Mon 1 Apr 2019
A Western Movie Review by Dan Stumpf: ONE FOOT IN HELL (1960).
Posted by Steve under Reviews , Western movies[7] Comments
ONE FOOT IN HELL. 20th Century Fox, 1960. Alan Ladd, Don Murray, Dolores Michaels, Dan O’Herlihy and Barry Coe. Written by Aaron Spelling and Sydney Boehm. Directed by James B Clark.
I hate it when someone has a good idea for a movie and then it gets fumbled.
In this case it’s a warped quest for vengeance set in the old west, with Alan Ladd as a settler passing through a small town who sees his ailing wife die because of the callousness of its citizens: The hotel clerk won’t fetch a doctor, the local druggist doesn’t fill a prescription promptly, and when Ladd makes a fuss, the sheriff detains him on suspicion long enough for Ladd’s wife to die before he gets back with the medicine that would have saved her life.
Chastened by her death, the good people of the town try to make up for it by offering him a job, but when Ladd takes a position as Deputy Sheriff, it’s with an eye out to settle the score.
To this end, he recruits a small band of ne’er-do-wells and owlhoots to help him loot the local bank: Don Murray as a drunk looking to restore his pre-war fortunes; Dolores Michaels as a dance-hall floozie trying to get out of the racket; and Dan O’Herlihy and Barry Coe, who just like stealing & killing — and One Foot takes a step into Caper Movie Territory.
The supporting cast does quite well in this, particularly when Murray and Michaels (who was memorable in The Fiend Who Walked the West) kindle a spark of decency between them and wrestle with the notion of going straight. Some of Aaron Spellings’ expositions are a bit too pat—like the characterizations in Love Boat — but when we get to the robbery and subsequent posse chase, led by Ladd himself, things get agreeably nasty as writer Sydney (The Big Heat, Violent Saturday, etc.) Boehm rings in some gratuitous murders and wicked double-crosses to liven things up.
Too bad One Foot is afflicted by the wrong director and a star past his prime.
Director James B. Clark did some highly successful animal films (Flipper, and A Dog of Flanders come to mind) but he lacks the sense of pace necessary to this sort of thing. As for star Alan Ladd as the bitter widower nursing a deadly grudge and finally turning on his cohorts…
Well, back in the 40s he could have used his impassive features to suggest wheels within wheels ready to grind up his unwitting prey, but at this stage in his career Alan Ladd was from all accounts fighting a battle with booze & drugs, and not trying very hard to win. Podgy and dull-eyed, he looks about as deadly here as a rubber ball, and he’s not helped by a costume designer who dresses him like a hick.
With Ladd and Clark at its heart, it’s surprising that One Foot in Hell works as well — or as not-too-badly — as it does. I recommend it to fans of Westerns and Caper Movies with a quick finger on the fast-forward trigger, who will find here a solid half-hour’s entertainment in a 90-minute movie.
April 2nd, 2019 at 11:16 am
You’re right, Dan. This is a story line that I don’t recall ever having been used before. Too bad the follow through didn’t manage to do so.
April 2nd, 2019 at 4:46 pm
A misfire, but one that at times comes close. I honestly blame Clark more than Ladd since a better director could have (and did in the same era) worked around Ladd’s problems while using his presence. FLIPPER and A DOG OF FLANDERS don’t really qualify Clark for a grim noirish Western tale of revenge good as they were.
Perhaps the problem was he did better with fish, dogs, and children than actors. In any case this feels more a failure on his part considering other directors still got decent performances out of Ladd in this era far gone as he was.
April 2nd, 2019 at 5:12 pm
With the exception of Shane, produced in 1951 and Ladd’s final film for Paramount, each subsequent project and performance was a step down, so that by the decade’s end, he was empty, although I do think that his Nevada Smith was a clean step back, but The Carpetbaggers was also done at Paramount. Should that have mattered? Clearly, not. But…Someone should reach out to Alan Ladd, Jr. and see if he wants to revisit this.
April 2nd, 2019 at 5:41 pm
The original Paramount reference was to clearly to his initial studio contract. The warner years, were not so good, ranging from adequate, The Iron Mistress, to Hell on Frisco Bay, a fair film, but his work uninspiring and listless, to The Deep Six, and below, like Man In The Net, or The Black Knight.
April 2nd, 2019 at 6:28 pm
Barry,
The title escapes me, but other than THE CARPETBAGGERS I thought he was good as the prejudiced soldier in that war film he did with Sydney Poitier. I agree his career was in a long nose dive, but I still think a better director could have at least used his presence better. Perhaps his last really good film was THE BADLANDERS, the Western remake of ASPHALT JUNGLE.
April 2nd, 2019 at 6:42 pm
Right David. All The Young Men and The Badlanders are both decent, but both Borgnine and Poitier carry the heavy lifting in the acting department although neither film, and I just made the reference, are especially well received in Maltin’s book. Not that it matters, just something to think about.
April 2nd, 2019 at 7:26 pm
THE BLACK KNIGHT
Jee-zus!