Destry Rides Again

There are several reasons why Destry Rides Again appeals to me. While I am not the biggest fan of westerns I do think there are some jewels within the genre, and I love comedy when it's done right. Destry Rides Again merges these two genres brilliantly. George Marshall does a fine job directing, I can understand why those would find his directing style flat but he allows the stars to have fun and has a nice understated approach to how he directs the film. This approach works.

The film still looks great. The cinematography and editing are crisp, the sets don't look as though they are made on the cheap and the costumes are beautiful to watch, and the music is rousing and compliments the mood wonderfully. The story is not as good as some of the other components but it is a fun, well-paced and relevant one. And there is a fine cast. Marlene Dietrich, cast against type here looks as though she is having a ball and has some of the film's best scenes and lines, and the wonderful James Stewart in his first western lead shows a believable chemistry(like fireworks I'd say!) and gives a very charming performance. Brian Donlevy is deliciously snide and knows how to sneer and scowl, and Mischa Auer, Charles Winninger and Allen Jenkins are marvellous.

Three things especially elevate Destry Rides Again to an even higher level though. One is the rollicking humour, the dialogue in particular is cracking and delivered with a wicked sense of timing by the whole cast. Secondly, Marlene Dietrich performing the simply fabulous See What the Boys in the Back Room Will have, that scene alone is a timeless classic. And finally, and possibly even the best of all, is the cat-fight between Dietrich and Una Merkel, which as far as I'm concerned has never been bettered.

Overall, a classic western-comedy and not to be missed. I think it could have been a tad longer, but with everything else so good I don't mind so much. 9.5/10 Bethany Cox

This movies had three strikes against it at Oscar time. 1)It was made in 1939 arguably the single year when more great films came out than any other year, 2) It was a western(no western had won best picture since "Cimaron" and would not again until "Dances With Wolves"and 3) It was a comedy and movie fans know how well comedy movies do at Oscar time. I know people who simply will not watch a black and white film or an old movie. Well, in my opinion, this movie has a story that is thoroughly enjoyable and stands up well even today. It has an excellent cast not only in the lead roles but also in the supporting cast. So, anyone who might not watch this film because it is not color is cheating themselves of an enjoyable film. And for any who just don't watch a film just because it is old, may I suggest that if you haven't seen a movie it is new for you. As for myself, I just did not endorse this film, but I put my money where my mouth is and forked over the greenbacks not once but twice. I got the film on VHS, and enjoyed it thoroughly. Upon finding it newly released on DVD, I got it again. The picture quality in the DVD is great. I'm a little surprised that there were no special feature extras included since these kind of bonuses are so common with DVD releases. But I suppose that would be like criticising a painting because of a lack of a fancy frame. This film certainly deserved to sweep the Oscars, and probably would have in a different year. 'Nuff sed.

When the Sheriff of Bottleneck asks one too many questions about the legitimacy of Kent's card games, he winds up dead and the new sheriff is the town drunk. The corrupt forces behind Bottleneck think that things will be just how they like it from now on but don't figure that the drunk will call in help in the form of a deputy, Tom Destry – son of the famous lawman. However Destry Jr turns out to not only be against carrying guns but also be soft-spoken and good humour – not characteristics that Wash hoped for in his deputy. However with a culture of silence, gun crime widespread and the town in the grip of the sultry and dangerous Frenchy, can Destry make an impact? Although I always find it difficult to watch large sections of this film without recalling the hilarious Blazing Saddles I do enjoy the mix of comedy, drama and dark content in this film and find it eminently enjoyable. From the very start, the tone is raucous and comic and the addition of Stewart only serves to make it seem even more whimsical. And for the most part it is just like this – broad fun with gentle laughs and good-natured playing all round. This is fine and makes for a fun film but it is the extra stuff that makes it gain momentum towards the end and not just end up like a big puff of nothing much; the drama is tense, the writing is brave and the action is pretty enjoyable. It isn't amazing stuff though and it could be argued that the sudden rush of blood at the end doesn't sit that well with the relaxed pace it had early on but for me it phased from one aspect into the other pretty well and the conclusion actually made it feel weightier than the majority had actually been.

The cast make it work of course, despite the risks taken. With events as they were at the time, Dietrich was considered a risk but she pays off well and is a great central character providing laughs and some real energy in her character and the musical numbers. Stewart has great chemistry with her, even if the script didn't make their relationship totally convincing. He plays his usual type of role but he does it very well and he mixes his gentle comic touch with Dietrich's bawdry style. The support cast are roundly great and people like Auer, Winninger, Donlevy and others all make sure that the film is not being carried by the two leads but is rather a group effort.

Overall a great comedy western that has more to it than you think. Unlikely to win over younger viewers weaned on constant action or big gross-out laughs but it is an effortless watch with gentle humour, great musical numbers, some tension, good action, great acting and a whole experience that has an enjoyable swagger to it while also winking to the audience for the most part.

. . . this is what they mean.

I'm intrigued by the voting on this movie as I can't imagine any scale on which it wouldn't get top marks. Where exactly does it drop the ball? Cast - inspired; performances - stellar; script - faultless; direction - millimetre perfect; score - find me one better, ("See what the boys in the back room will have" has gone into the language).

Is it because it's not an arthouse movie? Or because of the dangerous idea that restraint, cool and smarts are more effective weapons than playground bully tactics?

As far as I am concerned, if you want to know how to put a movie together, you can start here. 10/10 is the only possible mark for a masterpiece.

Jimmy Stewart, in the title role, is a pleasure to watch and listen to. The economy he brings to the role is surpassed only by his drollness. Marlene Dietrich is magical and when she and Stewart get together, it may not be exactly sparks but there sure is some heat.

This is one of the finer westerns of the period. It holds up very well into the 90s. The supporting characters are well cast and bring a nice feel of variety to the tiny town of Bottlenck.