4/10
It's not bad for a Bible-thumper
12 June 2006
Watching this movie it quickly became apparent that it was made to present Christianity in a popular format--and nothing was more popular in 1956 than the western. Back when I was a kid (which includes all of the 1950s) churches and, now and then, schools would present such movies. I would not be surprised if this church audience was a key market for this movie as its lack of stars and slow pace would have crippled it in movie theaters.

That said, I kept watching it and was surprised at the professionalism of the actors and the production. Usually such productions have a few professionals then fill out the cast with near amateurs who would cause all but a parent to blush. In this production there were no real howlers.

Mitchell gives a good performance in the lead role, although he has a face and appearance more suitable for a bad guy. That old pro Robert Armstrong gives his usual solid performance as a sheriff of questionable loyalties. The same can be said of Taylor Holmes, who plays the town drunk who becomes the new preacher's first friend.

Is this worth searching out? No. But if, like me tonight, you can't get to sleep and you find The Peacemaker on cable, you could do worse. I started watching it to catch Robert Armstrong and then continued watching to see how deeply it might slip into Bible thumping. So what if it did thump the Bible now and then? What the hell, I've stayed up later to watch worse movies than this one.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed