mbanak In light of today's headlines, where political accusations and over-reaction are the norm in the news, this classic shows the horror of mob rule. We learn from "To Kill A Mockingbird" that some people are on this earth to do a dirty job. There is a dirty job hanging over the head of the character played by Fonda. His mop-up of the incident is inspiring. If movie-makers really desire to touch lives, this film has done the job. Our conscience is a prime and valuable connection between man and Heaven. The film concludes with Fonda explaining that in a memorable bar scene, in a setting unique in all of cinema. I claim Fonda made "12 Angry Men" as a counter-balance to this bone-jarring story. What do YOU think?

LakiM9 Just seen this movie, I have to say I'm absolutely delighted! The Ox-Bow Incident can be safely ranked as one of classic cinema's great movies. Praised by critics worldwide, it has still received very little public recognition and appreciation and it is about time this changed. It was never considered a success at the time of release, especially by mogul Darryl F. Zanuck who never considered a movie a success of any kind if it lost at the box-office. However, over the years it has become an artistic success with fans who appreciate good movie- making when they see it. Unlike other westerns from the golden age of cinema, this one doesn't focus on Cowboys and Indians or other such entertainment subjects, but instead the story is of a much more absorbing and long-lasting nature. It is also very nice framed(rope shots), and has a very interesting dialogue. Some elements of the movie's story may be similar to another classic about justice, "12 angry men". The movie is also having very nice cinematography, even though it is black and white. Speaking about acting, the best directed characters were for sure Jane Darwell's and Henry Fonda's. It also has a very sad plot twist at the end.I won't spoil the end but it is a little bit complicated for me. If you are looking for a nice thriller, you found it!

Alex da Silva It's 1885 and drifters Henry Fonda (Gil) and Harry Morgan (Art) ride into a backwater town where they learn that a popular cattleman has been shot dead and had his cattle stolen. The townsfolk are keen on a quick lynching for whoever is responsible and Fonda and Morgan go along with the posse to detract suspicion from themselves. They don't approve of what is happening along with a few others but they are in the minority. This town wants vengeance. Unfortunately, for whoever they find, vengeance is not the same as justice.Once it gets going, the film is pretty tense as you side against the majority mob led by ex-Army Major Frank Conroy (Major Tetley) and local cowboy Marc Lawrence (Jeff). The audience can sense what the outcome will be but can't quite believe that the film will see it through. I kept expecting that turning point to come and change the course of events. What happened was quite shocking.The cast are all good and the film has a compact running time and effective setting, especially that tree. I don't know how you get a tree like that. My wife reckons that it was struck by lightning. Could be? The film has a bleak ending but I guess we all make mistakes in life. We just have to move on.

sharky_55 We expect something when Henry Fonda, darling of Hollywood, strides into a bar in the west, weary, weathered but eyes alert and focused. A fight, or an argument, or a shootout perhaps. And we also expect him to win it, because, well, he's Henry Fonda. His Gil Carter is not as intimidating as say, his Wyatt Earp, but nevertheless he still has the presence of the leading man, the protagonist, the one who will shake up the small town and its inhabitants. But here is a film that goes against that narrative - he is not the invincible figure who can overcome all odds, and for once the strange powers of mob justice overwhelm everything else. Gil and his companion Art in fact join the posse because they are new in town and drawing lurking, suspicious glances from the folk - what better way to draw attention away from themselves than to take part in their own sport? The film portrays that dangerous allure that can drive mobs to do things that individuals could never even think of doing. Innocents and the naive are dragged along with them, or else for fear of not fitting in, being cast aside, being viewed as weak - as the mayor's son sees himself as. But they don't go about it chaotically. The scariest thing is that it evolves in a way that seems also consequential. The sheriff is missing, so the deputy steps up, and swears to uphold the mob's democratic 'justice'. When they catch their suspects, all the evidence seems to point to them, and the only witness who can prove their story is conveniently dead. At a mere 75 minutes it does not ever drag to that eventual conclusion (with the exception of a rather tame encounter with an ex- girlfriend of Gil's). Slowly, Trotti takes away our hope of the group ever getting a fair trial and justice. Dana Andrews' Donald Martin sells this increasing desperation. It is clear from the very foremost discovery that he is not a murderer or a thief - but no matter how well spoken and passionate he is the mob is not swayed. Indeed, as his most eloquent words are heard he is already dead, but his character shines through. As Fonda gives a stirring rendition of the misplaced morals and justice that has lead to his untimely death, Wellman pans across the bar to all the regretful participants. These events will not leave their eyes for a long time. Funny too, when movie goers don't expect a coward, but then are made to desperately want all these men to be so.