Balas que Não Erram

No Name on the Bullet is possibly Audie Murphy's best western. Only Destry is on a par with it. These two films demonstrate clearly that Murphy could give a creditable performance on the rare occasions when he was given a good script, cast, and director to work with. In this film Murphy plays John Gant, an apparently easy going man who, in fact, is a hired killer with a deadly reputation. When he comes to town many apparently-respectable citizens with concealed guilt become panicked, each thinking that he is the one whom Gant is in town to kill. If you think you don't like Audie Murphy westerns, give this one a try. It will probably surprise -- and impress -- you.

One of Audie Murphy's two best Westerns, along with "Duel at Silver Creek." Audie departs from his usual role as a Good Guy, to play a part that is more bad than good, but has admirable qualities as well (honesty & responsibility chief among them). He underplays this role, which is one of the reasons that the movie works so well. It has little action for a B Western, but the action comes in a surprisingly violent sequence. The plot avoids many of the usual Western clichés, instead providing thought provoking dialog. Why do the TV channels repeatedly show Audie's mediocre movies & avoid showing his best? I rate it 8/10.

Audie Murphy had finally gotten a role where he could show his dark side. Picking up bits from Dan Duryea and Barry Sullivan's affable bad guys in previous films he had made with them, his John Gant is a smooth professional killer, an arbiter of fate, who in this film at least,seems to kill only those who truly deserve it. Cat calm and just as ruthless,he's afar cry from the baby face "Man gotta do what a man got to do" types he played in other Universal westerns. His real life prowess as the Hero lessened the suspense of those films, in this it brings a much needed tension; who can stop him? If he had played the good doctor and Charles Drake was the gunslinger everyone would know the resolution before the fadeout. Here, in a dark reversal of "Shane"'s ending, the fast gun rides out of the picture,his job completed,the hypocrisy and failings of the "good people" exposed,and the frontier is a little more civilized. This film,along with "The Red Badge of Courage,and the original "The Unforgiven" are the roles that showed that Mr. Murphy could've been a contender as an actual actor.

Movies like No Name on the Bullet uncover the depth of talent in Hollywood. The roles are filled almost exclusively by familiar faces with unfamiliar names - R. G. Armstrong, Willis Bouchey, Edgar Stehli - with the result that one can concentrate on the story characters rather than being distracted by "star presence".

Without a top-heavy cast, the story itself also gains focus, and I think the story of No Name on the Bullet is fascinating. What happens when a notorious contract killer rides into town and...does absolutely nothing?

The one star of the movie, Audie Murphy, plays the gunman. I love Murphy, one of Hollywood's misspent talents. Does this also apply to the the character actors I refer to above? Not really.

Character players, though quite talented, rarely attain stardom - Edward G. Robinson, Claire Trevor and Claude Rains are notable exceptions - not through neglect or misuse but by some limitation of range or persona. Audie Murphy's talent was misspent because, though obvious, it was never developed, either by studios, who, myopically, only wanted to exploit his war hero status as a box office draw, or directors who, in Murphy's career, were usually "line directors," good for getting a movie in the can on time and on budget rather than for getting great performances out their players.

Which brings me to director Jack Arnold, who does a journeyman's job, but who I believe is the cause for what another reviewer wrongheadedly calls Murphy's shortcomings. Stilted lines and studied movement are the results of "hands-off" direction. This is OK for the character parts, where skilled players in simple roles don't need much direction, but not for lead roles. Watching Murphy I'm reminded of another sadly underdeveloped star, Alan Ladd, whose talents always shone under a great director, but who didn't get those directors consistently enough, in my opinion, to fulfill his promise. Coincidentally, both Murphy and Ladd died prematurely. Perhaps not coincidentally, both had drinking problems. I wonder if they might have been experiencing similar frustrations.

Since No Name on the Bullet contains complex secondary parts, it's fortunate, that the players cast for these parts are outstanding, so the characters are interesting. Unfortunately, the budget constraints force the runtime of the film to be far too short. The result is a number of unresolved character studies. I want to know more about the blacksmith, the ex-flame and the judge - and more about the gunfighter. I'd also like to see more denouement. The main plot ends too abruptly, as if the producers were saying, "That's all we can afford to give you, Folks." That said, I wouldn't call the ending dumb, again as the wrongheaded reviewer cited above asserts, just shortchanged.

Returning to my opening thesis, that watching a cast of talented character players carry a movie is a special treat, I highly recommend this little gem of a Western.

When hired killer Audie Murphy rides into town, everyone gets nervous. Not so much because he's a killer, but because they all have something to hide. This is a wonderfully suspenseful, very low budget western, directed by Jack Arnold, from near the end of Murphy's period as Universal-International's resident cowboy star. His filmography may not be so distinguished as that of Gary Cooper or John Wayne, but it's an awful lot better than many have made it out to be. This fine-tuned gem is a heck of a lot better than North To Alaska.