The limitations of film-making technology in the early 1930s is apparent, with somewhat iffy sound design and image quality. Nevermind that there are countless other instances of pictures made then or much earlier that are as sharp and clear as day, but sure; in fairness, this was made independent of major studio resources. I don't know if there were any particular constraints on this production that specifically limited the efforts of its contributors, but it's also noteworthy that the acting is almost uniformly stiff, blunt, and unconvincing, and likewise the direction. One also readily observes how incredibly direct the storytelling is, as exemplified in dialogue, scene writing, expository intertitles, and otherwise plot development that collectively leave no mystery whatsoever to the course of events. Almost from the time the tale begins, the audience knows exactly what's going to happen. I suppose that to some degree this comes with the territory for a feature clocking in at under 50 minutes, but still the incidence is a little startling for how rarely we see such inelegance in cinema.
None of these facets by themselves inherently mark 'The rawhide terror' as a bad movie, but taken up all together, the entertainment one could derive from it is severely diminished. From start to finish the entirety of the picture is astoundingly, unnaturally plainspoken, if not also a tad stilted or forced. Even the sequencing and editing at large raise a skeptical eyebrow, and the cinematography that feels strangely amateurish. As if all this weren't enough, the writing was also in substantial, desperate need of being both expanded upon and tightened in various ways: the major plot points are glaringly obvious, and everything in between nevertheless flounders with bizarrely insufficient coherence, cohesiveness, clarity, detail, or basic communication. In essence, the writers flatly told us the core of the plot at the outset, then just haphazardly threw the rest together.
At least the filming locations are nice, and the horses.
If there were even the slightest more care taken toward any element of this production, the end result would have been improved. As it stands, I'm not convinced that anyone involved here even possessed the fundamental skills to do any better. I'm downright flummoxed at how weakly every aspect of 'The rawhide terror' was treated, arguably even the sets, props, costumes, and makeup. There was a kernel of a worthy idea underlying the story, but after that everything pretty much fell apart with far too little quality or rudimentary capability to do anything about it. I suppose I admire the gumption to produce a film under these circumstances, but this is a title that one has to actively labor to enjoy for how stunningly flimsy it is. I don't know who I would ever earnestly recommend this to, or why, because I don't know who would earnestly enjoy it. Scattered fragments of capability save this from being counted among the worst movies I've ever seen, but at this level, that doesn't really mean anything. Whatever it is you think you're going to get out of 'The rawhide terror,' I strongly suggest you look somewhere else instead.
1 out of 2 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
