bookandcandle Why was Support Your Local Gunfighter filmed most of the time at night? I could not even get into the movie with all the darkness, in addition to the craziness of Suzanne Pleshette shooting and screaming. Was the producer trying to save money on having no daylight background? I was looking forward to the western sets and scenery. Instead, all I got was dark, darker and darkest background at night. This was one of the worst westerns I have ever seen...not funny and not enjoyable.

burkeinca I saw "Support Your Local Sheriff" and enjoyed it so much that I immediately rented "Support Your Local Gunfighter" which I knew was similar. In terms of style, actors used, humor, character types and genre, the two are almost identical. The director Burt Kennedy is also the same. Also, both spoof earlier famous westerns (the first "Rio Bravo" and the like, the second "Yojimbo."). I enjoyed SYLS more than SYLG, though. I would rate the first movie a 9 out of 10—a real gem; the second I'd rate 3 out of 10—disappointing but not a complete waste.The main difference had to do with the likability of Garner's character. In SYLS, although smooth and suave, the Garner character is never deceptive. In fact, part of the humor is his flat honesty (as when he tells Prudy that he can't be in a committed relationship even before she even shows much interest in one). He also has real, not fake, talent, since his shooting ability is practically supernatural.In SYLG, the Garner character is nothing but a smooth fraud. From the very first scene, we watch him sneak away from his betrothed with fistloads of cash he's swindled from her. The first thing he does when getting into town is con a rich older lady into a relationship. Really? At least Robert Preston chose the prettiest and smartest woman in town to woo in "Music Man." This is just slimy, going after rich older women. The Garner character hires on as a gunfighter, but, in this account, he's not even an average shooter. That didn't impress me. I found the subplot where the Garner character keeps betting $4600 on 23 black (and losing) annoying also.SYLS was a real oddity: a film with conservative values made during the liberal era of "Hair," "The Graduate," and "Bonnie and Clyde." The subtext of this earlier film supports ideas like "An orderly town is superior to one full of violence and bullying," "When you take a job, you have certain responsibilities," and "Authority should come from real, not fake, talent." At its core, it was a tongue-in-cheek wish-fulfillment fantasy for those of us that believe a permissive, disorderly society hasn't been such a great improvement, but that with the right leader in charge, this problem could be solved. SYLG had no such appealing subtext. A rather shifty, fast-talking opportunist winds up getting the gal and a whole lot of money mostly by luck—a movie to be enjoyed more as droll character study and parody with a couple of mildly cute scenes than as something special that can be savored.

dch48 This movie, while funny in many places, pales in comparison to the earlier Support Your Local Sheriff. The first movie, with much of the same cast, is a solid 10 but I can only give this one a 7 at best. All of the actors who were in both movies did a better job in the first one and Joan Hackett was surprisingly better than Suzanne Pleshette.They just aired them back to back and the superiority of Sheriff was glaringly apparent. Sheriff flows along smoothly with great dialog but this one seems to stutter and try too hard. The premise of the first movie is also better and the opening scene sets the tone for the hilarity that follows. Again this one just doesn't do that as well. I always liked Garner and he was brilliant in both movies but maybe they should have quit while they were ahead and never made this one.

Bud_Brewster Turner South showed "Support Your Local Sheriff" and "Support Your Local Gunfight" back-to-back on Sunday night (11/20). And after enjoying my umpteenth viewing of "Sheriff", I tried to enjoy "Gunfighter" – after failing to do so the first time I saw it, a few years ago.Admittedly, the first time I watched "Gunfighter", I quit watching it less than thirty-minutes into the movie, because it just didn't seem to be doing what "Sheriff" did so well.This time, thanks to some of the comments of other IMDb users, I stuck with it . . . and I finally got the point. Even though I don't like "Gunfigher" nearly as much as "Sheriff", I think I understand why I don't like it as much as its predecessor.Without going on and on about the differences – "Sheriff" offers idealistic and hero-worshiping viewers like me a character who Waltzes through life with complete confidence, solving problems quickly and easily."Gunfighter", on the other hand, is about a morally confused person who seems reluctant to do any honest work, and who prefers to make desperate attempts to con the local residences out of a few bucks.The defining moment in "Sheriff" is the scene in which Gardner goes on a picnic with Joanne Hatchet and realizes that his plan to leave town before the big gun battle with the bad guys (which he plans to do) would be a cowardly act."Gunfighter" doesn't contain a scene like this one – and James Garner's character does not have the kind of moral fiber that would permit the story to include this kind of scene.For this reason, "Gunfighter" is decidedly inferior to "Sheriff".But, for the record, "Maverick" (1994 – which also starred James Garner – contains many scenes which compare favorably to "Support Your Local Sheriff".Oddly enough, Turner South showed "Maverick" right after "Support Your Local Gunfighter" on the afore-mentioned Sunday night.Weird, eh?