Billy the Kid contre la loi

Seeing this was a producer Sam Katzman quickie production, I wasn't expecting much. What I got was even less. So why beat a dead horse when a half-dozen reviewers have already mocked the film. I guess I just can't resist it. Besides, maybe someone has finally awakened the sleepwalking Scott Brady. In the long line of Billy the Kid impersonators, his is easily the weariest, from start to finish. But then, he's already pushing middle-age, a 30-year old looking like 40— some Kid! St. John, on the other hand, looks very much a kid, like she just stepped out of a 1950's malt shop, Debbie Reynolds ponytail and all.

Remember, this is supposed to be 1880's eastern New Mexico, even though that desolate prairie looks nothing like the movie's lush San Fernando Valley. I don't mind some liberties with historical accuracy, but this movie is about as accurate as a cartoon. Oh well, it probably played three or four drive-in's, before earning back the fifty bucks Katzman spent on it. I hope I learned my lesson, at least until the next bomb comes down the Western Channel chute.

Every movie buff knows that Sam Katzman was to western and action movies what Mc Donald chain of restaurants is to gastronomy. It is cheap, quickly done, destined to the largest audiences, it may be an agreeable time waster but also very quickly forgotten. If you wish to watch good films about Billy The Kid and Pat Garrett, watch PAT GARRET AND BILLY THE KID, from the great Sam Peckinpah or of course Arthur Penn's LEFT HANDED GUN. This is not pure crap and concerning one of the youngest killer ever, I also have seen worse, many westerns even very very far from the actual events. This one, however seems rather close, not so far from history. Scott Brady is rather OK, doing his best.

William Castle made a fair number of Westerns before he discovered his niche in horror; blacklisted screenwriter Bernard Gordon would ultimately distinguish himself in science fiction. "The Law vs. Billy the Kid" is merely an example of two talents better at doing other things making a Western. The flat, artificial-looking sets commonly employed at Columbia were turned to surreal purposes in Castle's horror films merely look bland here; although cheaper in appearance, a PRC Western looks more like a Western than this does. Gordon has transformed Billy the Kid's big Western legend into a tidy romance; almost a chamber drama. But the treatment sacrifices some of the strong dramatic elements of that same story and also its irony, which is a replaced by a burning seriousness in the character of Billy that runs against type. Scott Brady is really too much of a manly he-man type to play Billy and is definitely too old for the part. Brady is the weakest element in the cast, which is generally good -- it's especially fun to see the beloved "Skipper" of Gilligan's Island play a sadistic jerk. I can think of a lot worse films -- even Westerns -- than this one; it's at least moderately entertaining. But the compromises made to the rich vein of source material from which it was draw, and in some other respects as well, makes the cost to the basic property a little too dear.

Law vs. Billy the Kid, The (1954)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

William Castle is best known for his horror films but he did mangle in the western genre for the majority of his career. This Columbia "C" picture has Billy the Kid (Scott Brady) and his buddy Pat Garrett (James Griffith) finding work on a farm but when the owner is killed by a bad sheriff, the kid decides to seek revenge, which will have all the law looking for him. I'm still not too familiar with Castle's western era even though I did sit through Jesse James vs. the Daltons. This film here isn't nearly as entertaining and for the most part this comes off very flat with very little life, action or energy. The biggest problem is that the screenplay is all over the map in what it's trying to do. We see Billy as a good kid and then we see him as a jerk. The film starts off with the relationship between Billy and Pat but then goes off into different directions. I'm really not sure what the point of the movie was but perhaps they were just trying to throw as much stuff they could into a 72-minute movie. Brady is pretty poor as Billy the Kid as he brings no life or energy to the role. Griffith isn't much better as Garrett and Alan Hale, Jr. of the Skipper fame doesn't fare any better. I doubt western fans will find anything worth watching this for so it'll probably have to be seen by those wanting to know what Castle did before making a name for himself with Vincent Price.

This movie is bad. And not in an Ed Wood way kinda bad. No, No, No. This movie bites so bad that if you left it along it would run off and howl at the moon and eventually deliver a whole flock of mindless look-a-likes to your front door, which is where this cur came from in the first place.

The script, such as it is, moves the plot line along at the break neck speed of a depressed three-toed sloth. The cast was assembled much the same as Frankenstein's Monster was. The set looks like it was all borrowed from a dream sequence of Gilligan's Island, which makes sense being as how Alan Hale Jr. appears as one of the baddies.

Hale chews up the scenery like a crazed beaver, spitting out the most atrocious dialog like so much sawdust and toothpicks. His character meets his much needed end in quite possibly the most unconvincing, unrealistic death scene ever to grace a western.

Best viewed with several friends, an endless bowl of popcorn and the mind altering drug of your choice.