Last Train from Gun Hill
I love the complexity of westerns from the 1950s. Moreover, I love the fact that this complexity could be contained within the framework of relatively simple and compact stories and still lose nothing in the telling. Take Last Train from Gun Hill (1959): on the face of it we have a fairly standard pursuit and revenge tale, yet it successfully tackles the themes of racism, loyalty (both to friends and to family), justice and the father/son dynamic. Not only that, but it wraps the whole thing up in a run time of an hour and a half or thereabouts. The result is tight, intense moviemaking that draws you in from the very first shot and only relinquishes its grip when the final credits roll.
Matt Morgan (Kirk Douglas) is a US Marshal with a Cherokee bride and a young son. Within minutes of the opening Morgan’s wife has been assaulted, raped and murdered by two young thugs. This is a brutal and shocking way to begin any story, and despite the camera mercifully cutting away none of its power is diminished. The point is further hammered home when Morgan arrives to survey the terrible aftermath, horror, sorrow and outrage all flitting across his features. Morgan’s grief is compounded by his realisation that a saddle left behind at the scene of the crime points the finger of guilt at an old friend and comrade Craig Belden (Anthony Quinn). Morgan doesn’t for one moment believe that Belden himself could have been directly involved in this heinous act, but the presence of the saddle means some member of his entourage must have been. The sting in the tail comes from the fact that the chief culprit is Belden’s son and heir Rick (Earl Holliman), a spoilt and inadequate young man living hopelessly in his father’s shadow. The perverse and damaging nature of this father/son relationship is eloquently summed up in a short scene at Belden’s ranch house. When the foreman ribs the boy about the reason for a cut on his face Belden goads him into fighting for the honour of the family name - Rick is soundly beaten, causing humiliation to him and disappointment to his father. When Morgan learns the truth the scene is set for a confrontation between the two old friends. The bonds between the two men are strong but the events that have taken place put an intolerable strain on them. Morgan is determined to take Rick back to stand trial while Belden is equally determined to stop him. As Morgan and his prisoner wait in a cramped hotel room for the arrival of the last train, Belden and his men lay siege outside. There’s more than a passing resemblance to Delmer Daves’ 3:10 to Yuma at this point, although Rick lacks the charm of Ben Wade and Morgan’s personal loss lends him more inflexibility than Dan Evans. As the clock ticks inexorably towards the arrival of that last train the pressure mounts on Morgan, and the issue is raised of whether he too might have to face the same situation as Belden somewhere down the line - for Morgan (like his former friend) is now a widower faced with the unenviable task of trying to raise a boy alone.
John Sturges always knew how to shoot an action scene and there can be no complaints on that score here. However, this movie isn’t a string of back to back shoot-em-up set pieces, and it’s sometimes forgotten how good Sturges was at coaxing strong performances from his cast. Both Douglas and Quinn give convincing portraits of men unaccustomed to ceding ground to anyone and torn between conflicting loyalties. The few scenes where they actually share the screen are a pleasure to watch - the initial meeting at the ranch when both men realize who really killed Morgan’s wife, and what the consequences must inevitably be, contains some marvellous work with an enormous amount of feeling conveyed simply through subtle glances. As good as Quinn is, Douglas steals the show with his grim determination and suppressed fury boiling just below the surface. He’s playing a man for whom respect for the law and the badge he carries is paramount, even to the extent that his own personal grief is subordinated to duty. There are only two occasions when his professionalism is allowed to slip momentarily, both triggered by racial slurs directed at his murdered wife. The first is a reflexive burst of physical violence against a local loudmouth. The second, however, is merely vocal but has a sadistic quality that is quite chilling - his deliberate and detailed description to a shackled and cowed Rick of how the judicial process that will lead to his certain death will be as slow and protracted as any Indian execution is the only time he permits himself to savour the taste of revenge. Earl Holliman played Rick as a whining, craven creature who never elicits the least sympathy from the viewer. This seems to be largely down to the writing, and if any particular criticism is to be made of the film it’s that Rick’s character is just too unlikeable. If there had been something even vaguely attractive about him it would have added yet another layer to the story, but that’s really just nitpicking on my part. Carolyn Jones has the only female role in the movie (not counting the extremely brief appearance by Morgan’s wife) as the on/off lover of Belden. Aside from providing a counter to all the machismo on display, she occupies (for most of the film at least) a place similar to that of the viewer i.e. watching from the sidelines while feeling some sympathy for both the protagonists. In the end, it’s her respect for Morgan and his motivation, and her disillusionment with Belden and his son’s brutality, that leads to the decisive shift in the balance of power.
The R1 DVD from Paramount has Last Train from Gun Hill looking just great. The vistavision elements have been transferred beautifully at 1.78:1 anamorphic, with colours looking rich and saturated. I can’t say I noticed any damage or flaws worth mentioning and the image is sharp and detailed. There are no extras whatsoever on the disc, and that’s a pity as this is a movie that would seem to be just begging for an intelligent commentary track. This is a movie - like many by Sturges in fact - that knows how to keep the tension simmering and the viewer hooked. There’s no preaching or tiresome moralising yet the messages are all communicated clearly and seamlessly without impeding the narrative or the entertainment. In short, it’s a high class film.
on October 20th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Great post, Colin. This is a film I appreciate more every time I see it. It’s quick, smart and very very nasty.
You bring up an excellent point — the main reason I loved 50s Westerns as a kid and am an even bigger fan of them today. They manage to weave in various themes — in this one, racism, revenge, loyalty, etc. — without ever bogging the picture down. They play to 10 year olds as well as they play to 40 year olds, on completely different levels. This makes them perfect for repeat viewing, and I’m often astonished at all that went over my head when I was a kid.
Of his many terrific pictures, I think this might be Sturges’ best for pacing and suspense. The fight in the hotel room over the shotgun is as good as it gets. There isn’t an ounce of fat on this thing — which you certainly can’t say about Gunfight At The OK Corral.
Again, great movie, great post.
on October 20th, 2010 at 7:15 pm
[…] Colin over at Riding The High Country has posted another great piece — this one on Last Train From Gun Hill (1959). […]
on October 20th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
Thanks Toby.
Any movie that you can revisit time and again qualifies as good in my opinion. The best of the 1950s westerns all have that in common, and it really does boil down to their multi-faceted nature - there’s something new to focus on with every viewing.
I guess that it’s inevitable that comparisons are drawn with Gunfight at the OK Corral, both movies coming from the same stable, but they’re entirely different in structure and pacing. I enjoy the two films very much (in fact I enjoy pretty much all of John Sturges’ pictures) but for different reasons.
on October 21st, 2010 at 5:28 am
Colin, your review and 50s Westerns’ comment are spot-on with regard to this film. I remember this film well from the first day I saw this on TV as a kid. It made that much of an impression on me. Douglas and Quinn’s all too brief scenes together here ought to shown to today’s actors so they can see how it’s done.
I showed this to my wife earlier this year, and though she’s not a fan of the western, she enjoyed it. I think with that viewing, I came away with a new impression (another strength of this Sturges film), and appreciated Carolyn Jones and her character more for it. This time, I saw Matt Morgan and Craig Belden trapped by the themes you stated, and in the macho actions they must take. They can do nothing about it. Only Linda really breaks free from these, which then causes the shift in power you mention.
The other aspect that I admire with this western is that Belden is someone the audience still respects, whether he’s the heavy or the real threat to Matt, or not. Anthony Quinn did so many villains early in his career, and got to be so good at it (besides becoming quite an actor). I see his (and the film’s) success with the role by the fact that I feel for him by the time the end credits arrive. The only other character that closely epitomizes this would be (for me) Robert De Niro as Neil McCauley in Michael Mann’s HEAT.
This is a great film and review, Colin. It is a favorite of mine.
on October 21st, 2010 at 9:14 am
Indeed. It’s impossible to overstate the importance of a genuinely sympathetic villain. It’s something that adds another dimension to a movie, manipulating the viewers’ emotions and making the resolution more powerful. Boetticher nailed this a number of times with Lee Marvin, Richard Boone and Claude Akins in particular. I’d also agree with you that Heat works in a similar way by asking us to divide our loyalties between De Niro and Pacino.
Carolyn Jones’ character is one that I too have learned to appreciate more with subsequent viewings. You tend to pass over her the first time as the duel between Morgan and Belden holds centre stage. However, Jones’ role is vital in grounding the picture and offering some perspective.
on October 22nd, 2010 at 3:52 am
It’s funny you’d both mention HEAT, since it’s a picture I often think of with this one. Both films seem to rotate around a key scene where two great actors really get to strut their stuff.
This may be Carolyn Jones’ best performance, and it’s one of the best roles ever handed to a woman in a 50s Western.
And lastly, it sure makes me happy to know this picture means as much to others as it does to me.
on October 22nd, 2010 at 8:15 pm
“Last Train From Gun Hill” is one of those ‘comfort blanket’ westerns I go back to time and again. I feel that it’s a great tribute to the natural, unshowy abilities of the directors/writers of the 50s that their storytelling remains so completely compulsive.I genuinely believe that Sturges’s westerns will be remembered long after the world has forgotten who Quentin Tarantino was!
One peculiar technical thing near the end of this picture I noticed while re-watching it recently is that Anthony Quinn’s voice sounds very strange in one very brief dialogue sequence. When he confirms that the sheriff should comply with Morgan’s instruction to untie the horse- and- buggy to make the final trip to the station, it sounds as if he’s been dubbed by someone with a bad case of laryngitis! In the next line of dialogue, it’s Quinn’s own voice again. Very odd.
What a picture though! A high-class film indeed.
on October 22nd, 2010 at 11:24 pm
Thanks Dafydd.
I think Sturges is a name that most people know unconsciously - surely almost everyone has seen The Magnificent Seven and/or The Great Escape - but never seems to get a lot of critical praise.
He was no visionary but his westerns in particular (with the possible exception of Joe Kidd) are all well crafted and some, like this one, are close to great. He could probably be likened to Walsh, Wellman and perhaps De Toth among western directors.
on November 21st, 2010 at 11:10 pm
Great posting. Sadly, many dismiss westerns, when looking for a good film to rent. They think Roy Rogers and Gene Autry (and by the way, there is nothing wrong with their films, other than thay are made for children), and dismiss films such as this. I think this is one of Douglas’ best performances, Quinn as well. TCM shows this often enough, I’m happy to report.
on January 29th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
Caught this the other night and was pleased with how taut and thrilling it was. Hard to believe the film was only around 90 minutes long - so much happens in it and there’s even room for plenty of scenes with Douglas looking tense and edgy in the way he does best.
I loved the difference between Gun Hill and the town where Douglas is marshall (the complete absence of kids in GH), the bit where Quinn makes his son fight the foreman, and of course Douglas’s speech in which he describes a hanging.
on January 29th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
Glad you enjoyed it too Mike. It is a very lean and efficient movie that demonstrates just how much a tight script and strong direction can deliver.
You’re quite right about the contrast in the two towns, Douglas’ patch looking like a pastoral paradise compared to the corrupt and violent Gun Hill.
Thanks for the comment.