Fighting Man of the Plains
Fighting Man of the Plains
NR | 16 November 1949 (USA)
Fighting Man of the Plains Trailers

Former bandit Jim Dancer becomes marshal of a Kansas town and cleans up the criminal element - with the help of his old pal, Jesse James.

Reviews
Matrixston

Wow! Such a good movie.

... View More
Ploydsge

just watch it!

... View More
HottWwjdIam

There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

... View More
mraculeated

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

... View More
alexandre michel liberman (tmwest)

This film would probably not come out with honors if reviewed by a harsh critic. They would find flaws in the psychological motivations of the main characters, and at certain moments the simplicity of a comic book style of narration where the characters ostensibly explain what the screen cannot show. But there is another dimension to a western where other factors are what count. This film grabs you from the beginning and involves you up to the end, pure excitement, fast moving, there is Quantrill, Jesse James, and the hero, Jim Dancer (Randolph Scott) who used to ride with them taking part on the massacre in Lawrence, Kansas. By a series of circumstances he ends up sheriff of a town, but it is only a question of time before people will find out who he really is. There is a great ending and an excellent Dale Robertson as Jesse James on a very small part. If you think you saw all the best Scott movies, you will have a good surprise when you see this one, and it is hard to believe, it was made in 1949!

... View More
Brian Camp

Renowned western novelist Frank Gruber wrote the script of FIGHTING MAN OF THE PLAINS (1949) based on his own book. It tells the story of Jim Dancer (Randolph Scott), a fugitive outlaw who'd been part of Captain William Quantrill's infamous raid on Lawrence, Kansas on August 21, 1863. Dancer is apprehended by a "Pleasanton" (read: Pinkerton) detective who is then killed in an accident, allowing Dancer to take his identity and wind up in Lanyard, Kansas, where he's pressured into taking the job of Marshal after fearlessly subduing some rowdy cowboys. It's a fairly corrupt town, but the new Marshal does a good job of keeping the peace and gets aid from some unexpected quarters at the local gambling hall. The script is awash in simmering undercurrents, including the fact that the man who owns the town, Slocum (Barry Kelley), had killed Dancer's brother during the war, and Dancer had killed Slocum's brother in response during the Lawrence raid. Slocum's niece (Joan Taylor), who'd witnessed the killing of her father a decade earlier, lives with her uncle but fails to recognize Dancer as the culprit and begins to fall for him. Meanwhile the gambling saloon owner, Oldham (Victor Jory), finds his voluptuous partner, Florence (Jane Nigh), falling for Dancer as well. Eventually, Slocum alienates both the local cattlemen and the railroad company through his efforts to control all the land around town and a showdown is inevitable. At one point, a detective from Chicago shows up, summoned by the suspicious Slocum, to see if "Marshal Cummings" (Dancer's new identity), is indeed his old detective buddy. To make matters worse, Slocum's got cocky young gunslinger Johnny Tancred (Bill Williams) in his pocket, ready to take over when the tide turns. Dancer has his own ace in the hole, however, thanks to his old wartime associations. The finale offers a clear violation of the Production Code, but I can see where the blurred lines between good and bad, lawman and lawbreaker, "respectable" and disreputable could have easily confused the censors. Lots of stuff happens in the movie and the cast of characters is quite colorful. Things never slow down and surprises come at us pretty quickly. I had a great time watching this. I never felt it getting too far-fetched for me. The cast includes plenty of old hands at this kind of thing (Scott, Jory, Paul Fix, Douglas Kennedy) and a few new hands (Taylor, Nigh, Williams) and they're all good. Jory is particularly awesome. He comes off initially as his patented oily gambler, but he proudly defies our expectations. Future western star Dale Robertson appears as Jesse James in his first credited role. He has only two scenes—one good one and one great one. Film noir regulars Barry Kelley and Berry Kroeger are both on hand, one as a bad guy and one who'll surprise you.I watched this on TCM, which showed a black-and-white print of a Cinecolor film. I hope someone finds a color print and releases it on DVD.

... View More
MartinHafer

I am a huge fan of Randolph Scott's westerns, so it's sad that I felt so incredibly unimpressed by this film. Most of it is because I had a strong sense of having seen all this before...which I had. If you've seen as many Scott films as I have, you'll notice that this is at least the fourth film in which his character was somehow associated with Quantrill's Raiders--a group of thugs who violated every known rule for how to conduct campaigns during the Civil War. Killing civilians and terrorism were their trademarks and it wasn't surprising that several of this Confederate raiding party went on to careers as famous western criminals. Doing one or two films related to this group is just fine--but come on Randy, enough is enough!! What also felt recycled was his 'bad man turned good' storyline--it's very familiar indeed! The film begins showing the atrocities committed by the Quantrill gang and one of it's 'nicer' members (Scott--as Jim Dancer). Following the war, Dancer was an outlaw and continued to do bad things...though not nearly as bad as the James Brothers and a few of the other Quantrill thugs. He was bad...but only a wee bit bad!! Anyway, he is captured by a private detective and is being brought back to pay for his crimes. However, on the way, the detective drowns--with Scott handcuffed to him. Now here is the dumb part--when a group of settlers pass, they find Scott and the dead guy and automatically believe Scott's story that HE is the detective and that the dead detective is Jim Dancer!! He has no proof and it sure looked suspicious to everyone EXCEPT the folks who rescued him from the handcuffs!!! Later, Scott enters a crappy lawless town and manages to have himself appointed Sheriff! At first, he seems to be only doing it for the money but oddly he later takes the job seriously and conscientiously! Can Dancer turn his life around and live his life for good? Will someone recognize him for the dirty dog that he was? Will anyone remember that he's already made several other films JUST LIKE THIS ONE? Overall, a competent but far from rousing western that is full of silly plot holes and familiar themes. It's easy to skip this one unless you are a die-hard 'Scottophile'!

... View More
Robert J. Maxwell

Scott is arrested by James Millican, a detective for the Pleasonton Agency. The two have nothing personal against each other. When the detective is accidentally killed, someone has to cut off his hand to free Scott from the handcuffs. Scott takes the detective's place and, a bit later, is made sheriff of Lanyard, Kansas. He makes friends. He makes enemies. There are unscrupulous businessmen. Scott cleans the whole place up and gets the girl.By this point in his career Scott had decided, wisely, to turn out nothing but Westerns. He looked and acted the part well. According to Bob Osborne's commentary on TV, Scott enjoyed working out of doors, sitting back and reading the Wall Street Journal while the stunt men did the rough work. Scott was a keen investor and retired a wealthy man to the golf country of North Carolina without ever looking back at Hollywood. He bowed out after Sam Pekinpaugh's "Ride the High Country," a good note to leave on. He managed his career -- his life -- pretty well, all in all.Most of his Westerns were, if not exactly identical, cut from the same mold so the comparison of one to any of the others must depend on fine judgments about details. Is the film in glorious color? This one is not. Is the location interesting and evocative? Not this one, which looks like the San Fernando Valley used to look before the last inch of it was paved over. Better than usual support? No. Is Scott given any help from the script? An oddity of character? A quirk? An occasional wry turn of phrase? Not here. The result is a typical and not unrewarding Randolph Scott Western that doesn't distinguish itself from the many others he made in these years.Nice to see Victor Jory as something other than an open sleaze bag.

... View More