Good story, Not enough for a whole film

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

For years Elvis Presley had been desperate to do a movie as a drama character with a non singing part. He was also wanting to a spaghetti western. He had done well in his earlier years with "Love Me Tender", "Flaming Star", Wild In The Country", and "King Creole". These parts had singing in them but it was a chance to stretch his ability to do drama. Spaghetti westerns were still hot so he thought he had finally found the project he was looking for.This was intended to be a TV movie and Elvis thought this would be an opening for him to take his movie career in a different direction. A TV movie would not rely on the box office to carry it. It failed in the box office since it was not supposed to be released to the theaters and had a TV movie look to it. Colonel Parker did not want him to do TV movies and this was probably a set up to keep Presley in line. Parker was always worried about losing his meal ticket. Presley almost fired Parker he did his TV Special in 1968.As mentioned earlier, it was a well made movie that should have succeeded but it was never meant to be released to the theaters. He got to look like a part and he and the movie had a gritty look to it. Charles Marquis Warren was one of the premier western directors then but most of his work was TV so with the supporting actors mostly coming from TV, it did not fly then in the theaters. At that time, it was hard for actors to do both TV and movies and be bankable. Today, that is not the case so maybe Charro was ahead of its time. Elvis could have had a whole new career with this movie if only he had gotten the right support. Maybe he would have lived longer since he would have had a new interest to stimulate him. Rest in peace, Elvis.

Released in 1969, "Charro" stars Elvis as Jess Wade, an ex-outlaw whose former gang seeks to pin the blame on him for stealing a gold cannon from a Mexican shrine. Wade ends up trying to protect the Arizona town that holds one of the gang members in jail from the gang's cannon assault.If nothing else, "Charro" shows that Elvis could've easily been a Western hero in Eastwood's league if he chose to keep with it and got better scripts. Obviously influenced by the rise of the Spaghetti Westerns of the mid-late 60s, this is easily Elvis' best Western of the three he did, the others being 1956' "Love Me Tender" and 1960's "Flaming Star." These prior Westerns had too much of what made Westerns in general laughable before the 60s. There are many exceptions, like "The Last Wagon" from 1956" but -- generally speaking -- the downside of Westerns before the 60s include contrived plot elements, an unrealistic vibe, bad music, white actors playing Natives and dumb Indian dialogue. "Charro" is the least guilty of these sins of Elvis' three Westerns."Charro" has a good first and last act, but a weak mid-section. The score and Arizona locations are great, the cast too, but the movie's hampered by the lame second act and a TV-production vibe.The movie runs 98 minutes and was shot in Apache Junction and Gold Canyon, Arizona, with further studio work done in California.GRADE: Borderline C+/B- (or 5.5/10)

Charro! (1969) * 1/2 (out of 4) Elvis plays a gunfighting outlaw who decides to go straight but his old gang pulls him back in to steal a cannon, which is a priceless gem from the Mexican Revolution. I was really excited to see this title since it was said that it was unlike any other Elvis movie. That's certainly true as there's only one song, which is over the opening credits and even Elvis is made to look ugly with an ugly beard and dirty appearance. That, however, is as far as things go because while it was interesting to see a different type of film from Elvis this is still a pretty poor movie when looked at as a straight Western. We've seen this "one last time" thing in thousands of movies and it isn't any fresher here. We've also seen countless gunfights and the ones here come off very laughable and silly. Elvis gets his shot at doing a straight film but sadly he doesn't do too much with it. During the scenes where he's suppose to be a dangerous gunfighter, you can't help but laugh. The direction is also very poor and I usually don't mention the work of extras but they are incredibly bad here as well. Victor French is pretty good in his role but that's about all the film has to offer.

Been viewing a lot of Elvis' movies of late, and I must say this is one of his best. Certainly heads over most of his "dumbell" musicals he made in the mid 60's. Somehow his first few films are much better than his later ones. CHARRO has in interesting story line and is done in a professional fashion. By that I mean real locations for the exteriors, which is a switch from the cardboard and rear projection effects of his earlier films. Elvis looks very good here, better than some of his previous efforts. He seemed a bid pudgy in a lot of his musicals, but in this one he's trim and looks great in a beard. He does seem to "sleep walk" thru some of his scenes, and there could have been more action, but it's certainly a better film than some of the video guide books make it. Compare this film with FRANKIE AND JOHNNY; KISSIN' COUSINS; PARADISE, HAWAIIAN STYLE; and especially horrible films like HARUM, SACARUM, and CHARRO looks pretty damn good. If you like Elivs, and why would you be reading this if you weren't then CHARRO is a must see. Too bad he didn't make more like this. His next two were pretty bad. Oh, and the actor who played Billy Roy was a "tad" over-the-top.