Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

lemon_magic OK, I admit I saw the MST3K version of this movie instead of the "straight" theatrical release, but as a longtime MST3K vet I know how to disengage the wisecracks from the "front row" and judge the movie on its own merits, whatever they may be. (And even in the lineup of movies covered by MST3K, LOTWH is one of the more competent efforts.) In the movie's favor: Pretty good scenery, sets and costumes - the viewer really does get a sense of vast countryside, rugged men of action, and wild horses abounding. Although the robots make fun of Albert Glasser's score, it really is one of his best efforts and does its job nicely. No one in the cast really sucks - everyone seems to know what their part requires and the actors inhabit their characters quite comfortably. Also, a nice rousing fight scene during the opening credits gets things off to a reasonably exciting start.Against? Well, the plot doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and certain events require a whole lot of suspension of disbelief. You've never seen so many coincidental meetings and dropping/finding of critical plot MacGuffins - brandings irons, bandanna, letters, envelopes - in your life. The chief bad guy's machinations wouldn't get him elected to 9th grade class president in real life and they only work here because the plot requires it.And aside from a couple of chases and shootouts, the movie just mosies along for most of its length, which would be OK if it had a John Wayne or a Gary Cooper to carry it...but what it's got is a bunch of competent actors who were born to play spear carriers.I'm not a big fan of Westerns, although I've got "Rio Bravo", "Rough Night In Jericho", "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valace" and "Silverado" in my DVD collection. But there's at least 100 Western movies I can think of that I'd watch before I'd watch "Last Of The Wild Horses" again. And I seriously doubt anyone will ever see this movie for its own sake ever again...it's simply forgettable and run of the mill. But it's not "bad" the way a truly incompetent movie is "bad".

bensonmum2 There are a handful of generally unknown actors that I enjoy seeing in just about anything. One of those people is Douglass Dumbrille. From A Day at the Races with the Marx Brothers to Castle in the Desert with Charlie Chan, I always look forward to Dumbrille's performances. In Last of the Wild Horses, he plays the wheelchair-bound owner of the Double C ranch. His performance is by far the best thing this movie has going for it. Now that I think about it, Douglass Dumbrille is probably the only thing Last of the Wild Horses has going for it. The movie is one of those utterly dull, white-bread kind of Westerns where no one gets dirty and the good guys always win. It's the kind of Western that always seemed to feature an annoying comic relief character that you just wanted to see someone put a bullet through. All it lacks is a cowboy with a guitar to make my stomach really turn.But the most unforgivable part of Last of the Wild Horses is the way director Robert Lippert continually cheats to keep the plot moving. On three different occasions, people conveniently drop evidence that is later found and used to advance the story. From a branding iron to a letter to a bandana – Last of the Wild Horses would have us believe that the cowboys of the Old West were a bunch of butterfingers.

Stan Kline I saw this movie as a kid on TV, around 1951, and I thought It was a great western. It was done very well. The fight scene between Richard Arlen and Reed Hadely At the end was a memorable scene for me. It has been a long 55 years since I have seen this movie, so there Is a lot of the movie that I have forgotten, but what I can remember stuck with me all these years. There were a lot of great westerns made In the late forties and very early fifties. Some are out there and a lot are not The problem I have, Is that I have a hard time finding these movies on DVD to buy. If anyone has any information on this movie, I would appreciate It.

bux When one reviews a picture, it's important to consider the time frame in which it was produced. In years gone by, we had more simple times, hence more simple plots and so forth. This picture is of interest mainly because it is the only one ever directed by B-movie mogul and theater owner Robert L. Lippert. A few years later, Lippert's company would release "Little Big Horn"(1951) and "Tall Texan"(1953), now considered B-movie classics. This one shows how it all began for Lippert. Sure the story is routine, however it is somewhat redeemed by the fight scene at the conclusion, which was very advanced for it's time. I guess today, if a movie doesn't have a budget of ten gazillion bucks, has so many explosions it gives you shell shock, and enough sex and nudity to turn your gut, it isn't any good, eh? Don't beam me up Scotty, just send me back to the '50s!!