Very well executed

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

I'd like to know why the motion picture academy felt that Rupert Crosse deserved an Oscar nomination in the supporting category for this 1968 film? There was nothing to him as a black member of a Mississippi family in 1905. If anything, acting honors should have gone to Mitch Vogel, as the young boy caught up in the mayhem that pursues when Steve McQueen and Crosse persuade the young man to take to them to Memphis to a house of ill repute.The film, which is the typical coming of age movie, even for the period, tells the adventures that they encounter on their way and at Memphis.There is plenty of racism. Ruth White as the head of the brothel? Come on. She, who was so good, as Rod Steiger's first victim in "No Way to Treat a Lady," is as sexy as an old prune.Will Geer shines as an understanding grandfather,and Burgess Meredith recounts the story as the man the Vogel character was as a young boy. Vogel gave a very sensitive, restrained performance.

This hilarious movie has much drawing power for me. The cast, first of all, was well-chosen. Burgess Meredith had a good narrating voice, Rupert Crosse and Steve McQueen were two of the nuttiest characters you could ever find, Sharon Farrell was a very sweet, pretty, and appealing lady, the seasoned veteran actor Will Geer was excellent as a wealthy landowner in 1905 Mississippi, and Mitch Vogel was very versatile in his first role here. While no one should condone Crosse and McQueen for trying, for all practical purposes, to get the twelve-year-old boy Lucius (Vogel) into trouble, you still can't keep from, again, laughing at all the antics and escapades all the people (Vogel, Crosse, Farrell, and McQueen) involve themselves in. As a rule, it is a good, wholesome, very entertaining cinematic work.

For a movie that starred one of the greatest box office stars of his time, based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel by one America's greatest writers, "The Reivers" has continued to be something of an answer to a trivia question ("In what movie did Steve McQueen portray a semi-comic character involving a stolen automobile and a horse race?") I'm not sure of the reasons myself, but this movie has remained at the top of my "Favorite Movies" list since I first saw it in 1969. Maybe it was the out-of-character role of McQueen. Maybe it was the excellence of his supporting cast that includes Mitch Vogel, Rupert Crosse and Will Geer. Maybe it was the direction by Mark Rydell. Or maybe it was the outstanding score by John Williams (which has remained my favorite movie score of all time). Most likely, it is a combination of all the above. All I can say is that this movie has never lost its appeal for me. Watching the movie is like visiting an old friend with whom the passage of time will only strengthen the bonds of affection. This movie may not be for everybody, but I recommend it on the chance that you may be smitten by its special charm.

McQueen is clearly miscast here. For starters, he was 39 years old by the time he made this flick and he was too old to be believed as a young hayseed. Second, McQueen's real world personality just doesn't fit into the cardboard cutout of Boon the bafoon.If you are a true Steve McQueen fan, watch this movie; but only to fill in the square of having seen all his films. It is disappointing. Sharon Farrel is NOT sexy and the rest of the cast appear to be responding to hidden cue cards telling them what expressions to show. Guffaw, guffaw.