Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

There were so many westerns made, that it has to have a unique angle or something memorable, to sick its head above the parapet. Did I enjoy this movie? Without a doubt. The characters were strong and likable and I really found myself rooting for the young lad. Location? Excellent. The great expanse of the country was well portrayed and the shacks, houses and barns were all spot on. Acting? Good overall. All utterly believable and gave a strong sense of family unit. Storyline? Well this is maybe where the movie didn't quite do itself justice. The story was okay, but has, with variations, been told hundreds of times and it didn't bring much new to the table. But at 80 minutes, it wasn't too long and I found myself glad to have watched and enjoyed it.

Oddball Western drama. There's no commanding central character to hang your hat on. Barrymore Jr. headlines, but his "Cooncat" stands more for misunderstood youth than as a force for good. Actually, several characters alternate in the spotlight, crippled old Davis (Ruysdael) being the most commanding, with his spirited daughter Abby (Miller) not far behind. Then too, there's a very un-Western hint of the spooky in the "ghost" figures lurking in the background. That "horse dragging" sequence is unusual and more brutal than expected. If Barrymore had padding to ease the abrasion, I couldn't spot it. It's a pretty cluttered screenplay with a number of characters and episodes drifting in and out that makes it difficult at times to keep up with. Nonetheless, it's a good original story with a number of nice touches, including the barn dance; plus, the wide open vistas of southwest Texas (where the epic Giant {1955} was filmed). I also like the way that underneath the sub- plots, the film is really about the hapless kid finding a home. Note that the character Cooncat foreshadows a popular theme of the coming decade—misunderstood youth, especially as popularized by James Dean several years later.I expect the un-tried Barrymore was given top billing for box office purposes. He tries hard, and after all his character is based on anger and frustration since nobody believes him and is about to hang him. The only scene I can spot where he clearly over-acts is when describing the two horsemen to Boatwhistle (Wills). Otherwise, I see him as giving a logically emotional performance. Anyway, I liked the film as an entertainingly offbeat Western.

John Barrymore Jr. brings a Sean Penn-like quality to the portrayal of his character Cooncat in "High Lonesome", although that probably has more to do with his similar looks than in acting ability. This was Barrymore's second appearance in a leading role following "The Sundowners" which came out the same year. In my review of that picture, I opined that it's doubtful daughter Drew ever saw him in that film; my suspicion is that it's probably true here as well.When the picture was all over, I found myself scratching my head. What started out as something of an off-beat mystery Western, this wound up being a story that didn't make much sense. No reason was ever offered as to why the characters of the Smiling Man (Jack Elam) and Roper (Dave Kashner) ever hung around following the murder of Jim Shell in the abandoned trading post. Stealing Cooncat's money was one thing, but why all the other intrigue of lurking in the shadows; the disappearing duo gimmick got a little tired after a while. And what about all the men killed on both sides of the 'Jessup' fence when the Davis crew went out to tear it down? Are we just supposed to forget about all of that like it never happened? And by the way, who killed Pat Farrell's (John Archer) parents? They were dead a whole week before their bodies were discovered, and the idea was that 'maybe' Cooncat was responsible. Well, he wasn't. So who was? Oh, never mind. See what I mean - story elements were brought in and then discarded as if no one was bothering to pay attention.One thing I did like though - this was the only time I've ever seen Jack Elam's lazy eye referenced in a story. As he describes the men who instigated him to go after Jim Shell, Barrymoore's character states - "He had a cast in his eye so you couldn't tell which eye was pointin' where". I just wish they had taken a great line like that and gone somewhere meaningful with it.One last thing in the 'it doesn't make sense' department. Remember the finale? - Smiling Man and Roper have rancher Davis pinned down with gunfire after shooting Cooncat. So what does Davis do? He manages to swing around and just walk into the bad guy cabin through the back door! What??!! How did he do that? I don't know, and you won't either.

Filmed by Eagle-Lion right after THE SUNDOWNERS (1950) near some of the same Amarillo locations and with returning cast members Chill Wills, Jack Elam and the 'star', gawky teenager John Drew Barrymore. No Robert Preston to give some weight to the film, this time.Story boils down to a boy, "Cooncat" (Barrymore) running away from an abusive home and witnessing a murder committed by Elam and Dave Kashner. Only the local ranch owner Horse Davis (Basil Ruysdael) and his family don't believe him. They think Cooncat's seeing ghosts because Cooncat's describing some men that were killed during a range war 15 years previously. Of course there are no ghosts. Cooncat actually did see the murder. I won't give away the ending but lets just say it too is as anti-climatic as the THE SUNDOWNERS was.This also suffers from some of the same disjointed editing that that earlier film had suffered from, as well as Barrymore doing his silly facial grimaces while he overacts his part. And the way John Archer treats his bride-to-be Kristine Miller, needs to be seen to be believed. He spanks her on the bottom for shooting down a pan off the wall in order to prove a point. Then they kiss and make up like nothing happened. UN-REAL. Obviously some of the details in the script weren't worked out for the audience ahead of time.Also filmed in Technicolor with nice scenic West Texas locations, it's worth a look but it's not a keeper, in my opinion.4 out of 10