Bad Jim

Good scenery, incomprehensible storyline. The reason I give this movie what I would call a massive 4 out of 10 is simply that the actors are not horrible. They give decent performances, believable performances sort of. The script is an incoherent mess with no logical purpose. I didn't know why the characters did what they did, and after the film I was left somewhat puzzled at what I was supposed to "take home" from watching it. Was there any sort of afterthoughts to be had? Not really. If the actors had been as bad as the script, then this would have been a 2/10 movie, but they lift it up to an acceptable 4 out of 10. Passable for entertainment, barely. Anything with Chuck Norris in it is at least as good/bad as this.

It's not often that the horses do a better job of acting than the principle in a western. While James Brolin and Richard Roundtree were passable John Clark gable was gawd awful. The story line itself didn't really make any sense, apparently riding Billy the Kid's horse altered the sensibilities of the rider. If that was indeed the premise of the story more should have been made of it. Although the narrative was incoherent the scenery was good and Brolin's appaloosa horse was stunning. It's a shame they wasted the time and effort it took to make a film that didn't make any sense.This would make a good movie to have on with no audio and music playing while you clean the house.

My review was written in April 1990 after watching the film on RCA/Columbia video cassette.

"Bad Jim" is a good-natured Western about three kindly desperadoes and Billy the Kid's horse. It's a direct-to-video release that should satisfy sagebrush buffs.

Filmmaker Clyde Ware brings authenticity and enthusiasm to the moribund genre. Casting interestingly teams up James Brolin, who played Clark Gable in "Gable and Lombard" with sidekick John Clark Gable, the late star's son and a dead ringer for Kevin Costner. Third member of the triumvirate is Richard Roundtree, in good form and overdue for a Western since "Charley One-Eye" 17 years earlier.

The trio is intercepted by Pepe Serna, on the lam from the authorities. He had been riding with the late Billy the Kid and sells them what he claims to be the Kid's horse. Gable renames it Jim and the three ne'er-do-wells begin a series of bank robberies posing as Billy and his gang.

Rather uneventful film is long on atmosphere, with good lensing of Arizona locations and well-researched folklore (notably a primitive form of lacrosse played by a local Indian tribe). Ware avoids racism or condescension, though his script has a little too much hindsight at times, such as Gable lecturing a young woman on tolerance: "Put yourself in the other guy's shoes or moccasins".

Brolin is comfortable in the saddle and Gable shows promise. Supporting cast is peppered with veterans like Ty Hardin and Rory Calhoun who are fun to see again in this context.

First saw this movie around 1991-92 on HBO while in high school. I was intrigued then and still am now. Indeed the plot is a little bizarre and uneven, I think that's part the allure for me. I like the "authentic old West dialogue" they use, especially James Brolin (B. D.) who plays the older experienced and level headed guy but who is a bit of a dolt and follows John T's lead after he goes off the deep end after getting his mind possessed by The Kid's horse. Pepe Serna is always welcome, and despite Gable's awful acting chops, the scene with the prostitute and her "brother" is sweet. Who can resist the bank robbing montage set to the completely out of place 90's hairband rock music? Or when they gloriously devour those peaches for "$1 the can?" Ultimately it's a story about 3 average Joe's who are sick of their mundane life as rustlers, guys who decide (with a little help of a demonic horse) that they want more out of life, only to realize that money can't help you when you're constantly on the run. But truly, aren't we all just trying to get to our own beautiful Montana Territory in this life? Great scenery, interesting dialogue, and period-specific details. Good on you, Bad Jim.

This film, beautifully photographed, is a snoozer. We tried four times, and couldn't get past the first thirty-nine minutes. The story is incomprehensible, the dialogue...umm...interesting ~ but young Mr. Gable is certainly easy on the eyes. Definitely a curiosity piece.