Hostile Guns

The name A.C. Lyles doesn't exactly ring a bell with famous western directors/producers. He's no John Ford, no Budd Boetticher, no Sergio Leone. Why no notoriety? Short answer? He didn't produce any classics, maybe not even any just old fashioned, good flicks. I caught 1967's Hostile Guns on a recent airing on a movie channel -- a Lyles production -- and let's just say it's.....well....not so good.

Readying to transport prisoners to the Huntsville Prison, Marshall Gid McCool (George Montgomery) is struggling to find a deputy willing to travel with him. No one is willing to take on the dangerous job -- even if it pays well -- until McCool meets Mike Reno (Tab Hunter), a young, fiery cowboy thrown into a jail cell for starting a fight in the town's saloon. With the promise of $50 for his services, Reno agrees, signing on as a deputy and immediately slugs it out with the prisoner they're transporting, a convicted murderer, Hank Pleasant (Leo Gordon), who intends to make the trip just as difficult as possible. With a specially outfitted wagon, McCool and Reno head out on the trail, picking up prisoners as they go at different stops on the way to Huntsville, including a female prisoner, Laura Mannon (Yvonne De Carlo), another convicted murderer. The new arrival may be the least of their concerns though, both McCool and Reno quickly realizing they're being followed. Who's trailing them?

I guess it should have clicked for me early on. I've been watching westerns since I was a little kid, and when this one popped up on the TV schedule, I should have put it together. At no point in my tries to watch as many westerns as I can had I ever come across this western from director R.G. Springsteen. No mention, N-O-N-E, for good or bad. Nonetheless, I plodded on. After all, it sounded promising with a more than respectable cast. Yeah, that's about all it's good. This is a western that at 91 minutes reeks of cheapness. I'm thinking total budget here couldn't have been more than a couple bucks here and there, and that money went to assembling the cast, the best thing going here by far. Where to start, where to start?

Made on a small budget doesn't/shouldn't be a deal breaker. On the contrary, it can be nothing but a positive. For 'Hostile' though, huge stretches of the already dull 91-minute flick is simply shots of McCool, Reno and the wagon riding through the rocky, desert mountains. Then, we get a follow-up shot of their pursuers. I swear the angles of the shot were tweaked because it felt like I saw the same rock formation one time after another. Same for the follow-up shot of those evil bad guys!!! My personal favorite in the Badness Department is the fight scenes. Usually a halfway decent movie does its best to delicately transition the shots of the stunt doubles fighting with those of the actors "fighting." This was almost amateurish in that department. Not only don't the stunt doubles resemble who they're posing as, the fight scenes are so poorly edited you clearly see the face of the doubles. Get a sample in the link below.

If there is anything to remotely recommend here, it's not surprisingly the cast. They're almost all stock characters you've seen before in any number of westerns, but they have their moments. A familiar face if not a star, Montgomery is solid as the stoic, very capable marshal who's working with a real bad hand. Hunter is actually pretty respectable for the most part, only going high up on the Annoying Meter late. Their veteran law officer, young punk cowboy dynamic is good. Gordon does what he does best, growls and looks menacing as the brutal killer while De Carlo makes the most of her part as the society woman who's guilt or innocence is debatable. Brian Donlevy makes what amounts to a cameo as another marshal, while Pedro Gonzalez Gonzalez (as a goat thief) and Robert Emhardt (as a corrupt railroad official) play two other prisoners being transported. John Russell plays Pleasant's pursuing brother, Aaron, James Craig playing his cousin, both looking to spring Pleasant. 

Familiar situations, bad stunt work, recognizable characters, none of them are deal-breakers for me with a western. Just plain boredom and laziness? Now we're talking. A B-western that uses the same stock footage over and over is just bad. How many times can we see Russell and Craig ride down the same hill? How much was actually filmed outdoors? Not much, most of the trail scenes relegated to indoor studio work. Mostly, it's just boring. There's lot of talking, intense staring, all of it building up to some sort of showdown that never comes to fruition. The finale is disappointing, and then it ends. Not very good.

Hostile Guns (1967): */****

Raw Edge

When I think of westerns, I think of isolated windswept towns, lonely deserts, and far-off mountain ranges. Thank the spaghetti western genre for that one. It's always nice to see a change of pace though, like 1956's Raw Edge, a quasi-western based in 1840s Oregon.

It's 1842 in the wild Oregon territory, and Tex Kirby (Rory Calhoun) is looking to meet up with his brother (John Gavin) and work his ranch together. Upon arriving though, Tex finds his brother hung by a lynch mob, his Indian wife, Paca (Mara Corday), missing, and the ranch in ruins. Who's behind it? A local ranch owner, Montgomery (Herbert Rudley), rules the territory with an iron fist including a bizarre rule concerning any single women in the area. Supposedly Tex's brother was in his way, but now he's looking for answers. Tex finds himself in a situation deeper and darker than he expected, especially with Montgomery's wife, Hannah (Yvonne De Carlo), becoming an issue too. All around the valley though, an Indian war party threatens to attack, smoke signals hanging in the air.

This is not the typical desert western, that's a good thing. Not only is it set in Oregon, it is based in 1840s Oregon long before the typical wild west movie (usually after the Civil War). It was actually filmed in the San Bernardino National Forest, a more than worthy stand-in as a location shoot. Similar to the desert westerns, there's an isolated claustrophobia to the story. One town dots the territory, then there's Montgomery's forted-up, walled ranch, and last his mountain camp. The forest and woods hide all sorts of trouble, and the San Bernardino forest is a beautiful backdrop to the 1840s story.

From director John Sherwood, 'Raw' has a surprisingly dark story. It starts with a truly odd opening monologue that claims to be historically accurate, but who knows for sure? It says that in 1840s Oregon a man -- supposedly Montgomery -- ruled the region and mandated that single women -- A-N-Y single woman -- can be scooped up by any man who wants to take her as his wife. It provides an interesting subplot with Corday's Paca, a young Indian woman who married Tex's brother. The scene where the lynch mob hangs her husband is spooky and unsettling, certain members of the lynch mob leaving the hanging and turning their attention to the beautiful Paca. It develops later with Hannah, Montgomery's wife, as some of his men plan what to do with her should Montgomery not be in the picture anymore.

I liked that darkness that 'Raw' offers. Calhoun is the heroic lead, but his Tex is gunning for revenge and little else. Again, I liked Calhoun a lot, a prime example of a worthy lead in countless B-westerns in the 1950s who never became a huge star. De Carlo is very good too as Hannah, a beautiful wife who looks out for herself when she realizes her situation is not as ideal as she would have liked. Rudley is a good if underused villain with his henchmen leaving more of an impression, including Tarp (Neville Brand), Pop (Emile Meyer), Tarp's equally sinister father, and Sile (Robert J. Wilke), who takes Paca as his own wife. There's also Randolph (Rex Reason), a gentlemanly gambler who pits everyone against each other for his own betting profit, only to have a change of heart late. There are no real heroes here, just less bad heroes, and that's pretty cool to see in a 1956 western.

Seeing all these characters working toward their own greedy/selfish motives provides plenty of fireworks, but it takes a little too long getting there. With a 75-minute movie, that's not a good thing. While I enjoyed the entire movie, the first 45 minutes are too slow with too much talking and not enough action. The last 30 minutes pick up the pace as the Indian attack looms closer and closer. Good B-western, nothing great with solid casting and a change of pace location. Check out the movie at the link below.

Raw Edge (1956): ** 1/2 /****