Border Law

In the time of "Brokeback Mountain" it is fun to look back over past epics of Western Machoness with undercurrents of gay subtext. Ultra manly, muscular, and handsome Jones is particularly fascinating now....given his slightly overstated wardrobe (big hats for a big man?)and seeming inability to ever fully button any of his shirts (or refrain from getting bare chested at least once a feature).

Add in his butt slapping horseplay with the young actor playing his younger brother (complete with wrestling around with him when the kid is in only his underwear in the opening scene)and the bar brawl scene where Jones is taunted to "Strip Down and Go At It" (!) by the chief baddie who succeeds in getting our hero to undress and roll around the dirty floor with a particularly hunky if nasty junior bad guy....and the subtext is much more genuine than Jones' ever so stiff and courtly flirting with Lopita Tovar...

Purists will scoff....but there is no denying the overtones that were probably innocent then...but seem pretty overt now.

People in the 21st century implying 'gay' in this movie are simply seeing what they want to see.

B movies were made for the younger audiences, and moral positivity was foremost.,

I noticed there were comments both ways about possible gay subtext in this film. Well, as some of the gayest looking scenes occurred between characters who were brothers in the film, I don't think that there really is that much in it that could be interpreted as gay. But there is one scene where a guy tells Buck Jones and his rival to take off there clothes and have at it--that is pretty gay! So, I'd say both reviewers have a point--and the truth seems somewhere in the middle.

As far as the rest of the film goes, aside from a couple remarkable things (the romance and the stunts), this is a completely ordinary and unremarkable film. Plus, the acting is occasionally quite stiff and clumsy. As far as the romance goes, back in 1931, it was a much more bigoted world. So, having Buck fall in love with a Mexican lady was unusual. Also, towards the end of the film, several stunts (especially the guy seamlessly grabbing his friend while on horseback) were amazingly good.

The plot is about what you'd expect. A gang is operating at the border with Mexico and keep crossing back and forth to avoid capture. After Buck's brother is murdered by them, he vows to destroy them and goes undercover. I've seen a ton of old B-westerns and this plot is very, very familiar. Not bad--just not all that good either.

"Border Law" (1931) with Buck Jones, Lupita Tovar, Jim Mason, Frank Rice, Don Chapman, John Wallace, Lou Hicks, and others is a superb early "B" Western made probably on an "A-" budget at Columbia Pictures. Jones was really at his acme here, and though the picture is filled with what are now seen as dusty clichés, this was the early foundation days for many of them. Jones' plays a ranger whose younger ranger brother (Chapman) and another ranger (Rice) are assigned along with Jones to go after the notorious Shag Smith (Mason) and his gang, a bunch of ruthless bank robbers and killers. Chapman happens to be in town when the gang rides in to intimidate the town prior to planning to rob the bank. In the process they kill Chapman. Jones forms a stratagem to capture the gang in revenge. He "resigns" his ranger commission, as does Rice, and now Jones becomes the notorious "Pecos Kid", wanted for $2500, dead or alive. Meanwhile, he's met Lupita Tovar, a fiery girl from south of the border, a real spitfire. Jim Mason as the baddie was as good as it gets at being bad in these "B" Westerns, and he's equal to Jones here as a watchable cuss, as are Rice as Jones' partner and Lou Hicks as a scar-faced "Dave", a former prize fighter gone way, way bad. Tovar's a pip. Good show! If you're a Jones Western fan, saddle up! You'll appreciate the superb stunts, though today's watcher will be put off a bit by the speeded up horses in some of the chases. It wasn't necessary, and it spoils the verisimilitude a great deal today.

I watched this movie because I like the simplicity of the older westerns. I also found this plot a little too simple. Even so, the rough-and-tumble action of the movie and the abruptness of the scene edits made it rather amusing.

I think that finding "undercurrents of gay subtext" in this movie is reading far too much into it. As a young man I wrestled with other young men (yes, even shirtless!), engaged in some good natured rump slapping, as athletes often do, and even wore shirts not fully buttoned. But anyone who thinks that any of us had any leanings toward being gay is not the brightest light in the marquee. That's really funny!