Daniel Boone, Trail Blazer

This picture is an interesting saga of the struggle of pioneers led by Daniel Boone in the wilderness of Cumberland Gap while being threatened by hostile Indians. A treacherous Frenchman is the cause of all the trouble between the settlers and the red men while Boone tries to convince the Indians that the pioneers only want to build homes and live in peace. The film has a certain appeal because it is not a polished production but there are good action scenes, although somewhat violent for its time. The cast is comprised of B actors but they are all good, especially Lon Chaney as the Indian chief. Bruce Bennett is okay as Boone but is a bit too clean cut and soft spoken to be believable as a frontiersman. The dialogue is rather trite but the scenery lends itself to the realism of the Kentucky backwoods.

Going to the cinema was the highlight of a child's life during the 1950's and films about "Cowboys and Indians" were always very popular. None of us children were really bothered what the film was all about, just as long as there was lots of fighting, shooting, horses galloping and other sorts of action in the film.

I did not even know what the title of the film was. I remember giving the film my own title. I simply called it "The Indian Fighter".

I was attracted by the poster outside the cinema. It had a yellow and red background and had a black and white image of a man in a "Davy Crockett style", coonskin cap, fighting a ferocious, Mohican-like Indian. The poster excited me so much that I could not wait to get home from school to ask my mother to take me to see the film.

My mother agreed to take me to see it and as we walked down to the cinema, I could not contain my excitement.

However, my aura of excitement soon changed to tears of dismay. The man on the door said that it was not a children's film. He said that many nasty things happened in the film that an innocent child should not see - I cried all the way home. I think my mother had to buy me a colouring book to make me feel better.

I have just managed to track down the film and managed to match it against the poster that I remembered getting excited about as a child. The man, who had spoken to my mother at the door of the cinema, was right. Many "nasty things" did happen in this film that "an innocent child should not see".

However, having watched the film on YouTube, to my mind, the film was not as exciting as the poster that I saw outside the cinema depicted it to be; and not as brutal as the doorman at the cinema, who would not let me in to see it, said it was going to be.

If I had have seen it as a child, I would not have known whether it was a "sugar coated" family film that was trying to be a musical, or a comic adventure that was trying to be a violent history lesson about early frontier life in America.

So, after sixty years of searching for the film that I was never allowed to see, with only a childhood memory of the poster to go on, I will give it 8 out of 10.

I'm not a big fan of the western genre - meaning I watch some of them but not a lot of them. So this review is coming from one that watches westerns on occasions - depending on who is in the film, recommendations and/or what the movie is about. It was Lon Chaney that attracted my attention to this film mainly but I am also interested in film biographies and histories.

While this film maybe not be perfectly accurate it is a good film that gives us a fairly decent idea of what might have took place during the real Daniel Boone's life. I enjoyed the movie.

There are 3 songs in the film - although it's not exactly a musical those scenes are like a musical. They could have left them out of the film but it did not take away from the film to me.

Anyway - I liked this film and would watch it again.

8/10

1955's "Daniel Boone, Trail Blazer" was the second straight US production for Mexican director Ismael Rodriguez, filming south of the border like the preceding "The Beast of Hollow Mountain," unlike Burt Lancaster's "The Kentuckian," which was actually shot in Kentucky (working titles included "Adventures of Daniel Boone," "Attack on Boonesboro," and "Dan'l Boone"). Trucolor was a cheap outdoor process but it did add some gloss to the shopworn material, an aging Bruce Bennett almost too frail at age 49 to convincingly play the title role (rugged George O'Brien fit the bill in the 1936 "Daniel Boone"), while it's reassuring to find Boone's main nemesis Simon Girty again up to his fiendish old tricks, even if Kem Dibbs can't hold a candle to John Carradine's 1936 version. The slow pacing is further weakened by the nonacting presence of singer Faron Young, performing the same duties as in his feature debut for codirector Albert Gannaway, the still unreleased "Hidden Guns" pitting him against the ever ubiquitous Carradine, who could also be seen in "The Kentuckian!" This film's greatest asset is the solid presence of second billed Lon Chaney as Shawnee Chief Blackfish, blood brother to Daniel Boone, no stranger to sympathetic Native Americans since 1952's "Battles of Chief Pontiac," in which he played a dignified Ottawa chief (this may have had some bearing on his winning the part of Chingachgook in the Canadian-filmed TV series THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS). Blackfish spends much of the picture in thrall to Girty's deceptions, but a spectacular climax finds Boone finally proving himself in the eyes of his blood brother by using his murdered son's corpse. Claudio Brook would go on to a lengthy career in such cult items as "Samson in the Wax Museum," "The Bees," and the James Bond thriller "Licence to Kill."

It's hardly surprising that Republic Studios would bring out "Daniel Boone, Trail Blazer" when they did. After all, Disney brought out "Davy Crockett: KIng of the Wild Frontier" the year before and it caused a major sensation. Kids all over America went Davy Crockett crazy...demanding 1001 different products emblazoned with his name on them and endorsed by him. But what is surprising is how bad this Republic film was when compared with the Disney film. Instead of just doing a knock-off of the film, someone got the bright idea of making it more like a musical or singing cowboy movie...which was NOT what the public apparently wanted. Additionally, the film just looks cheap by comparison...not terrible...but obviously made on the cheap compared to the Disney film.

The basic plot is that the settlers in the west (really, the Ohio/Kentucky area of the eastern portion of the Midwest) were having trouble with the local Indian tribes. Those dastardly Indians apparently thought Boone and his friends were coming to take away their land and dispossess them...which, history has taught us was 100% true. While Boone himself might have wanted to co-exist (and who knows if this is true or not), the 'bad Indians' in the film were actually right. I know back in the 1950s people didn't think this way...but the tribes were right to suspect that the settlers wanted more than just a place to raise a family.

Throughout the film, Boone is shown trying to convince the local tribesmen that he meant them no harm. The leader (Lon Chaney Jr.) is torn...and many of his men favor war, though he personally seemed to like Boone and trust him. At the same time, some of the Indians were doing much to stir up war and a few of the settlers (one in particular) seemed more than happy to fight them. And, oddly, throughout this ordeal, folks kept taking time to sing! The singing was not good like that of Gene Autry or Roy Rogers...more just annoying and pointless.

If it sounds like I didn't like this movie, you are generally right. I thought historically speaking it was quite naive and the singing drove me batty. Additionally, the acting was only fair and it was obvious Republic was doing this on the cheap. Worth seeing if you adore B-westerns but otherwise, just watch the Davy Crockett films on Disney+ or see if you can find the old Fess Parker "Daniel Boone" television show.