In other words,this film is a surreal ride.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.

.Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

"The Law and Jake Wade" is a dark Western with some big name actors. But for the scenery and acting by Richard Widmark, there's not much else going for this movie. The film is based on a novel by the same title that helped launch a successful fiction writing career for Marvin H. Albert. I don't know how well the script follows the book, or how well Albert fleshed out the "reformed" Jake Wade in the book. But the film leaves this as an unsettled, dark matter. A couple other reviews have noted this. I kept looking for the film to explore the conflicts of Jake Wade over his past and present. In the beginning, that held my interest in the film. But as the movie progressed, and we never saw any resolution in the character of Wade, this became a nagging distraction from my enjoyment of the film. I agree with the few others who found fault with the plot and some of the scenes (Indian attacks) as well. But, I'd like to discuss this big hole in the story further. The dark aspect of the film is the character of Jake Wade. Has he reformed, or hasn't he? The question is never resolved in the film, so I was left hanging. So, I disagree with reviews that saw this as a standard Western. Widmark, who plays Clint Hollister, asks the question point blank in the movie. Why did Wade bother to spring him from jail when he had been tried and was due to hang for murder? Does the simple answer suggested by some reviews answer the question? Was it a matter of honor for Wade, or a debt to be repaid as some think? If so, that means that Wade had not changed and did not put law and order first. Wade knows Hollister. They had been together for many years. Wade knows that Hollister plans to kill him. Wade freed Hollister knowing that he would go on robbing and killing. So, the dark side of this film is that there is apparently no conflict in the person of Jake Wade. So, has he really reformed? Does he really believe in law and order? Does he really care about keeping the peace and protecting people? If he does, we don't see it, because any moral struggle over his actions never comes to the fore. Was it absent in the book? Or was it in the book but not explored in the film by the screenwriter, the director and/or the actor? Without exploration of Wade's moral conflict over his actions, we are left with a wooden marshal who has no thoughts about it one way or another. And in that lies the dark side of this film. The movie sets out to have us rooting for Wade as the bad guy turned good. But in reality, his bond to his former life was stronger than any moral sense and change of life for law and order. Now, some reviewers seem to hold Robert Taylor up as a great actor; so I'll end here with some words about Taylor's acting and appeal. As a young person, I too liked the handsome, rough-hewn image of Taylor, the leading man. There's no doubt that he was a draw for me and many other movie buffs to see his movies. But, the last few decades as I've built up a film library for my family, I haven't found a single movie in which I thought Taylor was very good or excellent as an actor. At his best, he is just good or OK. Some of the films have been very good due mostly to the stories and support from others in the cast. Enough said on that – I still have a couple keepers in which Taylor stars. He's wooden in those as well, but the films are quite good. "The Law and Jake Wade" could have been a great film if it had probed the character of Wade more deeply, and given him some conflicting emotions over his moral choices.

Let's face it, Robert Taylor is an awful actor. It just seems like somebody needed to fill this role quickly and grabbed a paunchy old stage hand from sweeping the floor, saying you'll do ! The guy just can't act ! How did he get by for so long in Hollywood with no talent, when there were other superb actors around like Spencer Tracy , Kirk Douglas, Richard Widmark etc... Robert Taylor must have read many scripts turned down by the proper actors of Hollywood just to get work.He is actually billed as the lead in this movie ! Even John Wayne on a bad day could act this man under the table. The definition of a Superstar is the star that carries the movie. Without Richard Widmark's presence billed as second lead, this movie would have fallen completely flat. Is this movie really directed by the same man who made "Bad day at Black Rock" and "The Great Escape" ? John Sturges must have been having an off day. Although he didn't have much to work with. The poor script and leading man to name but two. In Bad day at Black rock you have of course the master and arguably the best screen actor there has even been , Spencer Tracy. In this movie you have Robert (the statue) Taylor. Without a good leading man a movie is sunk before it begins.John Sturges should have been more like William Wyler in his approach to directing Robert Taylor. To at least coax a mediocre performance from the man, rather than this exhibition of rocking horse excellence. Nice to see Dr McCoy though, playing yet another heavy, he is a very good actor, obviously, although he never liked beaming down to planets.

The film is a little too short perhaps and the love interest subplot wasn't as well developed as it could have been. However, there is a lot to recommend The Law and Jake Wade. As a western and a film, it is fine and suitably tense, and I didn't mind the Indian attacks actually, they weren't outstanding but they weren't awful that they make you think "oh god this is appalling". Plus the climax, the Comache attack on a ghost town, I thought was well choreographed. The Law and Jake Wade is beautifully photographed, and the scenery is luscious. The score is lovely as well, and I was impressed with the clever screenplay and the acting. Robert Taylor I can find dull, like in Ivanhoe(that is of course my opinion) but he has enough charisma and grit to carry the picture, and Richard Widmark is all nasty and sneering as his adversary. John Sturges's direction is superb, and the story is very well-constructed. Overall, underrated and well done, not perfect but definitely worth watching. 8/10 Bethany Cox

The plot of this western, while not unusual, is reasonably well done. However, the love interest has very little to do. The scenery is excellently photographed, but the Indian attack is ridiculous. It makes no sense that the Indians did not burn the place. It was a ghost town, the wood was old and dry, and there was no one there but the people the Indians apparently were after.The best part is the handling of Jake Wade (Robert Taylor) after he's caught and being transported to the place where the money is buried. The rest of the movie is fairly dull.Altogether, a reasonable western, but it could have been a lot better.gaynor wild