CommentsXp
Best movie ever!
Livestonth
I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible
Kodie Bird
True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.
Michael Morrison
Bad editing makes some of the actors, especially Wally Wales, look as if they missed their cues or didn't know their lines.That is a double shame, because it almost counters some very good directing by Robert Emmett Tansey, who used some really interesting camera angles, some great acting by all the players, perhaps especially by "Little" Bobby Nelson -- who should have continued acting, judging by his excellent performance here -- and great action by the cast and story writers, including Tansey.Wally Wales was a good-looking and likable man who was a star in silent Westerns but, for whatever reason, didn't have that star power in talkies. He continued making movies for many more years, but mostly in bit parts and as stunt man.Despite all the grand-standing and posturing by Hollywood and its current denizens, there is not, and seemingly never has been, justice in the movie business.Wally Wales became Hal Taliaferro later and continued to show both presence and ability.His leading lady here is an utterly charming Southern belle named Myrla Bratton, from Cave Spring, Alabama. Her Southern speech just adds to her charm, and her acting ability is very evident here. But, again, for some strange reason, she made very few films. What a loss.This is an imperfect movie, mostly because of the editing, but try to ignore those errors and pay attention to a good story well acted and very well directed.There is a good print at YouTube and I recommend "The Way of the West."
jalilidalili
So it's a western... A typical cowboy (or in this case sheep-boy) flick with straight forward good and bad guys.The government wants to lease out as much land as possible and it is not important if either sheep or cattle are raised on the graze land they lease out, but the local cowherders still believe in feuding with the sheepherders...Not surprising a shepherding family lands in trouble. It's a typical plot with an elderly father as the head of the family and a daughter attracting a hired hand, who turns out to be the hero in the end. Of course you mustn't forget the bad guys either. There's the big (and in this case the man really is a big man) bass, who hires gunmen to get rid of the family.It's all so predictable that I doubt it had much effect on the viewers even back in the days... Today this would probably be done as an episode of a sitcom or something similar (possibly in 2 parts), but would have no chances of passing of as a feature film. I guess the pre-TV era of people going into cinemas and staying there between main features was the only reason why movies such as this one have been made.It's not that it's a particularly bad movie, it's just so indistinguishable from tons of similar pictures. It'll still help pass/waste the time, but don't expect anything fascinating about it.
JimPettis
The acting in this old Western is sometimes so bad even *I* notice the poor quality. The script is occasionally repetitive. The action scenes are generally horrible - cut away scenes that make the opponents seem as if they are not even in the same zip code, and fight scenes that are typical for old B westerns (read: poor).But there are some good points. The plot is much better than most. The high-speed chases are not obviously high-*film*-speed. The lack of background/supporting music is surprisingly not a detriment except in a very few scenes. This may even add to the attractiveness of the film.If you are a fan of old B westerns than this is probably a keeper. But for the rest of you, it's probably not worth the time it takes to watch.
