Sergio Leone Web Board

Films of Sergio Leone => Other Films => Topic started by: cigar joe on July 08, 2007, 08:13:12 AM



Title: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: cigar joe on July 08, 2007, 08:13:12 AM
Dir. Bud Boetticher, with Randolph Scott, John Carrol, Wallace Beery Jr, Karen Steele, Valerie French.
Easily the worst of the six Boetticher/Scott films that I've seen. this one is basically a town bound, dialog driven, "meller".
Scott comes to town with sidekick Beery on Tate Kimbrough's (John Caroll) wedding day to settle past accounts concerning his wife. A lot, and I mean a lot of the supporing cast of town folk you'll recognise from TV Westerns, old Twilight Zone's and even Clint Eastwood films (Hang 'Em High). So far Carrol with Andrew Duggan as his bought & paid for Sheriff,  Swede Hanson are the weakest of the villians of the six .

Banjo has stated before that Buchannon Rides Alone is on TV in the UK quite a bit, from the synopsis that I've read it also looks town bound, so we'll have to get Banjo's opinion on that last one unless its shown on TCM this month.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: cigar joe on November 05, 2008, 02:39:04 PM
Watched this film again last night, on TCM, not much has changed from my original opinion.

Scott & Beery both look a bit too clean after their ride to Sundown, no dust no sweat stains, at least their horses are lathered which was a good touch. Boetticher does include a sequence where Scott & Berry do take care of their horses after their arival in Sundown.

Again its the weakest of the ones I've seen, (all except "Buchanon Rides Alone") in the set.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 05, 2008, 05:05:51 PM
Damn, my set didn't arrive today! Maybe tomorrow . . .


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: T.H. on November 08, 2008, 11:57:53 AM
******spoilers********


This was pretty entertaining despite some fatal flaws in the script. All Kimbrough had to do was set fire to the stable, what was stopping him? It also would have been much more logical for Bart and Sam to kidnap Kimbrough's girl so his hired hands couldn't torch the stable/house (it also would have given the movie some momentum and pace) . Maybe the most annoying aspect is that Sam has rode with Bart for three years and has no idea why they're looking for Kimbrough. Are you kidding me?

I also didn't buy how the random group of citizens decide after a speech by the doctor to finally combat Kimbrough. It was implmented to get Scott's character out of the stable safely, nothing else. lazy writing.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: dave jenkins on November 09, 2008, 01:23:13 PM
At last, my Boetticher set arrived; I spun DaS yesterday and . . . man, what a lame film. This could easily have been a Gunsmoke episode . . . a bad Gunsmoke episode. This is definitely the Boetticher picture to miss. One interesting bit of trivia I learned, though: June Lockhart had already been cast as the Girl, but when Boetticher found out Karen Steele was in the world, Lockhart was out and Ms. Steele was in. And funnily enough, the part really was more of a June Lockhart role . . .


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: titoli on June 22, 2009, 11:52:46 AM
Glad to know this is the worst of the lot, because I liked it in spite of the objections. Fact is that, as pointed by Hackford in the featurette, here you have a hero who is not a hero and a villain who proves himself a man, which is quite unusual. Carrol, in a Robert Preston's role, is great and so is Scott. 8\10


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: T.H. on June 22, 2009, 02:14:11 PM
Glad to know this is the worst of the lot, because I liked it in spite of the objections. Fact is that, as pointed by Hackford in the featurette, here you have a hero who is not a hero and a villain who proves himself a man, which is quite unusual. Carrol, in a Robert Preston's role, is great and so is Scott. 8\10

very true. Despite the shaky script, I'd give this a 7. And Scott is always worth watching.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: The Firecracker on June 22, 2009, 05:33:57 PM
******spoilers********



I also didn't buy how the random group of citizens decide after a speech by the doctor to finally combat Kimbrough. It was implmented to get Scott's character out of the stable safely, nothing else. lazy writing.



dues ex machina


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: T.H. on June 22, 2009, 06:10:03 PM
precisely.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: titoli on June 23, 2009, 07:18:56 AM


dues ex machina

Great misspelling.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: The Firecracker on June 23, 2009, 07:27:44 AM
Great misspelling.


Reverse the u and the e and you'll have your God.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: titoli on June 23, 2009, 07:30:51 AM

Reverse the u and the e and you'll have your God.

Pleonastic.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: Groggy on June 23, 2009, 07:38:10 AM

Reverse the u and the e and you'll have your God.

 ;D


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: The Firecracker on December 03, 2010, 02:46:08 PM
All Kimbrough had to do was set fire to the stable, what was stopping him?

I thought of this as well but it makes sense that he didn't.
That stable is somebodies bread and butter. If he were to burn it down against the wishes of the townspeople then he might be facing a revolt, especially with the already delicate situation brought up by Scott.

despite all of its stupidity I really like it for the reasons Titoli brought up.
These surprises redeem the logical fallacies.

It seems that Boetticher's town based Westerns (This and Buchanon Rides Alone) all have some problems in the brains department while his bigger movies (which are little stories masked by large landscapes) are tighter.
That said I still really like the two town films.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: The Firecracker on December 03, 2010, 02:47:25 PM
Pleonastic.

Groggy didn't seem to think so but I'll give you the point.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: T.H. on December 10, 2010, 04:38:55 PM
I thought of this as well but it makes sense that he didn't.
That stable is somebodies bread and butter. If he were to burn it down against the wishes of the townspeople then he might be facing a revolt, especially with the already delicate situation brought up by Scott.

despite all of its stupidity I really like it for the reasons Titoli brought up.
These surprises redeem the logical fallacies.

It seems that Boetticher's town based Westerns (This and Buchanon Rides Alone) all have some problems in the brains department while his bigger movies (which are little stories masked by large landscapes) are tighter.
That said I still really like the two town films.

Possibly. That thought never occurred to me because I thought that Kimbrough (sp?) would have paid off the owner if he burned it down.

Yeah, I love all the Ranown westerns, flaws and all. I don't criticize movies for flaws nearly as much as I did at one point. I'm much more interested in the visuals, atmosphere and pacing. Boetticher's westerns have a very grand, powerful feeling to them.

Check out the 2 hr cut of the Bullfighter and the Lady if you haven't.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: The Firecracker on December 10, 2010, 06:14:09 PM
Kimbrough (sp?)

Beats me?

Check out the 2 hr cut of the Bullfighter and the Lady if you haven't.

Will do!


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: Dust Devil on January 15, 2011, 02:08:44 AM
Whatever faults you guys mentioned I didn't care about while watching it. I didn't even notice them, to be honest. This must be one of the best town-bound talkies I've seen, only near the end the feeling that there's too much talk starts to creep in, but luckily the movie ends soon. Very entertaining movie, with a great psychological twist. Good acting too.


7.5/10


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: Dust Devil on January 15, 2011, 02:10:09 AM
Wallace Beery Jr

Noah. ;)


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: Dust Devil on January 15, 2011, 06:41:12 AM
And happy birthday CJ! O0

Please, make no decision at sundown today. :D


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: drinkanddestroy on December 19, 2011, 07:49:08 AM
just saw the dvd for the first time; I'd give it a 6/10.

-- Both actresses are terrible.

-- Burning down the stable should have been a no-brainer; the villain had the town in his back pocket and could have easily paid well for it.


Title: Re: Decision At Sundown (1957)
Post by: stanton on December 19, 2011, 09:29:29 AM
Burning down could mean that the whole town burns down.