MovieChat Forums > Yellowstone Kelly (1959) Discussion > Yellowstone Kelly ~ fair...not good...

Yellowstone Kelly ~ fair...not good...

posted 13 years ago by guyinnanaimo
3 replies | jump to latest

I guess for its time, 1959, this would have been a good movie, but sadly, it doesn't hold itself much after 50+ years.
Having said that, not many movies do!
Walker is good, but the casting is atrocious, save for Akins and Oates, both in minor roles.
Interesting!
The Indian chief {John Russell}, his nephew {Ray Danton!}, and that Indian girl {Andra Martin} are probably the worst choices for Indians since Hollywood had Westerns.
And Byrnes isn't much in this one either.
I'd give it about a 5 for its 'day', and a '3' now.
And I'm being generous.

You can't HANDLE the truth!'

[–] sirstiffie 12 years ago

Your opinion is yours and you have a right to it, no matter how wrong you are about the film. While casting might have been better, the movie is a 7 on a 10 scale any day of the week and one of my fave westerns ever.

"The first one of you moves, and I'm gonna kill the whole lot of ya."

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

Its a B western and was not made to stand up to the winds of time.

Its that man again!!

[–] vinidici 9 years ago

It IS kind of hard to overlook blue eyed Indians like the Chief and Wahleeah. However, in frontier times it wasn't unheard of for white survivors of Indian raids to be absorbed into the conquering tribe. There actually WAS such a thing as the occasional blue eyed Native American. Too bad there wasn't a line or two thrown in to explain that Wahleeah and the Chief had some white ancestry.