efisch A strange film that is alternately stiff and fluid. Johnny MacBrown is no kid--more like 30. His acting is fairly amateurish but some lines have been well-rehearsed. Outdoor scenes are impressive but the indoor scenes are pure early-talkie confinement. Beery and the subsidiary actors seem to have the talkie thing down pat. Some of the action scenes were probably more impressive in 70mm and the outdoor recording is very good considering the sound limitations. Nasty revenge storyline where Billy justifies his many killings, but he's sure a nice guy about it. There are many killings and lots of mayhem. Some of the comedy lines between Mr. Butterworth and Mr. Hatfield are incredibly corny considering the circumstances. "The Big Trail" is a much better film from the same year and is still available in its impressive 70mm version. You have to really like westerns to appreciate "Billy The Kid", but there are lots of devoted followers.

Michael_Elliott Billy the Kid (1930) * 1/2 (out of 4) Extremely disappointing film from Vidor features Johnny Mack Brown as Billy the Kid and Wallace Beery as Pat Garrett. After his boss and friend is murdered, Billy swears vengeance on any man who helped kill him. Along with his friends, Billy sets out for revenge only to find himself trapped inside a building in a long stand off. It's funny that this film starts off with a message from the then governor of New Mexico talking about how great Billy the Kid was and how this film was "mostly" truthful. This film was famous for being shot 1.20:1 but also in the 70mm Realife widescreen format but sadly all known prints of this are now lost. The film was also shot with two endings and the one I viewed was beyond silly and goes against what the governor said. With that out of the way, I found this film pretty hard to get through so I'm somewhat shocked at how many great reviews this one has out there. Being an early talkie I was surprised at how good the film sounded and that included all the dialogue plus the various sound effects. What shocked me was how old fashioned the film looked because just seeing the "style" of this picture made me wonder how much Vidor really directed and if this full screen version was second thought to everyone on the set. The movie is incredibly ugly with mostly medium shots that really don't do anything for the film. The ugly and still fashion of the film really takes it toll on the action in the film because it makes it just as boring. Even worse are some of the performance that suffer because of this. I though Brown and Beery were both decent in their roles but certainly nothing to write home about. Kay Johnson was rather bland as the love interest but future FREAKS cast member Roscoe Ates steals the film as the comedy relief.

barnesgene By the time King Vidor directed this "Billy the Kid," he already had 36 movies under his belt (most of them silent), so it's weird that the movie seems so arbitrarily thrown together. Brutality and tenderness each try to crowd the other out. Somebody dies, and minutes later everyone's smiling again. I think the Western/Cowboy genre was still developing in Hollywood at the time (even after all those silent Westerns), and the addition of sound just threw another monkey wrench into the works. Nevertheless, you can tick off all the Western conventions and clichés as the film unfolds; they're all there. But it's like they're on steroids or something -- you never know when they're going to take on a life of their own. They just don't add up. I'm tempted to give this movie an "8" rating just for its consummate strangeness, but I think a "6" is probably a fairer assessment.

Neal99 This film was full of surprises for me, given its less-than-stellar reputation. One has to view it in terms of Hollywood myth-making and not as if it's an episode of `Biography.' King Vidor's camerawork is startlingly fluid - he uses camera movement and cutting very effectively. One of the biggest surprises was the brutality (not to be confused with gore) of certain scenes. The film also does an excellent job of creating a mood of futility. As for Johnny Mack Brown, at first I thought he was inappropriately cast. But as the movie continued, his characterization seemed more valid. And of course, the location shots are stunning. This film is underrated and overdue for critical re-evaluation. Perhaps that will happen if an archivist finds a widescreen print!