The 'classic' western, or better: the 'John Wayne Western' was, by 1973, dead. Sergio Leone had made some great things in the sixties, and Peckinpah's The Wild Bunch and maybe even Butch Cassidy were great inventions. All that made a return to the classic storytelling you'd expect from a Wayne western totally unnecessary.
Kennedy tries to be old-fashioned. The problem - if you want old western you watch old westerns, and after you've seen 'Once upon a time in the west' and the 'The Wild Bunch', THE TRAIN ROBBERS is quite uninteresting. Wayne does a fine acting job, and so does the rest of his supporters, but what's it all worth when the story lacks thrill? The cinematography is awesome, I dig the bombastic score and there's a great little twist at the end, plus a funny line or two. That's it. Most of the time they're riding. Long boring ever-recurring riding. Beautiful. But still boring.
Then of course there is Ann-Margret, who is one of the most beautiful women in movie history, but is not really presented in the way she deserves. Somehow she appears, thanks to bad hairdo and bad makeup, less attractive than in some other things she did around this time (the French-American thriller The Outside Man for example). It was a bad career move I'd say - after Carnal Knowledge she had everything an actress in Hollywood needs - beauty, talent and success, and what did she do? - A supporting role in an average John Wayne- western. I'd like to know why.
To sum it up - good music, good cinematography and fine acting. Ann-Margret's nevertheless a plus to the film. It's a simple plot, no thrill, no innovation. It's not terrible though, mind you. It's just a neat little western entertainment, nothing more.
6 1/2 out of 10
Kennedy tries to be old-fashioned. The problem - if you want old western you watch old westerns, and after you've seen 'Once upon a time in the west' and the 'The Wild Bunch', THE TRAIN ROBBERS is quite uninteresting. Wayne does a fine acting job, and so does the rest of his supporters, but what's it all worth when the story lacks thrill? The cinematography is awesome, I dig the bombastic score and there's a great little twist at the end, plus a funny line or two. That's it. Most of the time they're riding. Long boring ever-recurring riding. Beautiful. But still boring.
Then of course there is Ann-Margret, who is one of the most beautiful women in movie history, but is not really presented in the way she deserves. Somehow she appears, thanks to bad hairdo and bad makeup, less attractive than in some other things she did around this time (the French-American thriller The Outside Man for example). It was a bad career move I'd say - after Carnal Knowledge she had everything an actress in Hollywood needs - beauty, talent and success, and what did she do? - A supporting role in an average John Wayne- western. I'd like to know why.
To sum it up - good music, good cinematography and fine acting. Ann-Margret's nevertheless a plus to the film. It's a simple plot, no thrill, no innovation. It's not terrible though, mind you. It's just a neat little western entertainment, nothing more.
6 1/2 out of 10