The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean

1972 "If this story ain't true... it shoulda been!"
6.8| 2h0m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 18 December 1972 Released
Producted By: First Artists
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Outlaw and self-appointed lawmaker Judge Roy Bean rules over an empty stretch of the West that gradually grows, under his iron fist, into a thriving town, while dispensing his his own quirky brand of frontier justice upon strangers passing by.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Max

Director

Producted By

First Artists

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever
Ceticultsot Beautiful, moving film.
ShangLuda Admirable film.
Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
secondtake The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean (1972)A remarkable slow "western" which has many of the trademarks of the genre but lacks a compelling sense of purpose. You might say it's all about the title character, Judge Bean, played with conviction by Paul Newman, but in fact not much happens to make us worry about his well being, or about his purpose of being in the first place.This doesn't doom the movie, exactly, but it slows it down start to finish. There are lots of great little moments, and some short appearances by actors that have big billing, including both Anthony Perkins (of "Psycho" fame) who has about five minute sin the beginning, and Ava Gardner ("On the Beach" and "Night of the Igauan" among many) at the end (for literally four minutes--be warned). This almost gives away that there is a feeling of stretching some small possibilities beyond their limits.Newman, of course, is always an actor who gives his all, and though he plays a man seemingly older and more inform than Newman himself, he gives it a steady intensity anyway. He is an oddball judge, an outlaw kind of vigilante who makes up the rules as he goes, and not without some undisciplined sense of real justice. There are shootouts and confrontations that avoid death and mayhem, and all the while Bean, as judge, survives and persists. We are never sure whether we quite are on his side, frankly, but in some way we are because we are meant to be. That is, he really does mean to tame the wildness of the wild west in his own lawless way.How this relates to the times I'm not sure. Many Westerns (and other movies) used their genres to comments on Vietnam, which was still roaring at the end (in 1972) of Nixon's first term. I don't see it here. This is more about individualism and riding roughshod over the obvious bullies and criminals around him. But never with clear rationale. A very young woman bears his child near the end and we don't see in particular a sense of responsibility, but more a patriarchal belligerence. It's a bit unfriendly. We don't see through the man's coarse exterior, usually, to a greater light. Time passes by the decade it appears, though Newman only ages slightly, and cars and oil rigs appear here and there. The end is basically a showdown between the old days and lawless justice and the new days and a new kind of lawless justice. Yes. In a way, it's a precursor to "There Will Be Blood."It's a good ride, steady but sometimes downright slow. I think if you can get absorbed in the pace you'll be rather taken and interested. But go into it expecting a methodical and thoughtful pace. And a good, measured, well intentioned performance by Newman. One final short appearance is by Jacqueline Bisset, who plays Bean's daughter (and who appears basically out of nowhere). She's out of place but of course has at least a screen presence. The final poker game (with Bisset and Newman) has them betting with bullets. And calmly ignoring the mad mobs outside.
alexandre michel liberman (tmwest) I did not think much of this film when I saw it in the seventies. But at that time what I wanted to see was a traditional western like Hawks or Ford would do it. But John Huston was not a director who made conventional films and I failed to appreciate that. As it starts the film states that this might not be what really happened, but what it should have been. And Huston shows us the Judge, excellently played by Paul Newman as the hero, far different from any other movie about him I remembered seeing. They are all great people, the Judge, his deputies, his mistress (Victoria Principal), his daughter (Jacqueline Bisset). And even though Tab Hunter plays a small part, I would say this is his best performance. An unrecognizable Tony Perkins also shows up as a preacher, and Ava Gardner , beautiful, in a beautiful scene. Huston tells us a great, meaningful story, full of emotion,
happipuppi13 One thing that seems to come with movies about certain times and dates in history are these annoying,prudent nit-pickers who have to ruin a great movie by saying "this didn't happen and that didn't happen". To quote Client Eastwood at the end of The Gauntlet...nag! nag! nag! Doesn't anyone in this day and age just watch a movie for pure enjoyment and losing themselves in a story? Have we all become a nation of film critics and supposed realists that we have to pick a movie apart for not being 100% historically accurate?! You want the whole true story,then watch a Ken Burns documentary or PBS's American Experience! This movie is absolutely incredible. Starting with the way it is filmed,the scenery is great,in the sense of how empty and bleak yet somehow inviting it is. This has to be watched on a clean DVD copy to really be understood.Paul Newman plays his role so very convincingly,I sometimes forgot it was he being Judge Roy Bean. It seemed like a whole other person had taken over Paul's mind. His vengeful shoot-out in the whorehouse is not your standard western shoot-em up. Unlike in those films,he hits everyone he shoots and it's camera angles make it all the more real.There's so many other great players in this movie,I haven't the room to discuss them all but they do range from great to good. Victoria Principal played a her role so well as a Spanish girl,I mistakenly though she was Judge Bean's daughter later in the film. I don't see how someone finds her performance shallow,her character is a woman from a tiny village in Texas. It's a wonder she knows English at that time.Stacy Keach's brief moment in the film is witout a doubt the funniest scene. His long hair and goofy black clothes make him look like the Edgar Winter of cowboys! I disagree that Ava Gardner seems to old to be Beans object of fascination. Bean was in his late 30s/early 40s at the start and Miss Lily not much younger. She visits his town after Bean is gone,so it's perfectly fine.The overall story is quite riveting and doesn't need to be history book perfect to tell it. The old west from near the end of the 19th century had always had inconsistencies and exaggerations in it's stories and legends. The great point made here is where does upholding the law begin & end? At what point does it go from being just that,to being sadistic and out of control with power? Roy seems to go very far beyond drunk with power. He has his human moments in this movie which actually are moving but mostly he's a man who has placed himself above anything and others. The only thing I'd say that is quite out of place here is the very saccharine song sung by Andy Williams in the playful scene between Newman,Pricipal & the bear. Nothing against Mr. Williams' singing but it's a bit laughable in a movie that's mostly dark with comedic interludes. So for the great look of the film,the acting,the story and the direction of John Huston (who plays 'Grizzly Adams' in the film),I easily give this 10 stars.I don't care about the facts,just how good each player acts. (END)
PWNYCNY When I cannot decide whether this film is better than The Westerner with Walter Brennan and Gary Cooper, than I know that this is a great movie because The Westerner was one of the greatest westerns ever. Paul Newman gives a powerful performance as the legendary Judge Roy Bean. Mr. Newman is truly the star of the movie and he carries the movie well. His presence is enough to take a good movie and make it great. This movie is an example of how the actor makes the difference between a movie being likable but forgettable and wonderful and memorable. Mr. Newman captures the essence of the Bean character, the judge's eccentricities, his homespun philosophy on life and his essential humanity. True, Judge Bean was known as the hanging judge and he was a law unto himself, but he knew who he was dealing with and that there was nobody to back him up. He was THE LAW and had to command respect. Portraying an historical figure is tricky, but Paul Newman does it well and for that reason alone the movie is worth watching.