6/10
Badly acted and raw but its interesting and some scenes are actually well made
5 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
I cant believe people are saying "its good for the genre" Oh no this movie is not very good even for 1933 from A technical standpoint But Thats Why it gets a 6 because its is interesting because how raw it is and i must admit i even laughed at it because they had literally NO SOUND EDITING so its so Stupid sometimes especially a fishfight at the end where i literally said "This movie sucks so much i like it lol" and also the acting is so bad like the worst ever even for a 1933 Low budget film the acting is bad i mean its my first (and probably last) John wayne b western of the 1930s but man it was interesting. Well everything is quite bad (on a technical point) sorta but few things are good the underwater sequence while completely weird it was cool that they actually filmed underwater quite impressive actually and the Location work is good but the cinematography amateurish so the Locales dont get to shine as much but still beautiful most definetly. The choreography is pretty good. However Honestly it blows my mind that someone said that this has and i quote "good acting" NO IT DOESNT but if you think its good then good for you i guess. Welp this film was something i reccomend it however in a way if you want to see some beautiful Locations and decent action and early John wayne and beautiful locales and also this move HAS NO MUSIC except lone star logo and credits so it feels like a silent film at times lol. FINAL VERDICT:6/10 because its interestingly Raw however on a technical level even for its time its a 4.5 because of the Low budget and acting but Thats from a technical standpoint.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed