Watch The Quick Gun For Free

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

Having read previous reviews, I nearly didn't bother to watch TQG, but was glad that I did. By the standards of the 1960s and Audie Murphy Westerns, it wasn't at all bad. Murphy wasn't the greatest actor (though he did well in The Red Badge of Courage and The Unforgiven), but many of his facial reactions in TQG were quite good.Certainly Ted de Corsia over-acted, and the hotel seemed remarkably plush for such a small town. But I've seen far worse well-lit night scenes, and the townsfolk were elderly because all the young ranch-hands were away on trail. The old gang member seemed no older than grizzled old coots such as Gabby Hayes and Walter Brennan who featured in many Westerns.Spoiler begins: Sheriff Grant's strategy was all wrong. He locks up the only other fighting man in town and lets go the two outlaws sent to reconnoitre the town. (Later, when they are captured, Dan Evans remarks that's two less; pity that they weren't arrested earlier.) And Grant was foolhardy to go out to parley with Spangler.I did suspect that some of the revolvers might be seven- or eight-shot, but at least both sides went through the motions of reloading them.

Dating from 1964, the latter Audie Murphy western is a routine B filler littered with continuity errors (most notably, the church building in which all the windows are dark from the outside but inside the lights are on full pelt), stunt doubles and poor tactics (when attacking the town the villains don't decide to use dynamite to destroy the barricade until about half of them have been killed in a pointless full-frontal attack). It does have a high body count and Ted De Corsia overacts enjoyably in a role he previously played only 4 years before in Noose for a Gunman. (this film is a remake of that from the same production company).With these 1960s colour B westerns it is noticeable how ridiculously clean everything is. One guesses the film was shot on standard TV sets during the season break.I was intrigued by the member of outlaw De Corsia's band who seemed to be at least 70 years old. This guy says nothing the whole time and must have been cast because he was a friend or relation of someone. His moment of fame comes when the outlaws lay siege to Murphy who is in a hotel. Throughout the sequence, this OAP stands next to De Corsia gurning, looking around for no obvious reason and pointing his gun at his boss.

This is basically the same story as the 1960 film, Noose for a Gunman. Same writers, Steve Fisher & Robert E. Kent. Same production co., Robert E. Kent Productions. Ted de Corsia even plays the leader of the gang of 'bad guys' in both films. I prefer Noose for a Gunman over The Quick Gun, it seems to play out better. Along with that, Noose for a Gunman has quite a few of the best character actors: Jim Davis, Barton MacLane, Leo Gordon, Harry Carey Jr.,Lane Chandler, John Hart & Kermit Maynard. Lyn Thomas plays the female interest in 'Noose'. Noose for a Gunman is filmed in beautiful black & white, while The Quick Gun was in color. There is only four years between the two films, which seems like a short period of time for a remake/re-telling of the same story. This is not a bad film, but you should see them both to get the 'Big Picture'.

Director Sidney Salkow made quite a few westerns over the course of his career, and the one thing they have in common is that none of them are particularly good. If you want to see why, then watch this picture. Salkow has no sense of pacing whatsoever (a trait even more evident in his "Sitting Bull" from 1954, which has to be among the most disjointed pictures ever made). Stuff happens, then nothing happens for a while, then stuff happens again, then nothing happens for a while again, and so on, and so on, and so on. That describes this picture pretty much to a T, and what's even worse is that, unlike many of Salkow's other westerns, this one actually has a cast of experienced western actors in roles both large and small: James Best, Frank Ferguson, Rex Holman, Rick Vallin, Frank Gerstle and Mort Mills, among others, have done good work in other westerns, and Audie Murphy is earnest as always, but there's not much they can do with this. They try hard, but Salkow's limp direction and the drivel they're forced to recite kill whatever small chances there may have been of making something out of nothing. Even though the plot is somewhat tired, good--or even halfway competent--writing could have made this picture at least watchable. The writing here is laughable hack work, just cliché piled on top of cliché, overheated dramatics, eye-rolling villainy--it seems more like a William S. Hart western from 1915 than an Audie Murphy western from 1964. The last part of the picture picks up a bit--"picks up" being a relative term, considering that virtually nothing has happened up to that point--when the outlaw gang attacks the town, but even that isn't in the least exciting. Salkow's tenuous skills as a filmmaker completely evaporate when the "action" starts (again, check out his 1954 "Sitting Bull") and this picture is no exception--a few desultory gunshots and a bad guy falls off his horse, another gunshot or two and a townsman falls down (it's hard to tell if it's because he was "shot" or if he just dropped from exhaustion--the outlaws and the townsmen in this picture have to be among the OLDEST people to engage in a gun battle in the history of westerns) and the same thing is pretty much repeated for the next eight or ten minutes. There's no sense of excitement, danger, or anything other than boredom. In the end, of course, everything works out exactly as you knew it would, but it's not really worth sitting through this dull, lumbering mess to have your suspicions confirmed.