Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Aedonerre I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

TheLittleSongbird While the western genre is not my favourite one of all film genres (not sure which one is my favourite due to trying to appreciate them all the same), there is a lot of appreciation for it by me. There are a lot of very good to great films, with the best work of John Ford being notable examples.In the late 50s, starting in 1956 with 'Seven Men from Now' and right up to 1960 with 'Comanche Station', lead actor Randolph Scott collaborated with director Budd Boetticher in seven films. For me, 1957's 'Decision at Sundown' is one of their weakest, even a strong contender for their weakest. By all means it is a long way from terrible, it has a lot of great elements and is actually pretty decent. It just isn't in the same league as the wonderful 'Seven Men from Now' and 'The Tall T' and doesn't have enough of what made those two so good.Starting with the strengths, while not the best-looking of their outings, being smaller in scale and slightly too compact in its setting, 'Decision at Sundown' still looks pleasing. It is very nicely filmed, with some nice colour and atmosphere, and handsomely designed, it just lacks the visual grandeur of their best collaborations. The music has presence and fits nicely, while not being intrusive.Boetticher directs efficiently and mostly the film goes at a pace that isn't pedestrian. Numerous parts are suspenseful and fun, with some well choreographed action and some moral complexity. The ending is unusual and unexpected, and very effective. Scott brings likeability, charisma and intensity to his role and he is well supported by Karen Steele (oozing glamour and charm), Noah Beery Jr (enjoying himself immensely and having the best of the fun moments), John Archer (nice authority) and Andrew Duggan (suitably snake-like).However, Valerie French is rather bland and colourless in an underwritten role and lacking the charm and sometimes touching chemistry of Steele. John Carroll underplays his fairly one-dimensional villain, he's no Lee Marvin, Richard Boone or Claude Akins.The script is too wordy, lacking the meat and tautness of the scripts of the best Scott/Boetticher films, and can preach and be too basic to make the most of its complex themes. There is not enough depth to the characters, with only Scott's hero being developed enough and even then his motivation should have been explored more and more gripping. The story has a lot of great moments, but there is also some credibility straining, overload of simplicity and lack of tautness.In conclusion, decent but had the potential to be much better. 6/10 Bethany Cox

jazerbini In my opinion this is the film that Scott should not have done. The script is bad. Scott lives a husband who was betrayed by his wife years ago and seeks revenge the man responsible for it. The film escapes the traditional western line where the hero always has some dignity. Scott's character is a disoriented. Into the church in a way completely meaningless and then hides in a warehouse, taking his friend to death. Their actions do not make sense, despite being shown in history as having changed the lives of everyone in the community. All characters are caricatured, it does not seem that may exist. "Decision at Sundown" does not have the same strength of other Boetticher films and finishes disconcertingly again with Scott disoriented and drunk. I'm sorry those who admire the film, but I consider him very weak. Disappointing.

GManfred Mind if I swim against the current of critical opinion for a few lines? It's because I'm growing weary of the idolization of Budd Boetticher, which has been going on for far too long. "Decision at Sundown" is another goofy parable from Boetticher, who directs westerns with the touch of a blacksmith. This one is about an Avenger (Randolph Scott) who comes to Sundown to settle an old score and is impervious to the truth.Now, the premise is not bad for an action-packed western, but this picture quickly disintegrates into a Two-Guys-Holed-Up-In-A-Barn standoff (The only scenario worse for movie stasis is a hostage drama). Not content with leaving bad enough alone, Boetticher then injects several surreal touches into his movie. Here is one example; One of the holed-up guys decides he is hungry and demands to come out and go for some breakfast. Rather than plug this guy as soon as he shows his face, the posse lets him out to eat! There are lots of other examples, but time and space don't allow. Other turn-offs are the Broadway-bright lighting of all scenes and that all participants are immaculately dressed - wedding guests and non-guests - just like in the old west? Budd, I know you can't read this, but Westerns were not your thing. I don't know what genre would have been. But you fooled a lot of folks with your, ah, novel approach to boring situations and making country bumpkins sound like Epictetus or John Donne. And I am really teed off that you made rugged, stalwart Randolph Scott, one of my favorite western heroes, the butt of your feature length inside jokes.

Spikeopath Bart Allison and Sam, his trusty companion, ride into Sundown looking for a guy named Tate Kimbrough. It appears that Kimbrough had a dalliance with Allison's wife some years earlier, an affair that led to the suicide of the erstwhile Mrs Allison. With revenge and hatred eating away at him, Allison will not rest until he gets his man, but his very being here in Sundown will be the catalyst for not only himself, but also every other resident of this dusky town.Randolph Scott {Bart Allison} and director Budd Boetticher made seven very interesting, and intelligent Westerns together, each man seemingly using each one as a muse of sorts. This particular entry on their wonderful resume's is a fine testament to their winning formula, because Decision At Sundown offers up something different outside of your standard Western fare. The plot structure is for sure very basic, the man out for revenge, and the town in the grip of less than honourable men, but here our main protagonist really isn't thinking with his head. He is driven by rage and an affair of the heart, he in fact doesn't care if he lives or dies, just as long as he gets his man!. Also of interest is the effect on the town of Sundown that Allison has, it certainly lent me to think about some so called supernatural Westerns that would surface later on down the line, whilst the ending here doesn't resort to any sort of cop out formula's, it's poignant and begs for a further train of thought.Scott is first rate as Allison, grey hair personifying the wisdom that he has lost due to his blind thirst for revenge, with a devilment glint evident in both of his eyes. Scott does an excellent line in rage and grief stricken acting, so no doubt in my mind that Randy Scott was a wonderful actor in this splendid of Western genres. Backing Scott up is Noah Beery Jr {Sam} and John Archer as Dr. John Storrow, but of the rest of the cast I personally couldn't lend too much praise for, with the main negative of note being that the villains of the piece barely get out of grumpy only territory, John Carroll {Kimbrough} and Andrew Duggan as crooked Sheriff Swede Hansen really should have gone for a more twirling moustache type villainy than the underplayed ones we actually get.But underplayed villains be damned, this is still a hugely enjoyable picture, and one that definitely holds up on a repeat viewing. 7/10