In the 1870s, two rival businessmen, Zack Thomas and Joe Jarrett, on a stagecoach heading to Galveston, Texas, must pull together to protect $100,000 from an outlaw named Matson. Once in Galveston, however, their rivalry continues, as Thomas joins up with Elya Carlson and Jarret with Maxine Richter. But Matson is still on the loose, and a scheming banker threatens both Thomas and Jarrett.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
Beautiful, moving film.
Absolutely Brilliant!
By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
This is a SHAMEFUL effort. Presumably all the "stars" took their roles piurely for the money. I watched this drivel growing increasingly angry. The acting is pitiful, the story ridiculous, only the cinematography rates at all. AVOID THIS ONE. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish. Rubbish.
Plot: A $100.000 shipment and later a bid about opening a waterfront Casino are the objects of a tug-of-war between Zack Thomas and Joe Jarrett. Apart from having to deal with each other, they'll have to defend their selves against a Banker and the bad guy of the story, Matson.I'm not a fan of Westerns, especially not the comedy-oriented ones. However I'm one of these masochistic try-it-out-before-judging kind of morons so after trying out some of the more "serious" and classic ones I figured, eh! What the heck! Let me try this out too. Boy was I wrong. Why? Because this is one of these movies where EVERYTHING is wrong. From the pacing and acting to the directory and overall plot it's rubbish.Four For Texas is obviously an attempt of selling a couple of million tickets with the use of the very popular Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin who suck big time. They don't just suck as western characters but also as comedians. The film is simply not funny and these guys are simply bad actors, (I smell fanboy\girl anger in the air). For example the first part of the film. Bullets are flying all around yet Sinatra has a stupid grin on his face as if he is posing for a Las Vegas Show. The same with Dean Martin, he is always cool no matter what and in a very unconvincing way.Not only is the movie way too slow for what it has to offer but there is also no real suspense or plot twists. Characters talk, talk and talk sometimes they throw in a couple of supposedly funny lines and the main girls, (Ekberg and Andress), look like goddesses of love but they don't offer anything else but simplistic sex appeal with seducing slow walking, deep cleavages and stupid one liners that are supposed to be sexy.FINAL VERDICT: Only for Sinatra\Martin\Ekberg\Andress fanboys & fangirls (1/10)[+] Err Ekberg's cleavage maybe??? [-] Boring plot. Slow and not funny at all. Mediocre acting.Also Check: Cat Ballou (1965) – Maverick (1994) – Ocean's Eleven (1960)
It was great... for about 20 minutes.What this movie lacks is about everything you want in a western. a few minutes action and a whole lot of crap.A pampered cowboy and a thief who spent most of their time around two blond girls with skippy clothes and little brains.....add to that a fat banker and a riverboat and you have your story.Seriously that's about as interesting as it gets.If your highest wish is to see Frank Sinatra get pedicure.. than this is probably the movie for you. But if you're looking for an action filled western... then I propose you look somewhere else.
This movie has four stars, Dean Martin, Frank Sinatra, Anita Ekberg and Ursula Andress, so I gave it four stars. Actually two stars are for Dean Martin's attempts to add humor. Anita and Ursula get one each, but Frank Sinatra gets no stars.When the movie opens a group of bandits are attacking a stage-coach. Frank Sinatra is shooting the bandits from the top of the coach, while Dean Martin is shooting them from out the window of the coach. Sinatra has a silly grin on his face as he shoots. There is no indication that he might die any moment or that he is actually killing human beings. He is smiling as if he is just playing a game. Dean Martin also looks totally relaxed and nonchalant, but he is not grinning the way Sinatra is. There is no acting going on here. It is as if the director said to Sinatra, "Smile and shoot the gun." Anybody above the age of ten could have played the scene more realistically.I understand that Aldrich was upset with Sinatra. He said that Sinatra worked a total of 80 hours over a 38 day period. In other words, he worked about two days a week, for five or six hours a day, over a seven week period. Nice work if you can get it. I wonder if Aldrich used the inappropriate footage in the opening scene as a way of getting revenge on Sinatra, actually purposefully making him look like a bad actor.While the Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra both have about twenty minutes of scene time in the first half of the movie, Sinatra only has a few quick scenes in the second half until he walks in at the end for the climatic fight scene. I'm also wondering if Aldrich cut down on Sinatra's scenes when he saw that Sinatra was just saying his lines and not acting.Anita Ekberg was paired with Sinatra, but there was no chemistry there. She is only on-screen for about ten minutes. I suspect that Aldrich cut scenes with her and Sinatra when he saw that they weren't working.On the other hand, Ursula Andress does connect with Martin and the scenes of him lusting over her may be sexist, but they are practically the only amusing scenes in the film. Just as in the first James Bond movie, "Dr. No." she appears only after the film is half over. Unlike the James Bond movie, she cannot save this film, but she does relieve some of the tedium.Aldridge is a fantastic director under the right circumstances. "Kiss Me Deadly," "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane," and "Emperor of the North Pole," are my favorites. I suspect that he really wanted to create tension between Sinatra's and Martin's characters, but Sinatra refused and only wanted the rivalry to be good-natured kidding between pals. Apparently, he sought to get Sinatra fired, but failed. The result is a movie that moves at glacier speed and has few surprises, unless you can call the pointless appearance of the Three Stooges, a surprise.I think only Ursula Andress fans will enjoy this one. She wears some great dresses and appears quite self assured, relaxed and sexy. If you are one, just watch the second half. You won't miss anything.