fanbaz-549-872209 When you see the cast, the director and the writer, the single thought is that this has got to be a great Western. Fonda rarely made a bad film. The director was at times masterful. But Hollywood is an industry. It makes films like Ford makes cars and every now and the you get the motion picture version of the Edsel. The best thing in it is Fonda's wig. Henry never had a lot of hair but what he carries on his head looks like a busby gone wrong, like the picture itself. Dull. Unimaginative. Utterly unbelievable. I am only spending time writing this to suggest that you might want to spend your time watching the same cast in other movies.

Marlburian I was very impressed with this, and nearly gave it an 8. (I can't remember the last time I gave a film 9.)Henry Fonda (wearing a rather obvious wig) proves again his versatility, this time as a drunk. It's not giving much away to say that he does redeem himself, but not in a super-heroical way. Dan Duryea is always excellent value, though I did wonder at his apparently wearing the same glasses (furtively)to read newsprint and for distance vision. (Usually one needs different prescriptions.)I saw the film courtesy of Youtube, and the sound wasn't great in places, so I didn't grasp why the men that Fonda came across were so keen to ambush the railroad police (and some of them did seem rather rash in the gunfight when it came to firing in full view of the other side).The "town" where much of the action took place looked realistic, and Anne Baxter as Valverda Johnson was reasonably attractive as a self-sufficient homesteader without having the unbelievable glamour of so many leading ladies in Westerns.The photography was good, especially a panoramic scene of a train entering the town.Well worth viewing.

Sean Morrow I'd love to know more about how this made-for-TV movie came about. It's got Don Siegel for it's director and Henry Fonda leading a first rate cast -- Dan Duryea is a stand out as the older, wiser gun-hand well past his prime (although he's actual a year younger that Fonda, Duryea looks at least 15 years older, but I gather he was in ill health). Not to give too much away, Fonda is a bum who drifts into town and upsets the apple cart by inquiring about the sister of a friend. The story builds quickly and is intriguing, but it is the characterizations of the players that give the movie it's greatest appeal. Even the minor characters are given some depth and not just the stereotypical kind of depth that is generally used as a kind of short-hand. The production values are just what they should be and the photography is excellent. I would suggest you go out of your way to try to catch this little gem of a western.

mackjay2 Seemingly unlimited by its humble origins as a TV-movie, STRANGER ON THE RUN delivers at every level. This project is tautly and intelligently directed by Don Siegel, with every scene counting for both characters and storyline. A great deal of Old West atmosphere is generated by the production, and there is a good score by Leonard Rosenman. But for most viewers, the cast will be the biggest draw for this movie. It's a mighty impressive lineup: Henry Fonda, Dan Duryea, Anne Baxter, Michael Parks, Lloyd Bochner, Sal Mineo. Everyone gives a committed performance, with Fonda (reprising a variant of the 'wrong man' role), Parks and Duryea especially impressive. This is one of Michael Parks best acting turns on film, a must-see for all his fans. In supporting roles there is solid work from Zalman King, Walter Burke and Tom Reese, all stalwarts of TV westerns. Only Sal Mineo seems underused here: he simply doesn't have enough to do, and it's frustrating to see him wasted like this. STRANGER ON THE RUN makes a perfect case for the quality TV-movies could achieve.