Too much of everything

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

This has to be one of the "best looking" films around. Very scenic, as a Western should be. Maybe the best looking two leads together ever.It's a "fluff" Western, and that isn't always an insult. That's what this was meant to be. Lots of B Westerns were made with different goals, but roughly 2/5 were made like this, to be just eye candy, with a few side dishes added on.Here, Arthur Kennedy is the "mystique" character. he comes on with too much of a likable rogue, and we wonder if he'll be the masked murderer who leaves Tony Curtis with the blame for a killing of a respected cattle baron.This is lifted up a bit over the usual fluff with a few red herrings, as we get a bit of a mystery. And the clues come to us the same way they come to the character played by Curtis, which is refreshing. We actually feel along the way with him, as this is very well directed.The review that claims Korman may have copied the villain for Blazing Saddles looks to be close to the mark I dare say. That kind of gives it a retro appeal that they hadn't counted on in 1955. It is an appealing film. Not memorable, but appealing.

It is not easy for a guy with a very young face to be a star in a western. Audie Murphy could do it, but then he was a hero in real life. Tony Curtis also can do it and he comes out well in this entertaining and colorful western directed by Rudolph Mate. The supporting cast is remarkable. Arthur Kennedy as the not so bad guy, Coleen Gray  sexy, pretty and remarkably still in style, Peter Van Eyk the refined villain who thinks he rules the world. From the poker game at the beginning to the uncontrollable lynching mob at the end all goes very fast . Very good musical number "Gypsy with the Fire in his Shoes" performed by Coleen Gray composed by Laurindo Almeida and Peggy Lee.

To call this a "B Western" is to do it an injustice. B Westerns were long on action, shooting, horse chases and short on acting, and, most of all, character development. And they were intended as second billing to an A feature. Rawhide Years has solid acting all around, and some truly enjoyable singing (and fine acting) from Colleen Miller. Tony Curtis delivers a relaxed, low-keyed performance in the manner of Hitchcock's dictum: Don't act! The result is some remarkably good acting for the Fifties. The movie is similarly low-keyed, and delivers a pleasant, interesting tale. There is a bit of a who-dunit in the river pirates that puts some meat on the plot, and there is character development to the Curtis role that shows a con man with a conscience who becomes a cowpoke and, ultimately, a man. The Arthur Kennedy character has an even stronger element of character development, and the twists add greatly to the story's interest. Kennedy's is, indeed, the most interesting acting. And then there is Peter van Eyck, the bad guy almost to the point of caricature -- Boo! Hiss! -- at least by the end of the movie. He all but ties Zoe to the railroad tracks. I kept having to double check that I wasn't seeing Harvey Korman in Blazing Saddles. I suspect Korman was parodying van Eyck -- and there is some resemblance.There is no strong moralizing here, just an entertaining story. If there is any lesson, it is that appearances can be deceiving, and it can be hard to know who your friends are. The opening, where the crew of the riverboat mistakes some logs for pirates hints at this, as does the Kennedy character. Rawhide Years has a good storyline that keeps moving and keeps your attention. In the end, the story ties the threads together nicely. It is not a great movie, just a good, solid, entertaining one, and that's all it sets out to be.

Riverboat gambler Ben has to flee town and his girl after he's suspected of killing a leading citizen. Now he's got to clear himself with shaky help from horse thief, Rick Harper.Going in, I figured the movie would amount to a vehicle for one of Universal's new, young stars, Tony Curtis. Well, the first 20-minutes had me figuring otherwise. First, Curtis's Ben gets caught cheating at cards, then he gets spurned by his girlfriend, and finally does something totally unWestern—loses a fist-fight to a bad guy and ends up tossed unceremoniously into the river. By this point, I wondered whether someone in Hollywood had mixed up the reels. But no, after this unexpected opening the film settles into the more familiar western heroics, with Ben getting his share, plus the girl. However, there are several more offbeat touches in the works, including a lynching where Ben refrains from intervening after calculating the odds. No heroics here. Then too, there's the great actor Arthur Kennedy as Ben's sometimes buddy and full-time horse thief, Harper. Now Kennedy's usual style is to low-key his parts, which he does effectively, e.g. The Man From Laramie (1955). Here, however, he pulls out all the stops with an over-the-top performance that steals many a scene from the more subdued Curtis. I'm surprised the studio didn't intervene, since its Curtis's career that's presumably being advanced.Anyhow, it's a kind of offbeat western and not just a showcase for pretty boy Curtis. Nothing special, but still more unpredictable than most oaters.