I spent and enjoyable 90 minutes or so watching this film a few months ago and I would have summed this up as a good film and probably given it a higher rating (6-7).
However yesterday I sat down to watch the earlier made "Showdown at Abilene" and for the first 20 minutes had this feeling of "deja-vu". It was then I realised that this was an almost identical re-make of a film that was only 11 years old and wondered why on earth they bothered.
The lead in "Gunfight" is hopelessly miscast; Bobby Darin always seems to come across as a poor-man's Dean Martin and seems to have a constant grin on his face throughout. I am also of the generation that can no longer take Leslie Nielson seriously in ANY film which is a shame as he makes quite a good fist of this role. I am also always uncomfortable watching Michael Sarrazin (although that is an entirely personal thing and admit that this probably has more to do with his "intensity" as an actor than any lack of skill in his trade). Even in this, his first role, he is the stand-out act.
One thing on which I must comment however is Darin's Confederate uniform however is laughable (more Las Vegas than Civil War) and is so tight, he dare not bend over at any time!
To be fair to Gunfight however I thought I should give this another go and then watched the pair back to back.
The original (Showdown) is a much better and much more subtle in its approach to the reasons why he will not carry a gun (I'll say no more for fear of it being a "spoiler"). Had I not seen the earlier film, I would have been quite happy with this version but it is not really a patch on the first one and seems a pointless re-make.
If you have time and love Westerns as much as I do give this a go but if you can only watch one watch the original.
