29 reviews
This is the third time this story by Steve Fisher has been done. The first time was "Top Gun" starring Sterling Hayden done in 1955 in black and white, and then done again as "Noose for a Gunman" in 1960 starring Jim Davis, who later became Jock Ewing on "Dallas" (Ted DeCorsia even played the same role as in "The Quick Gun" with John Dehner taking the main villain role in "Top Gun"). All three are good if you like the old fashion type westerns, which I do. They were simple, your kids and grandkids could watch them, and they always had a good ending. Need more of them today. To me, Audie Murphy will always be a hero on the battlefield (The most decorated soldier in WWII including the medal of honor)and on the screen.
- Marlburian
- Jun 27, 2016
- Permalink
- JohnHowardReid
- Jul 17, 2017
- Permalink
Fast paced but unsatisfying Western, starring Audy Murphy in a role he played more than once -- the tortured soul who wants to do the right thing, even though everyone is against him.
Unfortunately, director Sidney Salknow presents us with a very simplistic plot and very two-dimensional characters. The film has the `small' look of a television episode, with overly neat and overly well-lite sets (even at night!).
Still, the basic idea is good. Murphy is enroute to his home town to face up to the citizens who think he murdered the two sons of a local rancher, despite the fact that it was self-defense. Before arriving at the town, Murphy runs into the gang of outlaws he used to ride with. He finds out that they plan to rob the bank and burn the town to the ground.
Murphy tries to warn the citizens, but their prejudice against him makes them reluctant to listen. But Sheriff James Best, an old friend of Murphy's, DOES believe, and he organizes the citizen to defend the town.
The plot does plenty of unexpected things on its way to a reasonably satisfying climax, giving the film some merit in spite of itself. Merry Anders, the love interest, plays a key role in the climax, redeeming her less than stellar performance in the rest of the film. If you love Westerns (like me) and you're prepared for mediocre acting and lackluster direction, you can have fun with this one. Think of it as an imaginative amateur film that was made on a shoestring budget, starring a popular war hero who succeeded in a second career as an actor.
On a personal note, Audy's `rig' (his gun and gun belt) is a whole lot more appealing and practical than those in most big-budget Westerns. And he doesn't wear it half-way to his knees! Western fans notice things like this. . .
Unfortunately, director Sidney Salknow presents us with a very simplistic plot and very two-dimensional characters. The film has the `small' look of a television episode, with overly neat and overly well-lite sets (even at night!).
Still, the basic idea is good. Murphy is enroute to his home town to face up to the citizens who think he murdered the two sons of a local rancher, despite the fact that it was self-defense. Before arriving at the town, Murphy runs into the gang of outlaws he used to ride with. He finds out that they plan to rob the bank and burn the town to the ground.
Murphy tries to warn the citizens, but their prejudice against him makes them reluctant to listen. But Sheriff James Best, an old friend of Murphy's, DOES believe, and he organizes the citizen to defend the town.
The plot does plenty of unexpected things on its way to a reasonably satisfying climax, giving the film some merit in spite of itself. Merry Anders, the love interest, plays a key role in the climax, redeeming her less than stellar performance in the rest of the film. If you love Westerns (like me) and you're prepared for mediocre acting and lackluster direction, you can have fun with this one. Think of it as an imaginative amateur film that was made on a shoestring budget, starring a popular war hero who succeeded in a second career as an actor.
On a personal note, Audy's `rig' (his gun and gun belt) is a whole lot more appealing and practical than those in most big-budget Westerns. And he doesn't wear it half-way to his knees! Western fans notice things like this. . .
- Bruce_Cook
- Mar 4, 2002
- Permalink
This is an enjoyable Audie Murphy western.
Simple story with some nice drama but the highlights of the film all belong to the 'Spangler' character. He is dynamic, boisterous, over the top and often hilarious (intentional or otherwise).
Nice way to spend an afternoon :)
Simple story with some nice drama but the highlights of the film all belong to the 'Spangler' character. He is dynamic, boisterous, over the top and often hilarious (intentional or otherwise).
Nice way to spend an afternoon :)
- damianphelps
- Oct 30, 2020
- Permalink
- classicsoncall
- Oct 3, 2014
- Permalink
It's your standard bad guy vs. good bad guy western. Clint Cooper returns to the town that ran him off and reluctantly agrees to stay and fight the coming horde of thieves. Though this is a very predictable plot, it doesn't feature the huge leaps that are common in some westerns from the era.
Watching this movie 41 years after it's release and judging it by today's standards isn't really fair. It is from a simpler time in history and as a result seems naive to us.
Today you would never see scenes that are supposed to occur at night happening in obvious sunlight. The melo-drama is passe. Everyone knows that gunshots are messy, except in old westerns. Having said all of that, fans of the genre and Audie Murphey will no doubt enjoy this film.
I also enjoyed watching James Best before his Dukes of Hazard days. While I am not one who thinks that his performances as Sheriff of Hazard County are un-noteworthy, this role really opened my eyes to his versatility and talent as an actor.
Watching this movie 41 years after it's release and judging it by today's standards isn't really fair. It is from a simpler time in history and as a result seems naive to us.
Today you would never see scenes that are supposed to occur at night happening in obvious sunlight. The melo-drama is passe. Everyone knows that gunshots are messy, except in old westerns. Having said all of that, fans of the genre and Audie Murphey will no doubt enjoy this film.
I also enjoyed watching James Best before his Dukes of Hazard days. While I am not one who thinks that his performances as Sheriff of Hazard County are un-noteworthy, this role really opened my eyes to his versatility and talent as an actor.
- ulicknormanowen
- Sep 13, 2021
- Permalink
Director Sidney Salkow made quite a few westerns over the course of his career, and the one thing they have in common is that none of them are particularly good. If you want to see why, then watch this picture. Salkow has no sense of pacing whatsoever (a trait even more evident in his "Sitting Bull" from 1954, which has to be among the most disjointed pictures ever made). Stuff happens, then nothing happens for a while, then stuff happens again, then nothing happens for a while again, and so on, and so on, and so on. That describes this picture pretty much to a T, and what's even worse is that, unlike many of Salkow's other westerns, this one actually has a cast of experienced western actors in roles both large and small: James Best, Frank Ferguson, Rex Holman, Rick Vallin, Frank Gerstle and Mort Mills, among others, have done good work in other westerns, and Audie Murphy is earnest as always, but there's not much they can do with this. They try hard, but Salkow's limp direction and the drivel they're forced to recite kill whatever small chances there may have been of making something out of nothing. Even though the plot is somewhat tired, good--or even halfway competent--writing could have made this picture at least watchable. The writing here is laughable hack work, just cliché piled on top of cliché, overheated dramatics, eye-rolling villainy--it seems more like a William S. Hart western from 1915 than an Audie Murphy western from 1964. The last part of the picture picks up a bit--"picks up" being a relative term, considering that virtually nothing has happened up to that point--when the outlaw gang attacks the town, but even that isn't in the least exciting. Salkow's tenuous skills as a filmmaker completely evaporate when the "action" starts (again, check out his 1954 "Sitting Bull") and this picture is no exception--a few desultory gunshots and a bad guy falls off his horse, another gunshot or two and a townsman falls down (it's hard to tell if it's because he was "shot" or if he just dropped from exhaustion--the outlaws and the townsmen in this picture have to be among the OLDEST people to engage in a gun battle in the history of westerns) and the same thing is pretty much repeated for the next eight or ten minutes. There's no sense of excitement, danger, or anything other than boredom. In the end, of course, everything works out exactly as you knew it would, but it's not really worth sitting through this dull, lumbering mess to have your suspicions confirmed.
'The Quick Gun' never exerts itself, but it's still a western that (only just) held my interest from start-to-finish.
The premise is watchable enough, which is fortunate as the acting, dialogue and fight scenes aren't great. All of the acting is on the wooden side, with the exception of Ted de Corsia who is pretty good as Spangler. The cast are all likeable, though don't quite give top performances in my opinion.
Dialogue-wise it's boring, there's quite a few moments with blocks of speaking. The combat isn't pleasing on the eye either, given its slow nature. The music and camera work is OK, I guess.
If you want to sit back and chill with a western that doesn't take much effort, then this is one for you. It's fine to watch, if underwhelming overall.
The premise is watchable enough, which is fortunate as the acting, dialogue and fight scenes aren't great. All of the acting is on the wooden side, with the exception of Ted de Corsia who is pretty good as Spangler. The cast are all likeable, though don't quite give top performances in my opinion.
Dialogue-wise it's boring, there's quite a few moments with blocks of speaking. The combat isn't pleasing on the eye either, given its slow nature. The music and camera work is OK, I guess.
If you want to sit back and chill with a western that doesn't take much effort, then this is one for you. It's fine to watch, if underwhelming overall.
I'd guess it was a remake 4 years later by the same writer but definitely worth checking out! Actually saw this one first.
- james-patrick-732-463468
- Jun 9, 2020
- Permalink
- Scarecrow-88
- Nov 24, 2011
- Permalink
- michaelRokeefe
- Nov 24, 2022
- Permalink
The problem with most of the Audie Murphy westerns are: they are not exciting. This is probably one of the last old fashioned style westerns Hollywood used to make for such a long time. The story is rather naive and so are the characters: Merry Anders is awful in her role of solid yet biting (yes!) schoolteacher, the only thing that is curious is to see a young James Best in a pre-"Dukes of Hazzard" sherrif role. Even Ted de Corsia doesn't get a chance to play a real villain.
What a great cast. Any age can watch this western and the shootout scene.
But the director, writer and set up people did a bad job on some scenes. The main one is when the outlaws arrive in town, the townsfolk set fire to the barricade which is next to the church where the women and children are. Since on fire the townsfolk have to back away from the barricade which means it easy for the outlaws to shoot them.
But the director, writer and set up people did a bad job on some scenes. The main one is when the outlaws arrive in town, the townsfolk set fire to the barricade which is next to the church where the women and children are. Since on fire the townsfolk have to back away from the barricade which means it easy for the outlaws to shoot them.
Dating from 1964, the latter Audie Murphy western is a routine B filler littered with continuity errors (most notably, the church building in which all the windows are dark from the outside but inside the lights are on full pelt), stunt doubles and poor tactics (when attacking the town the villains don't decide to use dynamite to destroy the barricade until about half of them have been killed in a pointless full-frontal attack). It does have a high body count and Ted De Corsia overacts enjoyably in a role he previously played only 4 years before in Noose for a Gunman. (this film is a remake of that from the same production company).
With these 1960s colour B westerns it is noticeable how ridiculously clean everything is. One guesses the film was shot on standard TV sets during the season break.
I was intrigued by the member of outlaw De Corsia's band who seemed to be at least 70 years old. This guy says nothing the whole time and must have been cast because he was a friend or relation of someone. His moment of fame comes when the outlaws lay siege to Murphy who is in a hotel. Throughout the sequence, this OAP stands next to De Corsia gurning, looking around for no obvious reason and pointing his gun at his boss.
With these 1960s colour B westerns it is noticeable how ridiculously clean everything is. One guesses the film was shot on standard TV sets during the season break.
I was intrigued by the member of outlaw De Corsia's band who seemed to be at least 70 years old. This guy says nothing the whole time and must have been cast because he was a friend or relation of someone. His moment of fame comes when the outlaws lay siege to Murphy who is in a hotel. Throughout the sequence, this OAP stands next to De Corsia gurning, looking around for no obvious reason and pointing his gun at his boss.
The Quick Gun is directed by Sidney Salkow and written by Robert E. Kent. It stars Audie Murphy, Merry Anders, James Best, Ted de Corsia, Walter Sande and Rex Holman. A Techniscope/Technicolor production with cinematography by Lester Shorr and music by Richard La Shelle.
1964 saw three Audie Murphy Westerns released, Bullet for a Badman was rather good, Apache Rifles was just above average and The Quick Gun was quite frankly poor. Which is a shame since the premise and double pronged dose of villainy showed good promise on the page. Plot essentially sees Murphy as Clint Cooper, a gunman returning to the town of Shelby two years after he had left because of killing two men. Although he was forced into the fight, many of the town denizens consider him an evil force, a problem since he is trying to get the whole town to understand that a gang of outlaws are on their way to pillage all and sundry. With the father of the two men killed by Cooper after his blood, the gang on their way and very much having Cooper in their sights since they know him well, Cooper has got it all to do to win the heart of the gal he loves and settle down in peace on his deceased father's ranch.
Of course it's a narrative tailor made for a Murphy character, defend the town against all hostilities whilst proving himself as a just man. But it never amounts to much more than a few half hearted up-tempo scenes. There are a number of villains for Cooper to deal with, but they are weakly performed by the actors, marking them out as unconvincing, with Walter Sande as Tom Morrison laughable as we are expected to believe his old and bulky frame can give a lithe Murphy a good fist fight. This is one of the many false things that dominate the picture, the fights are ultra slow, the stunt doubles all too obvious and the town of Shelby itself is one of the most unconvincing I have seen in a B Western. The interiors are all pristine and pretty, often looking like how someone would decorate a Wild West themed restaurant, badly artificial.
There's a decent sequence involving flames and as ever, Murphy is watchable and likable even in the most tawdry of Oaters, but this really smacks of unprofessionalism by those around him. Making it hard to recommend to anyone but the staunchest of Audie's fans. 5/10
1964 saw three Audie Murphy Westerns released, Bullet for a Badman was rather good, Apache Rifles was just above average and The Quick Gun was quite frankly poor. Which is a shame since the premise and double pronged dose of villainy showed good promise on the page. Plot essentially sees Murphy as Clint Cooper, a gunman returning to the town of Shelby two years after he had left because of killing two men. Although he was forced into the fight, many of the town denizens consider him an evil force, a problem since he is trying to get the whole town to understand that a gang of outlaws are on their way to pillage all and sundry. With the father of the two men killed by Cooper after his blood, the gang on their way and very much having Cooper in their sights since they know him well, Cooper has got it all to do to win the heart of the gal he loves and settle down in peace on his deceased father's ranch.
Of course it's a narrative tailor made for a Murphy character, defend the town against all hostilities whilst proving himself as a just man. But it never amounts to much more than a few half hearted up-tempo scenes. There are a number of villains for Cooper to deal with, but they are weakly performed by the actors, marking them out as unconvincing, with Walter Sande as Tom Morrison laughable as we are expected to believe his old and bulky frame can give a lithe Murphy a good fist fight. This is one of the many false things that dominate the picture, the fights are ultra slow, the stunt doubles all too obvious and the town of Shelby itself is one of the most unconvincing I have seen in a B Western. The interiors are all pristine and pretty, often looking like how someone would decorate a Wild West themed restaurant, badly artificial.
There's a decent sequence involving flames and as ever, Murphy is watchable and likable even in the most tawdry of Oaters, but this really smacks of unprofessionalism by those around him. Making it hard to recommend to anyone but the staunchest of Audie's fans. 5/10
- hitchcockthelegend
- Sep 6, 2012
- Permalink
Love everything Audie Murphy does even with the character name changes from 1955 Top Gun but the plot was spot on and the over acting in this film was entertaining.
Seems like a lot of remakes were being done then, must have been a lack of good film writers and slim pickens for Mr. Murphy to choose from but I liked the filmed nonetheless.
- Hondo_Lane
- Sep 14, 2019
- Permalink
Other than Ted DeCorsia's over the top performance as an outlaw gang leader, The Quick Gun will never rate as one of Audie Murphy's better big screen westerns.
After Murphy does not accept DeCorsia's offer to get cut in on bank robbery in his old home town, Murphy who was going there anyway goes double quick to warn them. His own reputation as a gunslinger precedes him though and the townfolk are skeptical. Two of them uncle and nephew Walter Sande and Rex Holman want to kill him because of range war that took Murphy's father and Sande's two sons.
But his friend sheriff James Best does believe him and so does the school teacher Merry Anders who has them both on a string and the town prepares.
What comes after that is for you to see, but all I can say is Best the sheriff makes one colossally stupid mistake and the plot flows from there. But don't doubt that Audie doesn't save the day after most of the cast is killed in the siege of the town.
Definitely not as good as some of his work for Universal in the previous decade.
After Murphy does not accept DeCorsia's offer to get cut in on bank robbery in his old home town, Murphy who was going there anyway goes double quick to warn them. His own reputation as a gunslinger precedes him though and the townfolk are skeptical. Two of them uncle and nephew Walter Sande and Rex Holman want to kill him because of range war that took Murphy's father and Sande's two sons.
But his friend sheriff James Best does believe him and so does the school teacher Merry Anders who has them both on a string and the town prepares.
What comes after that is for you to see, but all I can say is Best the sheriff makes one colossally stupid mistake and the plot flows from there. But don't doubt that Audie doesn't save the day after most of the cast is killed in the siege of the town.
Definitely not as good as some of his work for Universal in the previous decade.
- bkoganbing
- Oct 28, 2014
- Permalink
This movie should be a mandatory viewing for all students in the various theatrical curriculum in Universities. The directing is very, very poor (to say the least) having Murphy, Anders, and others perform in a stilted, confined manner. The "tough guy", Ted de Corsia, constantly overacts to the point of being obnoxious at times. Most of the extras look like they were recruited from the home for the aged just prior to filming, with some seemingly enjoying their first time as an actor/actress. What I find amazing is that at nights the entire "town" has more lighting then in any normal sunny day. The clothes everyone is wearing appears to have been cleaned and pressed just prior to that scenes filming. Perspiration drenched clothes are dry and well pressed in what is supposed to be the next scene a few minutes later. The close up camera work is OK, but there are far too many wide shots that don't fit the action of the time. Merry Anders is a beautiful person; but the outstanding hairdo could not possibly have been accomplished during the time frame the movie represents. And on and on and on
Unbelievable!!! I like both Audie Murphy and Merry Anders very much as performers. They certainly didn't deserve to be displayed in this shoddy film. The movie could have been excellent, but it was just the opposite, I'm very sorry to comment.
Inspiration was running low when Steve Fisher's original story was recycled yet again in what is basically a TV episode glossily opened out for the big screen in Techniscope with meaner brawls (marred by the obvious use of doubles), a noisy score by Richard LaSalle, and Audie Murphy as usual impossibly pretty and clean-cut despite his supposedly shady past (with Merrie Anders gorgeous but largely peripheral as the local schoolmarm).
Among a generally rather elderly supporting cast (including silent veteran Raymond Hatton), Ted de Corsia, Mort Mills and Rex Holman make memorably mean heavies (with Mills' eventual fate quite pleasing).
Among a generally rather elderly supporting cast (including silent veteran Raymond Hatton), Ted de Corsia, Mort Mills and Rex Holman make memorably mean heavies (with Mills' eventual fate quite pleasing).
- richardchatten
- Aug 15, 2020
- Permalink
- januszlvii
- Dec 26, 2018
- Permalink