IMDb RATING
5.9/10
1.5K
YOUR RATING
A former spy moves to Arizona to join a gold robbery, but when he gets there decides that it's not for him and tries to change his life.A former spy moves to Arizona to join a gold robbery, but when he gets there decides that it's not for him and tries to change his life.A former spy moves to Arizona to join a gold robbery, but when he gets there decides that it's not for him and tries to change his life.
Victor Adamson
- Barfly
- (uncredited)
Richard Alexander
- Townsman
- (uncredited)
Roscoe Ates
- Jake Hooper - Stage Driver
- (uncredited)
Rayford Barnes
- Raider Todd
- (uncredited)
- …
Dick Benjamin
- Minor Role
- (uncredited)
Barry Brooks
- Undetermined Role
- (uncredited)
George Bruggeman
- Riverboat Passenger
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaAlthough the film was another 3-D film by director Andre De Toth, he only had one eye and would never be able to see the result of the process. The other 3-D film he directed was "House of Wax."
- GoofsColt 1873 revolvers were used but the Civil War ended before those revolvers were developed.
- Quotes
Jeff Travis: A man's only as good as his cards.
- ConnectionsReferenced in The Fifties (1997)
Featured review
'The Stranger Wore a Gun' did have a good deal of potential. The premise sounded interesting as was seeing how early 3D would fare. Randolph Scott was always well worth watching, well when his acting style matured, especially his work with one of his most prolific directors Budd Boetticher (i.e. 'Seven Men from Now'). Andre DeToth was another frequent director, with he and Scott doing six films together. Ones that were watchable at least for namely Scott but not must sees.
Which is where 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' fits under exactly, watchable but not essential. While Scott is one of the best aspects and it is a good representation of him as an actor, he did do a lot better films and performances. It is not a good representation really of DeToth, who was no stranger to good and more films himself, my first exposure to him being 'House of Wax'. Does all that mean that 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' is a bad film? No. It's not great or even good either, my feelings if anything were very mixed and a large part of me was disappointed seeing as it was an opportunity to see Scott in the film genre he was best known for.
Sure 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' has good things. Some of the production values are nice, the film is handsomely shot and the scenery is attractive regardless of whether they're authentic or not. The music is pleasant and rousing enough. The climax has fire and excitement that wasn't present enough in too much of what came before it.
Found the cast to be a very mixed bag. Scott comes off best, typically purposefully stoic but very authoritative too. Claire Trevor brings a good deal of class to her role and does a great job with what she has. Seeing Lee Marvin and Ernest Borgnine in anything is always worthwhile, and seeing both of them being menacing and fun (especially Marvin) and making the most of the too little they had was a pleasure.
Others were less successful. Worst was Alfonso Bedoya, who overdoes it and comes over as really grating. Joan Weldon is rather pallid, acting inexperience showing, and the film does too little with her character, to the point where you question why she is even there. Was not sure what to make of George MacReady, he does what he can but did think at the end of the day that he could have been more menacing and gone for it more (being almost too smooth). DeToth's direction is pretty routine and didn't seem properly engaged with the material or know what to do with it.
While some of the production values were nice, the 3D is pretty cheap looking and added nothing (almost gimmicky) and the editing in some scenes is haphazard. Lets not get started on the blatantly obvious stunt doubles. The script lacked toughness and grit, playing it too safe too often, and was very stilted and hard to take seriously. The story's action is pretty forgettable and under-utilised, shining properly only in the climax, and the soapy love triangle is just as pointless as the 3D. Not only was the story bland and silly, it felt incomplete and like things had been dropped out in editing when they should have been left as some events and character motivations are vague at best and downright beyond confusing at times.
In conclusion, definitely not something to write off but there are far better Scott, DeToth and Western films around. 5/10
Which is where 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' fits under exactly, watchable but not essential. While Scott is one of the best aspects and it is a good representation of him as an actor, he did do a lot better films and performances. It is not a good representation really of DeToth, who was no stranger to good and more films himself, my first exposure to him being 'House of Wax'. Does all that mean that 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' is a bad film? No. It's not great or even good either, my feelings if anything were very mixed and a large part of me was disappointed seeing as it was an opportunity to see Scott in the film genre he was best known for.
Sure 'The Stranger Wore a Gun' has good things. Some of the production values are nice, the film is handsomely shot and the scenery is attractive regardless of whether they're authentic or not. The music is pleasant and rousing enough. The climax has fire and excitement that wasn't present enough in too much of what came before it.
Found the cast to be a very mixed bag. Scott comes off best, typically purposefully stoic but very authoritative too. Claire Trevor brings a good deal of class to her role and does a great job with what she has. Seeing Lee Marvin and Ernest Borgnine in anything is always worthwhile, and seeing both of them being menacing and fun (especially Marvin) and making the most of the too little they had was a pleasure.
Others were less successful. Worst was Alfonso Bedoya, who overdoes it and comes over as really grating. Joan Weldon is rather pallid, acting inexperience showing, and the film does too little with her character, to the point where you question why she is even there. Was not sure what to make of George MacReady, he does what he can but did think at the end of the day that he could have been more menacing and gone for it more (being almost too smooth). DeToth's direction is pretty routine and didn't seem properly engaged with the material or know what to do with it.
While some of the production values were nice, the 3D is pretty cheap looking and added nothing (almost gimmicky) and the editing in some scenes is haphazard. Lets not get started on the blatantly obvious stunt doubles. The script lacked toughness and grit, playing it too safe too often, and was very stilted and hard to take seriously. The story's action is pretty forgettable and under-utilised, shining properly only in the climax, and the soapy love triangle is just as pointless as the 3D. Not only was the story bland and silly, it felt incomplete and like things had been dropped out in editing when they should have been left as some events and character motivations are vague at best and downright beyond confusing at times.
In conclusion, definitely not something to write off but there are far better Scott, DeToth and Western films around. 5/10
- TheLittleSongbird
- Aug 6, 2020
- Permalink
- How long is The Stranger Wore a Gun?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $1,600,000
- Runtime1 hour 23 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content