Gunfight in Abilene

Bobby Darin looks so goofy in this movie that seeing Leslie Nielsen as a grim and malevolent land baron makes this movie even funnier.

Bobby Darin has a nice personality, but he looks 100% ethnic New Yorker, and I doubt he could ride a horse. This is not a bad movie, except that it does not make any sense. It is just the kind of movie that was put together and nobody bothered to check if the plot made any sense, or if the dialogue made any sense. Just a passable B movie.

The horrible song, Amy, makes it even worse. The movie was all about Bobby Darin and his guilt over killing Nielsen's brother. The song is about Amy, who plays second fiddle to the broken friendship between Darin and Nielsen. Just another part of the story that is awkward.

This is a good western film from the mid- 60's with Bobby Darin playing a Civil War soldier who returns home, only to find that things have changed in his occupation status, and love life. Darin gives a good performance, and Leslie Nielson is good as the villain.*** stars

I found that the entire picture would have been quite slap stick without Emily Banks. It was she that kept the viewer from falling asleep. The script was horrible! The outcome of the movie was as predictable as the over and over riding the horsey scenes.

I spent and enjoyable 90 minutes or so watching this film a few months ago and I would have summed this up as a good film and probably given it a higher rating (6-7).

However yesterday I sat down to watch the earlier made "Showdown at Abilene" and for the first 20 minutes had this feeling of "deja-vu". It was then I realised that this was an almost identical re-make of a film that was only 11 years old and wondered why on earth they bothered.

The lead in "Gunfight" is hopelessly miscast; Bobby Darin always seems to come across as a poor-man's Dean Martin and seems to have a constant grin on his face throughout. I am also of the generation that can no longer take Leslie Nielson seriously in ANY film which is a shame as he makes quite a good fist of this role. I am also always uncomfortable watching Michael Sarrazin (although that is an entirely personal thing and admit that this probably has more to do with his "intensity" as an actor than any lack of skill in his trade). Even in this, his first role, he is the stand-out act.

One thing on which I must comment however is Darin's Confederate uniform however is laughable (more Las Vegas than Civil War) and is so tight, he dare not bend over at any time!

To be fair to Gunfight however I thought I should give this another go and then watched the pair back to back.

The original (Showdown) is a much better and much more subtle in its approach to the reasons why he will not carry a gun (I'll say no more for fear of it being a "spoiler"). Had I not seen the earlier film, I would have been quite happy with this version but it is not really a patch on the first one and seems a pointless re-make.

If you have time and love Westerns as much as I do give this a go but if you can only watch one watch the original.

Though only 11 years had elapsed since the release of "Showdown at Abilene," Universal re-made this under the title "Gunfight in Abilene" with, surprisingly, Bobby Darin taking over the Jock Mahoney role. It's an unexpected casting which does not pay off since Darin seems out of place in a western and he's simply too small and modest to be the kind of tough lawman who could "clean up" a frontier town. In some scenes, he looks even shorter than leading lady, Emily Banks, and whereas Mahoney appeared on the balcony of the Abilene hotel gloriously bare-chested -- showing off his impressive physique but wearing his pants high enough to hide his navel -- Darin plays this same scene with his shirt on though open a bit at the top. (When Darin wakes up from a nightmare in a brief and dimly-lit scene, however, he's bare-chested whereas Mahoney, in a comparable scene, wears an undershirt.) On the plus side, Darin did contribute a song, "Amy," which is sung under the opening credits and which, though undistinguished, is pleasant enough and which today -- due to a decline in movie-song-writing quality -- might win an Oscar.

The triangular relationship among Jock Mahoney, Lyle Bettger, and Martha Hyer which strengthened the original movie is still of interest here but one can't quite believe that Bobby Darin and Leslie Nielsen had once been close friends.

Though this re-make follows the original quite closely, there are two notable changes. This version begins with a Civil War battle sequence showing Bobby Darin accidentally shooting a friend. Thus the audience knows from the start why the guilt-stricken Darin is reluctant to carry a gun when he returns to Abilene and why he feels he owes a debt to the dead friend's brother. When Darin later confesses the truth to Nielsen, his remarks lack the impact they had in the original version when the audience did NOT know what had happened back in the Civil War battle.

The other change is also questionable. In the new version there's a young blonde woman in Abilene who has a crush on Darin and who pops up in a few scenes. This character does not appear in the original version and she adds nothing to the story.

The re-make is superior to the original in two respects, however. Donnelly Rhodes makes a much more convincing "bad guy" than Ted de Corsia, and Michael Sarrazin's whipping is more effectively staged than Grant Williams' whipping in the 1956 version. Sarrazin is stripped of his shirt and subjected to more punishment and taunts than Williams who, for some inexplicable reason, is allowed to keep his shirt on while being flogged, even though he has a pleasing physique -- as was proved in "The Incredible Shrinking Man" -- and even though Universal had begun to groom him for his "hunk" appeal.

Finally, all the character names from the 1956 version have been changed for the 1967 one.