Despite being released in what was arguably the greatest decade for the Hollywood Western--the 1950s--and being helmed by one of the greatest action-film directors of that era--Raoul Walsh--1953's "Gun Fury" ultimately reveals itself to be merely a very good--not a great--motion picture. In the film, pacifist rancher Ben Warren (a hunky, 28-year-old Rock Hudson) reunites with his fiancée, Jennifer Ballard (a very beautiful, 32-year-old Donna Reed), at a dusty Nowheresville in Arizona. Trouble soon erupts, when notorious bandit Frank Slayton (Phil Carey) and his gang rob their stagecoach, shoot Ben down and, leaving him presumed dead, kidnap his bride-to-be, causing Ben, naturally, to put those pacifist feelings aside and take to the ol' vengeance trail. But, as had Gary Cooper three years earlier in "High Noon," Ben finds it extremely difficult to enlist aid for his dangerous cause; ultimately, only three people--Tom Burgess (an excellent Leo Gordon), Slayton's No. 2, who Slayton had earlier tied up for the vultures; an Indian named Johash, whose people Slayton had slaughtered; and a Mexican hot tamale, Stella, who Slayton had dumped--come forward to ride with Ben and take a bloody vengeance....
"Gun Fury" has, to its credit, many commendable attributes. The acting in the film is uniformly fine; I especially liked Leo Gordon here, as the former "bad guy" who helps Ben out. (He is given the picture's most amusing line: "All women are alike...they just have different faces so you can tell them apart.") The film features the typically sturdy direction that was Walsh's calling card, and sports a good deal of physical beauty, too. No, I'm not referring to Ms. Reed here, although she DOES look mighty fine, but rather to the gorgeous Arizona location shooting, enhanced by luscious Technicolor. The movie LOOKS fantastic, and this breathtaking backdrop can only have been more striking on the big screen and in 3-D, as the picture was originally shown. The film moves along briskly and with purpose, and ends with an exciting siege shoot-out and a (literally) cliffhanging dukeout between the principals. So what's the problem?
Well, for one thing, too many of the supporting characters are underdeveloped, especially Slayton gang members Blinky and Brazos, played, respectively, by the great Lee Marvin and Neville Brand. Granted, both men were just recently starting out in their careers in 1953 and were more character actors than leading men at this point, but still, a little character differentiation would have been nice. Johash and Stella are stock types, at best; Johash almost laughably so. And Donna Reed's character is a bit too wimpy and meek; a little more spirit from Jennifer would have been preferable to her near-total submissiveness to the Slayton gang. (Perhaps I'm being a bit too harsh here, but having just seen the remarkably feisty spitfire that Eleanor Parker portrays in the 1955 Western "Many Rivers To Cross," I can only imagine what havoc SHE would have caused among Slayton's men!) Other problems: Those 3-D effects (a leaping rattler, a thrown knife, flying hooves, and hurled rocks, branches and pots) look pretty silly when watched on the 2-D small screen (strangely, the eye-patched Walsh probably couldn't even see his film in 3-D), and the film's many night scenes don't look nearly as spectacular as the ones filmed under the desert sun; indeed, they are way too dark, especially for home viewing. Finally, the film concludes a bit too abruptly for this viewer's tastes. Still, despite all, "Gun Fury" certainly does manage to please; Raoul Walsh couldn't make a dull picture if he tried. No, it's not in the same league as the director's "High Sierra," "Objective, Burma!" or "White Heat" (then again, how many pictures are?), but remains a perfectly acceptable entertainment nevertheless....
"Gun Fury" has, to its credit, many commendable attributes. The acting in the film is uniformly fine; I especially liked Leo Gordon here, as the former "bad guy" who helps Ben out. (He is given the picture's most amusing line: "All women are alike...they just have different faces so you can tell them apart.") The film features the typically sturdy direction that was Walsh's calling card, and sports a good deal of physical beauty, too. No, I'm not referring to Ms. Reed here, although she DOES look mighty fine, but rather to the gorgeous Arizona location shooting, enhanced by luscious Technicolor. The movie LOOKS fantastic, and this breathtaking backdrop can only have been more striking on the big screen and in 3-D, as the picture was originally shown. The film moves along briskly and with purpose, and ends with an exciting siege shoot-out and a (literally) cliffhanging dukeout between the principals. So what's the problem?
Well, for one thing, too many of the supporting characters are underdeveloped, especially Slayton gang members Blinky and Brazos, played, respectively, by the great Lee Marvin and Neville Brand. Granted, both men were just recently starting out in their careers in 1953 and were more character actors than leading men at this point, but still, a little character differentiation would have been nice. Johash and Stella are stock types, at best; Johash almost laughably so. And Donna Reed's character is a bit too wimpy and meek; a little more spirit from Jennifer would have been preferable to her near-total submissiveness to the Slayton gang. (Perhaps I'm being a bit too harsh here, but having just seen the remarkably feisty spitfire that Eleanor Parker portrays in the 1955 Western "Many Rivers To Cross," I can only imagine what havoc SHE would have caused among Slayton's men!) Other problems: Those 3-D effects (a leaping rattler, a thrown knife, flying hooves, and hurled rocks, branches and pots) look pretty silly when watched on the 2-D small screen (strangely, the eye-patched Walsh probably couldn't even see his film in 3-D), and the film's many night scenes don't look nearly as spectacular as the ones filmed under the desert sun; indeed, they are way too dark, especially for home viewing. Finally, the film concludes a bit too abruptly for this viewer's tastes. Still, despite all, "Gun Fury" certainly does manage to please; Raoul Walsh couldn't make a dull picture if he tried. No, it's not in the same league as the director's "High Sierra," "Objective, Burma!" or "White Heat" (then again, how many pictures are?), but remains a perfectly acceptable entertainment nevertheless....