presence, Russell here or Lauren Bacall in her first picture, "To Have and Have Not". I'm willing to call it a tie. But there again, Hughes had to go for that over the top close up of Russell's lips about to kiss Billy, it almost demands a laugh out loud reaction. And how about all those goofy Warner Brothers type cartoon music moments; didn't ANYONE have a clue that they didn't fit with the story?
You know, I'm usually the first to dismiss reactions to a film dealing with alleged homo erotic subtexts, but I have to agree with other reviewers on this board regarding the relationship between Doc and Pat Garrett. There's that conversation between the two just before Garrett takes out Holliday that's just mind blowing in it's suggestion. Just another element that digresses the entire story into never-never land.
I think what might have given this picture half a chance would have been to keep the famous gunslinger names completely out of it. Then at least you could have made a case for a somewhat offbeat Western. Still, I don't care how you might attempt to rationalize it, there's no way anyone in his right mind would take a strawberry roan in trade for Jane Russell.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
