Bruce Corneil
A brutal and uninspired revenge Western, this was the second really bad film that Rod Taylor starred in during 1973 with its immediate predecessor being the almost - as - bad "Trader Horn". As for "The Deadly Trackers", The New York Times called it "viciously senile" and warned that it contained nothing more than "fireworks and gore". Even Leonard Maltin, a frequent advocate for the versatile Australian actor, has dismissed it as being just plain "dreadful". And, sadly, I would have to agree. Indeed, it turned out to be the final bomb that flattened Taylor's movie career.By the mid-'70s he'd become trapped on a runaway train to cinematic oblivion. With his stay at the top seemingly over, he would be increasingly called upon to do nothing more substantial than lend his name to a string of low budget obscurities.Some were fair. But most were unworthy of his talent. Still, he continued to work regularly and better chances came his way on television via guest shots and support roles.
inspectors71
Sadistic trash. Barry Shear's supremely vulgar revenge western, THE DEADLY TRACKERS, is at best a replacement for Ipecac--both are guaranteed to induce vomiting. Shear has hatched (who would accuse him of direction?) a nearly unwatchable and sickeningly gory story of a pacifist sheriff (Richard Harris) whose family is murdered by four thugs (lead by a sociopathic Rod Taylor), and he rides into Mexico in hot pursuit.As the body count builds and the desecration of elderly farmers and prostitutes builds to a crescendo, one might wonder if it's okay to miss Peckinpah's repulsive but artistic THE WILD BUNCH.I choose to miss Richard Harris as Dumbledore.
classicsoncall
I find it interesting how I can reconcile my feelings about this film. On the one hand, it's a boldly intense revenge Western, while on the other, there's so much nonsense going on that with any serious scrutiny one might dismiss it as gross caricature. Take the character of Choo-Choo (Neville Beand) for instance - how exactly did 1880's medical technology manage to graft a chunk of railroad track to his right arm? Then there's Gutierrez (Al Lettieiri), the Mexican Federale - you mean to tell me that he gets shot off his horse, does a forty foot swan dive over a cliff, and some time later manages to get up and walk away? I had him a goner, but if he could have survived, how so without a broken back? Then there's the main character himself, Sheriff Kilpatrick, ably portrayed by Richard Harris. Now I know it doesn't take much of a stretch to go from pacifist to hell bent avenger after seeing your family wiped out, but how about some discretion. Kilpatrick just jumps right in without thought of consequences, like jumping that big lug Schoolboy (William Smith). OK, I know that had to work out to keep the story going, but gee, the guy looked like he just finished a workout at World Gym.There's something else about Kilpatrick - did you notice that after every one of his bloody encounters (that first one with Schoolboy was the worst), he appears in the next scene with a clean set of duds. I didn't notice any Chinese laundries along the way, so it left me wondering how he might have managed that. Maybe I'm being picky, but didn't anybody else think about that?Here's something neat though - I liked the idea that Kilpatrick had the town of Santa Rosa so organized that they were able to back him up at a moment's notice with all hands on deck. If these were the citizens of Lago, there would have been no rest of the story in "High Plains Drifter". Something to think about.As for the finale, I'm not buying it. After all that Kilpatrick and Gutierrez had gone through to catch up with Brand (Rod Taylor), the Mexican lawman would just shoot him in the back as he rode away? Where's the code of honor among lawmen? Even if Gutierrez wanted to be hard core by the book with Kilpatrick, by the final showdown with Brand it was going to be self defense any way you slice it. So I have to ask, was that really necessary?
