Missouri

It seems like it could have been great but fails at just about every turn, unfortunatly. Likeable characters with all their actions unfolding logically and leading to dilemmas but for whatever reason the movie is rather boring and a bit over sentimental at times. It seems like the script was prob great but lost in the execution of production.

Ross Bodine (William Holden) and Frank Post (Ryan O'Neal) are a couple of cowboys complaining about life. They work for cattleman Walter Buckman (Karl Malden). They play with the idea of robbing a bank and riding off to Mexico. They are forced into a fight and wreck the saloon. Walter holds back their wages to pay off the damages. The two men see no way out other than to really do the robbery. Ross robs banker Joe Billings while Frank holds his wife Sada hostage. They allow him to keep some money to pay the local cowboys but Sada convinces him to steal it. Walter is angry that his two employees did the robbing. His two sons, John Buckman (Tom Skerritt) and Paul Buckman (Joe Don Baker), join the posse.

The poster is a little funny. The intention seems to be portraying this a light fun action western. I don't actually find it funny. It tries to be light at times. Mostly, it's bit muddled and long. I would rather have some better action. Blake Edwards is using too much slow motion when he doesn't need it. The bank robbery should be better. The horse roundup is the best action. Otherwise, the action is less than impressive. All in all, this is fine but I would find a comedian to be one of the leads especially if Blake intends this as a comedy. Apparently, the studio took over the finishing and Blake disowned the final product. At least, he got material for another film. I doubt he has a sense of the western genre.

I was very surprised when I saw that "Wild Rovers" was written and directed by Blake Edwards. Edwards is more known for his comedies and occasional dramas...not westerns. Was he up to the task? Well, considering what sort of film it is, having a non-western writer/director is actually a very good thing!

Why would I say this? Because "Wild Rovers" is a totally deconstructed view of cowboys. Instead of the usual macho theatrics you see in a western, this one is much more like the lives of REAL cowboys....their dull and somewhat pointless lives. In the film, the guys work hard, get paid little, visit prostitutes, fight because they are bored, puke, and die young...like a real cowboy of the era. There's nothing romanticized about the men in this film and, if anything, they are a bit sad and pitiful.

In the story, two of these drifting cow punchers, Ross and Frank (William Holden and Ryan O'Neal) begin to question their lives and their futures. To escape this, they consider robbing a bank. After all, better to die this way than to die on the job. But if they follow through with their plan, it's pretty certain that it won't be easy and some folks will come gunning for them.

In order to maintain the realistic style of the film, Edwards does not rush the film at all. Instead, it's slow and deliberate. Additionally, the cinematography often helps to convey a sense of loneliness--with wide screen shots of the lonely prairie. It's lovely...but stark. This could make for a dull film (like "Heaven's Gate") but the writer/director seemed to maintain the proper balance of dullness, scope and the story itself.

So is it any good? Well, it's difficult to judge based on the IMDB reviews. They run the gamut...from those hating it, the indifferent as well as those who think it's a masterpiece. As for me, I really appreciated "Wild Rovers" because I used to be an American History teacher...and know Edwards' view of the west is far more realistic than 99% of the movies in this genre. Thoroughly exciting? No...but neither was life in the old west. Overall, very well made and well worth seeing provided you have an open mind and don't demand the usual western cliches and plot twists.

I saw WILD ROVERS when it first came out - in the early 70s. It had been butchered by the powers that be at MGM. Still there was a lot to recommend the western: William Holden at his post-WILD BUNCH grizzled best, Jerry Goldsmith's classic, Copelandesque score that somehow manages to be lyrical, evocative but not a bit cloying (learn something, James Horner and Hans Zimmer), and the stunning cinematography. I saw it again in the late 80s restored to its original length (on a double bill with the restored PAT GARRETT AND BILLY THE KID, also butchered by MGM in the early 70s). I found more to like about the movie: the unexpected spurts of humor, the observations of the connectedness between cowboy and animal life, and Blake Edward's staging of the scenes of violence - he never does the same thing twice, and the barroom shootout is an object lesson in blocking and editing. (If there is any complaint one can level against Clint Eastwood's UNFORGIVEN was how uninterestingly the action scenes were staged.) Anyway, I just caught WILD ROVERS again on HD.Net Movies during 4th of July weekend, and its virtues have actually grown with age. And it looks gorgeous on a 16:9 Hi-Def screen. Give it a few more years and it might attain classic status.

Overlong, but the wide-screen cinematography (a must-see in letter-box format), music score and character relationship of Holden and O'Neal, make this one of my favorite westerns. As a nature-lover, I find the outdoor scenes, especially the horse-breaking in the snow, among the best I've seen in any western. The cinematography in this scene is breath-taking, exhilarating and thrilling. The superb and beautiful music score by Jerry Goldsmith adds to the overall enjoyment of this film. Please, M-G-M, bring this film out on DVD. It needs to be seen in it's original, uncut, widescreen version so it can take it's place along other great western films.