Acensbart Excellent but underrated film

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Wuchak Released in 1972 and directed by Mark Rydell, "The Cowboys" stars John Wayne as an aging rancher who is forced to hire pubescent drovers for a 400-mile cattle drive from Bozeman, Montana, to Belle Fourche, South Dakota, after his ranch hands abandon him for a gold rush. Roscoe Lee Browne plays the wise black cook while Slim Pickens & Colleen Dewhurst have small roles. This is a realistic, almost epic Wayne Western focusing on the long cattle drive and the amateur boys learning to be men. It lacks the fun brawling and unrealistic elements of John's contemporary Westerns of the 60s-70s (e.g. the quick-draw nonsense in "El Dorado"). A Martinez stands out as the outcast Hispanic amongst the kids while Bruce Dern is notable as a menacing ne'er-do-well. The almost shocking confrontation that opens the final act is a highlight and the boys' just strategy is great: KILL 'EM ALL. The film runs 134 minutes and was shot in Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Warner Brothers Burbank Studios, California. The screenplay was based on William Dale Jennings's novel. GRADE: A-

npdeo18 It was a great pleasure to see Duke enacting such a role than the usual roles of a cowboy. The supporting cast by Roscoe Lee Browne as a part of the crew and the schoolboys to drive the cattle drive were amazing and fun to watch. The way John Wayne guided those schoolboys were worth watching and funny as well especially the stutter scene. Meanwhile the role enacted by Bruce Dern as criminal/bandit is definitely praise worthy and it was encouraging to see him in a duel with the Duke. It would have been great to see him enacting the role of Bond Villain. At the same time of the scenes were quite emotional especially the scene before Duke's death was quite emotional and touching. Overall the film along with The Shootist is one of the best films of John Wayne in his career end. Even if a remake is made no one would be able to match up Duke in this role.

tightspotkilo People say (and write) many things about this movie, most commonly that it's some sort of a "message" movie, or allegory, about the war in Vietnam. Whether it is or isn't (and I say it isn't), it doesn't matter a whit. The movie stands on its own merits as (1) a fine movie, (2) a John Wayne movie --one of his last, (3) telling a good story, (4) a coming-of-age story, (5) with fine acting all the way around. In addition to The Duke, we have Roscoe Lee Browne playing the role of cook and philosopher, charming, dignified, and charismatic, and Bruce Dern, occupying the role and position of probably the all-time most evil "bad guy" villain in cinematic westerns history, and Dern more than delivers the goods. Through it all, the movie remains a coming of age story for the ages, and the proof is in the fact that it stands up well, even now, 43 years after its release.I believe the controversy stems from the fact that it's a John Wayne movie, and he was a known hawk when it came to the war. So people read into that what they want to read into that. But simple logic dictates otherwise, that this movie is not about the war. Wayne would never have participated in an anti-war film, so that rules that out. And Bruce Dern and director Mark Rydell were both known for their liberal and anti-war politics, and would not have signed on to a pro-war movie. Ergo, the movie was not making any kind of direct and intentional statement about the war, for or against. It's a bit ironical for me personally that the film carries with it that pro Vietnam war or anti Vietnam war controversy, either way (and people say both things about it). I was in Japan on R&R from Vietnam when I saw this movie in the Spring of 1972, in a Japanese theater amusingly dubbed into Japanese with English subtitles. To this day I still don't know why they did that. Why not just Japanese subtitles? But the buzz about the movie at the time was not that it was pro-war or anti-war, and I never heard any such theory like that until many years later. The only popular buzz about this movie in 1972 had to do with the nature and fact of the demise of John Wayne's character.

Robert J. Maxwell Judging from the title alone -- in its full splendor it's "Jonn Wayne and the Cowboys" -- it sounds like just another one of those routine and mind-numbing attempts to cash in on Wayne's heroic image in the setting of the Old West. He ground out lots of these Sonicburgers in the 70s.In most ways, that's what it is. Wayne must drive his herd of cattle through Montana. The local cowpokes have caught gold fever and left, so Wayne must hire a dozen little boys, the oldest of them being fifteen. The only other adult is the cook Roscoe Lee Brown, who serves as Wayne's conscience.Wayne is a tough taskmaster. When one of the boys dozes in the saddle, Wayne doesn't just wake him up. He pushes him roughly off his horse. ("I pay a day's wages, I expect a day's work.") There are thinly disguised clichés in the script. One boy can't speak without stuttering until Wayne taunts him and insults him and the kid says, "You SOB!", without a stutter, forever cured. (Usually they throw away their crutches.) Supporting players have names like Jeb, Slim, Weedy, and Matt.Wayne attempts nothing new, as he had in, say, "She Wore A Yellow Ribbon," "The Searchers", and "True Grit." He coasts along on his honorable John Wayneness. His wardrobe is the same as in the other efforts of this late period -- leather vest, high neckerchief, the usual hat -- although this time the color of the shirts under the vest is subdued.But there are a couple of surprises. For one thing, he's finally given a plain-looking wife his own age. He's allowed to curse the aging process seriously. A fight with the no-goodnik Bruce Dern is particularly brutal. Instead of a simple clip on the jaw, Wayne must beat hell out of Dern to keep him down, and he takes many bruises in the process. And I can think of some movies in which Wayne is killed in combat or dies some heroic death. Here he gets shot in all his limbs before the mortal wound and it takes him quite a while to die.And, although the ending provides the catharsis that the audience needs, I can't help wondering if it's a good idea to show that one of the lessons the kids learn is that all the bad guys should be slaughtered in the most painful way, whether they're armed or not.By this time, Wayne must have had a lot of control over his material. I'm surprised that he allowed his character to be killed off so viciously. I'm also a little surprised that he repeats, multiple times, the metaphor, "We're burning daylight." It's from Shakespeare, who used it more than once. That should have carried a neon sign -- "Unclean" -- right there. That's not even to mention the pretty tune by Vivaldi played on a guitar.