a5c7b9f00b When Jesse learns that Krager is cheating settlers, he and his gang rob trains to obtain money for them to purchase their land. Krager, finding a Jesse look alike in Burns, hires him to wreck havoc on the ranchers. When Jesse kills Burns he switches clothes and goes after the culprits. Jesse James joins with Missouri settlers in their battle with rich, land-grabbing railroad tycoons. This is yet another wildly inaccurate Jesse James picture–and certainly not the first one featuring Roy Rogers. In fact, I just saw &quot;Days of Jesse James&quot; starring Rogers yesterday. Now call me a glutton for punishment, but I was just hoping that this film would at least try to be accurate–-like Rogers&#39; &quot;Billy the Kid Returns&quot;. But, once again, it&#39;s just another poor film trying to capitalize on the myth of Jesse James. Because it&#39;s pure myth, in this film James is good. Sure, in real life he murdered several people and stole money from innocent folks–but here, he&#39;s like Robin Hood–and a Robin Hood that almost never kills anyone and, like a typical Rogers films, mostly shoots people in their shooting hand! Rogers plays Clint Burns and Jesse using the old &#39;identical strangers&#39; cliché. Oddly, Burns is a bad man–a lookalike who evil bankers and speculators (it&#39;s ALWAYS evil bankers and speculators) have hired to commit crimes while posingJesse. That way, the nice Jesse will get blamed and the common folk will stop supporting him. But, eventually, Burns overplays his hand and is killed by Jesse in self-defense (his only killing in the film–again, it&#39;s SELF-DEFENSE!). Now Jesse pretends to be Burns and works to expose the schemers for who they really are.<br/><br/>Along for the ride are Gabby Hayes (a Rogers regular supporting actor) and he plays the sheriff (again, a pretty common role for this grizzled old buzzard)wella nosy reporter lady (a common cliché, though very, very few existed in the mid-late 19th century) and her friend.<br/><br/>Overall, a historical nightmare for history teachers like me,almost nothing about this film approaches who James really was. On top of that, the story just abounds with clichés and feels like yet another sub-par Rogers film. He did do better films than this–a lot better. With better music and MUCH better stories.<br/><br/>By the way, this is a VERY unusual film in that Roy does NOT play a particularly good guy and he also does not use this name for his character. A strange moral compass in this film, that&#39;s for sure. The movie starts with the government (I assume) offering land for $3 per acre to people who must improve said land-and then a railroad moves in and takes over the land. The settlers turn to the courts, but the railroad wins the court battle, with the lawyer promising to appeal.<br/><br/>Jesse James comes to town-or is he a lookalike gambler, wearing the same clothes? Two female reporters have also come in from St. Louis, hoping to get the scoop on Jesse James, the hero for the underdog (or so this film claims). A railroad official hires the gambler to commit crimes to discredit Jesse James, and the story turns to a mix of confusion. In a shootout, who gets killed, James, or the gambler? Unfortunately the movie failshistory (Jesse James was no hero), orentertainment-we cannot tell who the good guys or the bad guys are. Even the romance at the end is unconvincing. Despite the all-star cast, the movie is a dud.
seosangbarve Admin replied
346 weeks ago