The Lusty Men

The movie's a real sleeper. Rodeos were never a popular theme for Hollywood, outside of Saturday matinées. Maybe that's why the studio came up with a misleading title that cheapens expectations. The movie certainly doesn't glamorize rodeo-ing. In fact, it's a pretty scathing look at both the inside and the outside. Jeff's (Mitchum) character is brilliantly conveyed early on as he drifts across the empty field along with other wind-blown discards. He's going back to his roots now that he's quit the circuit, with no other place to go.

So he hooks up with ambitious Wes (Kennedy) and his no-nonsense wife Louise (Hayward). For half of Wes's winnings, veteran rodeo-er Jeff can guide the talented newcomer as he joins the circuit. The trouble is Jeff is attracted to the loyal Louise even as Wes begins to live the fast life on his big winnings. Louise, however, only wants what she's always wanted-: a little spread of her and Wes's own where they can make a home. But Wes is forgetting those plans as he succumbs to the hard-partying of the rootless circuit. So, what will Louise do and just as importantly what will the love-lorn Jeff do now that the marrieds are growing apart.

The partying scenes are particularly well done, conveying just the right touches of cheap booze, loose women, and tall tales. Note that telling camera angle of the grizzled Booker (Hunnicutt) as he gazes up a shapely leg from floor level--- one shot can speak the proverbial volumes. Note too, the subtle way the script implies that trick-rider Rosemary has been sleeping-around, apparently an approved practice in these circles, contrary to the mores of the time (1952). Also, the shower scene when Al (Faylen) walks in is a neat bit of implied humor that depends on audience savvy for its chuckles. It's quite an intelligent screenplay, except for maybe the abrupt, but oddly satisfying, last scene.

Cult director Ray oversees with his usual artistic sensibility, though it looks like he was still suffering intermittent illness since an uncredited Robert Parrish gets a credited appearance from IMDb. And, of course, Mitchum is Mitchum, so low-key here it's hard to read his feelings at any point. No, in my little book, it's Susan Hayward's movie. By golly, she's escaped that dead-end tamale shop and nothing's going to stop her little dream. The guys may be physically tougher, but none can match her inner strength, and Hayward brings it all off in thoroughly convincing fashion. I can't conceive that the movie made money, as downbeat as it is. And I wonder what audiences lured in by the lurid title thought once they saw rodeo. Nonetheless, the film remains an outstanding example of movie-making in a minor key.

Don't let the title fool you. Apparently part of the studio's design to tempt a broader audience in to see this film, 'The Lusty Men' is just not a very good title for it. Two other titles were considered - one even worse, "This Man is Mine", and one that was better if not exciting, "Cowpoke". Briefly, this is the story of a young ranch worker (Arthur Kennedy) and his new bride (Susan Hayward) trying to save up money to buy a ranch of their own. Faded rodeo star Mitchum crosses their path and changes their lives, showing the young husband Kennedy a shortcut to big money by riding in the rodeo. There's a lot of friction resulting as time goes on, with Kennedy hooked on the easy money and attention, while Hayward fears for his safety and blames Mitchum for driving a wedge between the couple. I won't give away any of the story beyond that.

I do want to give a broader review of this movie for the type that it is. I don't think I've ever seen a seriously-made movie which depicts rodeos or bull riding that was not at least fairly compelling, as this one is. Whether it's 'The Lusty Men' or 'Eight Seconds' or 'The Ride', those who ride rodeo put their lives and safety on the line for relatively little pay in most cases. They pursue their sport with an intensity that may be hard to understand for those who live a more ordinary existence. Just as a compulsive gambler gets that little rush every time he scratches off a lottery ticket or pulls the handle on a slot machine, every time the bull or bronc rider nods his head and the chute gate swings open, he has a brief chance at success and a win and the thrill that goes with it - but he has hundreds, maybe thousands of people playing the game along with him. If he has a great ride, the crowd goes wild. If he gets bucked off, or gets hurt - maybe even killed - he has done so trying to please all those people in addition to himself.

The complexities of the motivation of the rodeo rider belie what some may feel to be a very simple or even 'dumb' pursuit. It is these motivations which create the opportunity for fascinating characters living lives that follow different rules. They live outside the box, even now as they have for decades, in pursuit of their dreams. That's why 'The Lusty Men' and the other rodeo / bull riding films I've seen have been so good. When you start with characters filled with the 'heart and try' to compete at rodeo, people who are not so bound to logic and common-sense, the storyline possibilities are nearly endless.

Things in the world of rodeo have changed since this movie was made. As one other reviewer pointed out, a rodeo rider of the past having to retrieve his winnings at a saloon after having gotten banged up riding that day would be the perfect formula for the start of a drinking problem. Fortunately, they don't get their winnings at a saloon anymore. On the other hand, the 'buckle bunnies' who pursue rodeo riders are still drawn to the lean, lanky, quietly courageous cowboy no matter whether he rode for eight seconds or got bucked off in two. He doesn't need to be a big money winner, because the cowboy's appeal has never been about money. To the contrary - his lack of wealth may be part of his appeal by making him seem more down-to-Earth and approachable, maybe even vulnerable because he is nearly broke. In this movie however, the young cowboy / rising rodeo star does attract the wrong kind of women because he has amassed some money winnings.

You don't have to be a fan of rodeo or bull riding to enjoy this movie. While it does revolve around those sports, the real story is what happens to the young couple and the old rodeo star who enters their lives.

This is my all-time favorite Robert Mitchum movie. In fact, it's the movie that made Mitchum one of my favorite actors. I saw this movie as a child on television and could not understand why Susan Hayworth would prefer Arthur Kennedy to Robert Mitchum.

It's a dusty, exhausting rodeo film, so realistic that one can almost smell the horses. Seeing how the participants usually had to pick up their winnings ("day money") in a bar after what could have been a physically crippling time in the arena shows how easy it would have been to start drinking to kill the pain and the fear. Also the rodeo "groupies", so ready to soothe the pains and massage the ego, have probably changed very little since the early '50s. The character of Jeff McCloud has obviously been there and done that, and Mitchum plays the weariness with authenticity and sympathy. He also reveals his ability to play comedy in the scene in Rosemary's trailer with Frank Faylen.

I heartily recommend this film to anyone wanting to see a realistic slice of Americana, and good performances by all the leads.

Fascinating, penetrating glimpse into the world of rodeo competitions and the often foolish lengths that men will go to prove their manhood. Superbly shot, written and acted, it's also a chance to see Robert Mitchum in top form. Criminally confident and cool, he absolutely carries the film despite exhibiting the demeanor of a man dozing in a hammock under a hot summer sun. Fed a steady diet of dead-on dialogue like "Never was a bull that couldn't be rode, Never was a cowboy that couldn't be throwed," and "Hope's a funny thing. A man can have it - even when there ain't no reason," he feasts with a wink and a smile. He and feisty Susan Hayward have great chemistry together and the movie is consistently eventful and exciting, with particularly realistic rodeo footage. (Maltin is right about the very last scene though - it does feel false.) By all means, seek it out - it's one of the most purely entertaining 1950's films I can recall.

One of Robert Mitchum's best films from his days at RKO is The Lusty Men about the rodeo circuit. Mitchum plays Jeff McCloud a burned out rodeo rider who spots some potential star talent in Wes Merritt. He also spots Merritt's wife and the Merritts are played by Arthur Kennedy and Susan Hayward.

Mitchum's been thrown by one too many bulls and horses and he's a burned out man. Still the allure of the circuit holds him in sway. He mentors Kennedy until they come to a parting of the ways and not just over Susan Hayward. The part is a perfect fit for Mitchum, his own footloose past made him understand the character of Jeff McCloud and bring it to life.

This was the first of two films Mitchum did with Susan Hayward. She's clearly in support of him and she knows it. Her big moment on screen is dispatching a rodeo groupie at a party who had designs on Arthur Kennedy. Her footage had to be shot first, according to Lee Server's biography of Mitchum, as Hayward had a commitment in Africa to shoot The Snows of Kilimanjaro.

Among the supporting cast Arthur Hunnicutt, one of the biggest scene stealers around, is very good as another burned out rodeo rider. Mitchum looks at him and sees that is his future. In fact in the end, so does Kennedy.

The Lusty Men is a fine depiction of rodeo life, ranking up there with the later Junior Bonner and 8 Seconds. Good entertainment all around.