utgard14 A woman (Claire Bloom) is raped and her husband killed. A Mexican bandit (Paul Newman, believe it or not) is put on trial for the crimes. But there are four conflicting stories about what really happened: the bandit's, the woman's, a prospector's, and an old Indian's. Western remake of Rashomon is, not surprisingly, inferior to that classic in every way. However, it is entertaining although not always for the right reasons. It has a nice cast, most of whom turn in terrible performances. Paul Newman is especially bad. Probably the most embarrassing role of his career. Other stinkers in the cast include William Shatner, Howard Da Silva, and Paul Fix. Edward G. Robinson is the best actor in the movie. His character is broad and prone to being over-the-top like the others but he manages to rein it in just right. Claire Bloom and Laurence Harvey do fine but are nothing special. Not a great movie by any means but curiosity factor warrants giving it a look, particularly if you're a Newman or Robinson fan.

SnoopyStyle A disillusioned preacher (William Shatner) is abandoning Silver Gulch after a trial of a despicable crime. A scruffy prospector (Howard Da Silva) finds him waiting at train station. A con man (Edward G. Robinson) sleeping there join them at recounting the events leading to the trial. Mexican bandit Juan Carrasco (Paul Newman)'s encounter with husband Wakefield (Laurence Harvey) and wife Nina (Claire Bloom) had ended with the husband's death and the raping of the wife. The couple was leaving the post war south. An old Indian shaman (Paul Fix) performs a séance at the trial using the spirit of the dead man.It's a reimagining of Akira Kurosawa's iconic Rashômon in the old west. This is definitely not the traditional western which probably confused some people at the time. It just happens to take place in the old west. Paul Newman is almost unrecognizable as a Mexican bandit. He's pushed to the limit with such a vast range of an unlikely role. The acting is all first rate. This is an engaging film throughout. The slapstick humor and the mannerisms in the last act doesn't quite fit. Overall, it's a good attempt at a remake. Even Newman's brownface didn't put me off.

Jay Raskin It is amazing that Martin Ritt and Paul Newman made this film between their two masterpieces "Hud" and "Hombre". It seems that they should have known that the stage acting that Newman was doing would not be effective on film. In stage acting, you play broad and loud because the 23rd row has to see and hear you. In film you can adjust the volume and go in for the close-up to make sure the slightest gesture gets shown. For whatever strange reason, everybody, with the exception of super-old pro Edward G. Robinson, is doing stage acting. It comes across as over-the-top and ridiculous most of the time. The acting seriously undercuts the serious metaphysical questions about truth that the plot raises.Newman's performance matches his worse performance in "From the Terrace," although, I haven't seen him in "the Silver Chalice" (allegedly his worse). He reminded me of the 1960's cartoon commercial character for Frido's Corn Chips, "the Frido Bandido." He has on heavy stage make-up, so he is hardly recognizable, and his accent sounds quite fake. The real problem is that this is not a leading man role, but a role for a character actor. There were probably hundreds of out of work Spanish speaking actors in Hollywood at this time who could have done the role better.William Shatner isn't playing to the 23rd row, he is playing to the 46th row. As a priest who has lost his faith, he has one pained look throughout the movie. One of the nice things about Shatner is how relaxed and animated he is in all his roles, from the Twilight Zone to Star Trek to Boston Legal. Here he is the opposite: restrained to the point of being a cartoon cut-out.Claire Bloom and Laurence Harvey also give mundane and forgettable performances.For cinema fans this is worth seeing because it is a Martin Ritt film and he was a terrific director. However, like every great director, he had his misfires, and this is one of them. It is watchable, but much more should have been delivered considering the classical source material.

Spikeopath Directed by Martin Ritt, The Outrage is a remake of the 1950 Akira Kurosawa film Rashomon, that in turn is based on stories by Ryūnosuke Akutagawa, but Ritt has reformulated it in a Western setting. It stars Edward G. Robinson, Paul Newman, Laurence Harvey, Claire Bloom, Howard Da Silva & William Shatner. The story remains the same as four people give contradictory accounts of a rape and murder during the trial of Mexican bandit Juan Carrasco (Newman). The story is told within a flashback framework of three men waiting for a train at a rain soaked Southwestern station-a prospector (Da Silva), a con man (Robinson) and a preacher now struggling with his faith in humanity (Shatner). As each story is told the validity of each account comes under scrutiny, could it be there was a gross miscarriage of justice at the trial?Perhaps unsurprisingly, this remake of a well regarded classic was a commercial flop, with many front line critics particularly savage in their reviews. Which while acknowledging it's a long way away from style and tone of Kurosawa's movie, it's hardly the devil's spawn either. Solidly constructed by Ritt and potently shot in black & white by James Wong Howe (vistas however are in short supply), the story is strong enough to make for an interesting social conscious Oater. There's some misplaced humour in the final third, and a charge of overacting from the talented cast is fair enough (especially Bloom); but maybe, just maybe, Ritt and his team deserve a little leeway for trying a different approach? I mean at least it's not a shot for shot remake eh?Certainly Newman could never be accused of not being bold or daring with his role selections, one only has to look at his Western film's to see that. Especially the three he did with Ritt: Hud (1963), The Outrage (1964) & Hombre (1967), three very different roles, and each of a different ethnicity too. Throw in his intense turn as Billy The Kid in Arthur Penn's The Left Handed Gun, and it makes a mockery of those people who pop up from time to time proclaiming Newman had limited range! Is he miscast as Bandido Carrasco in The Outrage? No not really, he throws himself into the role and without prior knowledge of whose under the hat, it's not overtly evident it's the great blue eyed man performing. Sure a Mexican actor would have been better for the role, and definitely Rashomon wasn't in need of a remake. But for Western fans, and especially for fans of Newman, The Outrage still has enough to warrant spending a pie and a pint of beer with. Not particularly great, but not exactly bad either. 6.5/10