ironhorse_iv Bad habits are hard to die hard for Lee Van Cleef. Once again, he starred in a really horrible movie. Directed by Gene Martin AKA Eugenio Martín, this euro-western film also known as Hunt the Man down, or Four Mercenaries from El Paso, is a mess. The movie tells the story of bandit Roy King (Lee Van Cleef) and his gang. They were hired by a mysterious wealthy man, Montero (James Mason) to blow up a Mexican Army munitions stockpile in Mexico, using a luxury riverboat as a base of operations. The only problem, is that they were lured into a bigger scheme that digs them even deeper into the troubles of the Mexican revolution. Can Roy King and his group dig themselves out of this hole or will the problems of this job, become too much for them to handle? Watch the movie to find out! Without spoiling too much of the movie, I think I would have more respect for this film, if the movie flown right. Don't get me wrong, the movie could had work, with all the double-crossing and twist turns, but it got really annoying with all, the repetitive. Seeing these dummies get duped, time and time, again got frustrated, pretty fast. All the men in this film, are portray as cartoony idiots! The main character that Lee Van Cleef plays, is supposed to be smart, and clever. Yet, he even dumb himself down, by marry a woman, he only knew a few hours in the opening scene? Come on! Who does that! It didn't help that music that came with this film, claims that Lee Van Cleef's character is supposed to be the meanest and scariest of the bad-men of the old west! All we see, as the audience, is Ron King being afraid, and goofing off. The worst twist had to be, toward the end, when the schemes stop making sense. The last twist; comes out of nowhere, and felt so damn confusing. The movie gets dumber, when it comes to the music. Bad Man's River has a god-awful soundtrack, mixed with silly Barber shop quartet songs & out of place, rock music by Jade Warrior. It's completely wrong. It doesn't match the Spaghetti Western, feel, at all. Another problem with the film is the way, it was filmed. The dark blue color picture montage of Lee Van Cleef's face during the opening was really hard to see. I can barely notice, what the picture slideshow was showing. The film quality is so washed out, and faded. It gets worst, as the movie starts to use freeze frame, excessive! I really thought, there was something wrong with my DVD copy, at first! I thought, the dish was skipping frames, but I find out, later, that the film was doing this, on purpose. I don't get, why the director would chose to do this! It really ruins the feel of the film! Thank God, it's only in the first bits of the film. Still, the movie does have some bad editing, chops, toward the middle of the end, that's hard, not to notice. The pacing is a bit off, as well. The movie starts out, with a bank robbery, being successful and the movie plays it off, as if it was finishing up. It really seem like the movie is already, over. Then somewhat Ron King, end up in a mental asylum, only for it to blow up, minutes later! I know it's supposed to tell us, that King has escape, but it seem like he got killed, by the explosion, since the film doesn't show him, escaping! Anyways, the movie jumps around for the rest of the film, from locations in both US & Mexico. Despite, the locations haven't no rivers, near it, a steam boat, somewhat connection them, together. Honestly, I don't know, how Lee Van Cleef & his gang were able to move around, so quick. It's really puzzling, how they even got on the boat. Nothing about the boat's speed, makes logically sense. I guess, the boat is able to travel, both quickly & slow. The movie really push, the runtime, to its limits due to this. There are lots of slow moments with barely any good humor or action. The movie has this weird cartoony feel to its action. Good guys are able to kill, multiply bad guys, while bad guys aimed for the feet and seem like they can't even hit. Even with a sub-machine gun, no less! It's really impossible to suspend disbelief for this movie, when a six-shooter is able to shot, more than six bullets, at a time! I really hate the moment, when one of the villains, receiving a cannon shot to his face, and only appears scorched like a Looney Toon cartoon. It really makes this film appalling to watch! No wonder, why James Mason feels so embarrassed, taking this role. The acting is very stilted, due to the awful dialogue, given. It's clear, that the audio English dubbing, doesn't match the lips, any more. While, this movie is bad, it's not the worst, Lee Van Cleef's film, I saw. He was somewhat alright in this film. I like that he cover his toupet with a bowler hat. James Mason looks like he's isn't have fun like Cleef. He looks so miserable, being there. Eduardo Fajardo, Sergio Fantoni & Aldo Sambrell as the villains, were all funny, at times. By far, the worst character in the film, had to be Alicia (Gina Lollobrigida). I really don't get, how the men in the film were able to stand her. Her acting was over the top. While, her character is a bitch. The actress that played her, was indeed, a sexy sex symbol! Overall: This movie belong in the 1 dollar bargain bins. I just glad, I don't have to watch this movie, ever again. Thank God, all bad things must do come to an end.

aleconstantine Bad Man's River is a spaghetti western movie which I chose based on Lee Van Cleef being on the cover -- I'm not a massive western fan but even I recognised Van Cleef as a fairly famous actor in the genre. Unfortunately this did not equate into a good movie. Van Cleef is, I assume, the character for the title song: "He's the baddest man in Bad Man's River, where virtue is a sin".Does this movie have a good plot? No. It involves a complicated process of blowing things up and stealing a bank cheque, but seems to revolve largely around Alicia -- played by Gina Lollobrigida -- who marries men and betrays them but for some reason they never think she'll do it again. I mean seriously, after the third time a woman has sold you down the river to death or worse you've pretty much only yourself to blame if it happens again -- and it does.However, if we ignore the shoddy plot we have to ask ourselves if we're left with a good action movie. We ask that question, and we receive a negative answer. I'm a keen believer in suspending disbelief in movies...you have to go with the flow and accept what the directors are trying to do. Yet there is a limit. This limit was not reached when the good buys never missed a shot and the bad guys aimed for the feet and never got a hit* -- even with a sub-machine gun -- but the limit was reached and passed and left eating dust when a protagonist would fire his gun twice and four men would fall over. And who knew that a cheap mattress would provide better cover from bullets than an inch of solid oak? It's impossible to suspend disbelief for this movie, the plot is appalling, and the acting stilted. I rate it: A bullet to the head.* Oh, one protagonist gets shot. At least, he falls against a wall clutching his arm or shoulder or chest or something. It doesn't slow him down though, in fact it doesn't even bleed.

Earl Taylor In the summer of 1972 I was a missionary for the LDS Church in Bandung, Indonesia. In those days we had one day a month we could go to a movie. On that particular day we chose to go see "Bad Man's River". I can't tell you how this movie ended as I got up and walked out in the middle of it! Mind you, this was the ONLY opportunity over a month long period that I could see I movie. In those circumstances, if I was to walk of a movie it must have been a real bowser. As I recall the straw that broke the camel's back was the sad realization that a more or less distinguished actor like James Mason had been reduced to appearing in total Derek. Lee Van Cleef was in his element, but even he was approaching the margin with this one.

Jonathon Dabell Is it just me, or does James Mason wear a guilty look upon his face throughout this film, almost as if he's aware that he's wasting his talent in a sub standard cheapo? Bad Man's River is a bad film, but what makes it even more unforgivable is that a lot of classy stars were mysteriously persuaded to appear in it.It's an eccentric paella western about various outlaws and swindlers trying to steal cash from the Mexican government. Mason was once quoted as saying that he made it for fun and money, never thinking that it would get a release in England, but much to his horror and dismay it was picked up by Rank and got cinematic distribution.The film isn't as funny as it thinks it is and is made doubly irritating by frequent freeze frame shots (why were so many 70s films obsessed with the freeze frame gimmick?) and pantomime style music. It's a unique film, with a bizarre and unconventional flavour all of its own, but don't take that as a recommendation. The only thing I would recommend about this film is that you don't see it!