I love Randolph Scott films and have seen more than most people on the planet. However, while many of his films are bona fide classics, I am not some Kool-Aid drinker who believes every film he made is a work of pure genius. Yes, the Budd Boetticher and Sam Peckinpah films he made late is his career were amazingly entertaining and wonderful films, his films of the 1940s and early 50s were a mixed lot--some excellent and many like "Return of the Bad Men"--filled with clichés. Now I can't blame all the problems on Scott--he was, as usual, the consummate professional and his performance was his typical graceful job. But the script, sadly, wasn't much better than your average Gene Autry film--formulaic and a bit silly here and there.
The film begins with Scott selling off his cattle and preparing to marry a blonde and move to California. However, the coming of some bandits put a crimp on this. Mostly, and this is so dumb, because he takes time out of his busy life to convince a FEMALE member of the bandits (?!!??) to give herself up and lead a life of virtue...SO SHE DOES!!! Were the writers on drugs?! A female member of the Sundance Kid's gang?! A bandit going straight because the virtuous hero asks her to?!?! What?!?!? Later, instead of getting married and moving, Scott accompanies the town as it picks up and moves a few miles away during the Oklahoma land boom. I have absolutely no idea why they did this....bored I guess. And, in this new town, Scott cannot leave because with all the new settlers they need law and order and he agrees to be the new Marshall--even though the plucky blonde widow wants him to live a simpler life since her first husband was a lawman...and he was killed (gosh!).
Into this perennial waiting to get married come two problems. First, the reformed female bandit comes to town to be paroled to Scott (hmmm, that couldn't cause any problems). Second, now in addition to the tiny Sundance gang, lots of other famous bad guys come into the film. Yes, this one, at one point or another, has Sundance, the Daltons, Billy the Kid and 1001 other famous scum-bags all getting together to terrorize Oklahoma. It is patently ridiculous (since none of this ever happened)---and the sort of thing that drives history teachers (like myself) go crazy! By the end of the film, thanks to Scott, the gangs mostly disband. And, in a final showdown, it's just Scott versus the evil Sundance (Robert Ryan). Now, after a brief shoot-out, Scott manages to get the advantage on Sundance--holding him at gunpoint. So what does any cliché-driven film do now?! Yep...Scott throws down his guns and they punch it out, man-to-man!!! If it were me, I would have just shot Sundance in the face--after all, he murdered one of your friends and terrorized the territory!! Yep...shoot 'em in the face...none of this shooting him in his trigger hand or leg!!
So why, if the film is so clichéd and inaccurate, do I still give it a 5? Well, as I said above, Scott is very good. Also, unlike too many of his westerns of the period, the stunt work is good--and you can't easily tell the stunt men are doing most of the dangerous stuff, as it's integrated well. Also, finally, it has Gabby Hayes. As usual, he's fun to watch and is a wonderful "old western coot"--also a cliché, but a fun one!
The film begins with Scott selling off his cattle and preparing to marry a blonde and move to California. However, the coming of some bandits put a crimp on this. Mostly, and this is so dumb, because he takes time out of his busy life to convince a FEMALE member of the bandits (?!!??) to give herself up and lead a life of virtue...SO SHE DOES!!! Were the writers on drugs?! A female member of the Sundance Kid's gang?! A bandit going straight because the virtuous hero asks her to?!?! What?!?!? Later, instead of getting married and moving, Scott accompanies the town as it picks up and moves a few miles away during the Oklahoma land boom. I have absolutely no idea why they did this....bored I guess. And, in this new town, Scott cannot leave because with all the new settlers they need law and order and he agrees to be the new Marshall--even though the plucky blonde widow wants him to live a simpler life since her first husband was a lawman...and he was killed (gosh!).
Into this perennial waiting to get married come two problems. First, the reformed female bandit comes to town to be paroled to Scott (hmmm, that couldn't cause any problems). Second, now in addition to the tiny Sundance gang, lots of other famous bad guys come into the film. Yes, this one, at one point or another, has Sundance, the Daltons, Billy the Kid and 1001 other famous scum-bags all getting together to terrorize Oklahoma. It is patently ridiculous (since none of this ever happened)---and the sort of thing that drives history teachers (like myself) go crazy! By the end of the film, thanks to Scott, the gangs mostly disband. And, in a final showdown, it's just Scott versus the evil Sundance (Robert Ryan). Now, after a brief shoot-out, Scott manages to get the advantage on Sundance--holding him at gunpoint. So what does any cliché-driven film do now?! Yep...Scott throws down his guns and they punch it out, man-to-man!!! If it were me, I would have just shot Sundance in the face--after all, he murdered one of your friends and terrorized the territory!! Yep...shoot 'em in the face...none of this shooting him in his trigger hand or leg!!
So why, if the film is so clichéd and inaccurate, do I still give it a 5? Well, as I said above, Scott is very good. Also, unlike too many of his westerns of the period, the stunt work is good--and you can't easily tell the stunt men are doing most of the dangerous stuff, as it's integrated well. Also, finally, it has Gabby Hayes. As usual, he's fun to watch and is a wonderful "old western coot"--also a cliché, but a fun one!