Writerascritic went on a diatribe, but he has as many "authenticity" holes as the movie. Historically, it was actually rare for a woman to be raped in the west and if she was, the man was usually killed as soon as he was located. Women were rare in the raw west and were protected accordingly.Women were not just kept barefoot and pregnant. They had children, but how many was a result of social standing. Poor farmers may have needed farm hands, but children still had to be fed and that could be tough. Few women had "dozens" of children because many died in child birth.Why gay issues were brought into his review other than the fact that writerascritic is obviously a hate monger is a mystery to me. I have read his other reviews and it's obvious that he is homophobic and his reviews should be monitored for useless, hate filled content.Poor writerascritic can't contain his hate just toward gays and women who want to be treated decently, but also religious folk. What's funny is during the era the movie was supposedly set in, 90% plus of the white population of the United States was strongly Christian and practiced the faith ardently.It's obvious that the subject matter is a reflection not of the story's time, but of the era of the movie production when Hollywood was resisting the idea that women should have rights. This was and is due to the fact that Hollywood makes far too much money exploiting women and anyone else not white male to readily change movie styles. This movie is just as mediocre as most made during the 60's, humorous at times with a weak script. Good actors put to waste with a singer narrator reiterating the existing story line.Thankfully, times have changed and if you want to see how much in the last 60 years this is the movie to see.

Haven't seen Waterhole #3. Having just read 'writerasfilmcritic's review, will enjoy so doing. 3 will offend those who believe what we laughingly call civilisation commenced in the late 60's, when stunt-growth subversive whelps of 30's Trotskyite parents began the slow train wreck called Political Correctness. Those offended by 3 wouldn't last two seconds during 3's era. Mindrot 'Victim Hagvocates','Facilitators','Sensitivity Trainers' and other lice, steeped in the delusion that Mammon and lawyers can save them would flee in horror from that tool of the Old West known as the rifle. They'd scream 'Gun! Gun! Call 911!'. Confronted by a hissing rattler - hiss far more dramatic than rattle - they'd recite an insipid roster of environmentalcase memberships and sue for peace. The rattler would do as do rattlers always, bite and slither away. Call it pest control.Refreshing to hear of 3's cultural outlook. In the 50's and 60's schools had gun clubs and rifle ranges yet were islands of tranquil learning. Worst offenses? Gum chewing and note passing. Yes, I said the 60's. Not all of us behaved as dirty hippies only to morph into big fat bloated money grubbing Korpseorate Oligarchs in the 90s and '00s. We were too busy studying and having fun to waste time on communist front groups like feminism, environmentalism, peace rallies, ban-the-gun-ism and other Trotskyite Beasts That Would Not Die.Many of we much maligned Boomers despise vapid PC trappings of litigation, restraining orders, and endless whining on LeftWing LezBag TV carnivals like dOprah. Got a beef? Discern your part in it. That'll stop it. Someone bugging you? Never ever even joke about Restraining Orders. They're Leninist contrivances crafted by devious deviant lawyer-mutants, promoted by psychopaths for the purpose of dividing society the better to destroy it. Walk from trouble if you can. If not, educate those who make it as to its steep costs.Might Waterhole #3 make a good litmus test? You know, those offended by 3 we'd keep at polite distance while those who enjoy 3 we'd put on our A list? Makes sense here. PC shills like lawyers and Victim Hagvocates lie for criminals so as to destroy society. Why do they scorn the Old West? Because in that era they'd be marked as twisted serpetine rejects. They'd be stuffed into the nearest boobie hatch - to resounding applause.See this film. It sounds like a breath of fresh air in a world slowly strangling itself with endless 'reforms', laws, and PC trash.Dr. Paul Vincent ZecchinoManasota Key, Floridawww.etherzone.com26 September, 2006 "Fear is the price of our instrument. But I can help you bear it."H. Lecter, M.D.c. Thomas Harris,"The Red Dragon"

Generally, I don't like it when these comments about movies degenerate to political diatribes, but with the reaction to this movie, I must respond. What the PC crowd doesn't understand about "Waterhole Number 3" is that in it Coburn played an amoral anti-hero who harbored a great degree of cynicism about hypocritical conventions. Therefore, the "horrible rape sequence" that has their panties in such a twist was merely part of his interpretation of how such a man would behave in a lawless environment. It would have been completely out of character for him to suffer an attack of scruples when confronted with a sexy gal alone in a barn. Besides, in the nineteenth century, feminism didn't even exist and women WERE men's playthings, whether Gloria Steinem can handle the concept or not. For them, to be kept barefoot and pregnant was reality, not an archaic state of being ridiculed by glorified lesbians whose primary goal in life is to control their "reproductive rights." Back in them days, folks, pioneer women had up to two dozen kids and lost a good many of the brood to disease, accidents, and murder. The feminine role was well-defined and there was no discussion about it. In point of fact, the "gentle rape" committed by Coburn upon the nubile young woman's tender virginity might not have been considered rape at all simply because he married her afterward. Some other disturbing facts of the era: Gays were not tolerated, let alone allowed to marry, but pistol-whipped merely for thinking their perverted thoughts. Indians, both good and bad, were driven nearly to extinction for daring to believe they had innate rights on the land. Many of the women of today would have been working in whorehouses, not telling the rest of us what constitutes modern standards of morality, either that, or they would have been slapped silly and sent slinking into the corner to mull over the reality of the day. To sit in front of your computer and actually attempt to apply PC hypocrisy to such a wild and lawless era is so absurd that it beyond comprehension. Furthermore,in the sixties (when this movie was made), a woman couldn't go up to a man's room at 2am, have consensual sex, and the next day claim she was raped, like that broad did to Mike Tyson. Such inherently suspicious bs would have been laughed right out of court. There was no such thing as "date rape," "spouse rape," or "sexual harassment." If a man caught his wife in the sack with another man, he could shoot them both and get off with a temporary insanity plea or not even be charged at all. Neurotic Generation X, with their condoms, Ipods, cell phones, piercings, tats, shaved pubic areas, and shallow, money-grubbing ways weren't even born yet, hence interesting flicks like this one could actually be made and distributed. As for the much ballyhooed rape, something very similar happened in "High Plains Drifter" and who complained then? It's a movie, folks. If you can't separate fact from fiction, perhaps you'd better turn off the set and get a life. Not one of you mentioned the gunfight sequence at the beginning of the movie, which set the tone for this film and should have sent you scurrying to turn if off. Challenged by some jerk to a gunfight, Coburn steps out the door of the saloon, casually approaches his mount, pulls out his saddle gun, rests it atop his saddle, and unceremoniously drops the dope who is standing in the middle of the street, stupidly believing that such differences of opinion were supposed to be resolved in a certain way. Coburn thumbs his nose at authority, convention, tradition, and all the rest of the hypocritical nonsense to which our woefully misguided country is devoted to today. Now, it's as if the sixties never even happened. We've got the Bible-thumping, hymn-singing, pew-sitting hypocrites on the one hand, constantly extolling the spectre of their children's tender psyches as an excuse for their own intellectual, spiritual, and moral cowardice, and the man-hating, feminist "global warming" advocates on the other hand. Both groups shouldn't be allowed to watch good movies like this. Their extremely fragile belief systems can't take it.

This is one of my two favorite westerns. Years ago, I bought the soundtrack album, with narration by Roger Miller. It is one of the first things that Dave Grusin, fresh from Colorado U. did. Many of the verses in the ballad are unforgettable, and help me to recreate the best movie scenes in my mind.Lewton Cole is the prototypical Anti-Hero. (Whenever somebody uses that term, I think of Lewton.) "This tale has a hero, his name...Lewton Cole They say he was born with an ace in the hole! They nursed him on bourbon, they teethed him on steel, And his first words were "shut up and deal!"Everyone gets het up about the rape, but ultimately, Billee gets over it. Roger says "Billee decided that she'd already lost everything she was going to, so she decided to go after her man."And the last verse of the ballad, sums up the anti-hero riding off into the sunset."Old Mexico lies just ahead, so Gambler, move along! They ain't nobody there to care if you done right or wrong. You shot a thief, you found some gold, You stole a kiss or two... And the world's a better place because of you."