Panik am roten Fluß

Wo aspects that make the film tick: the handling of the large number of cattle and Montgomery Clift. Otherwise the film is ordinary putting some history in focus: the Chisholm trail, the railroad, Texas as a beef state, and Abilene.

I read quite a few references to the ending and how it should have been an "unhappy " one. The screenwriter, Borden Chase, was also very unhappy with it. The original ending was The Duke's death. Hawks changed the ending and Chase never spoke to him again. Mr. Chase was married in 1920 to my Grandmother, Lillian Doran. But, that is another story!

Red River (1948)

A Western with a huge cattle drive at its core. John Wayne plays the head rancher, and among his workers and upstarts are a son-like youngster (Montgomery Clift) and a old-timer best friend (Walter Brennan). There are rivalries, Indians, opposing ranchers, and a woman or two who each intrude or help out Wayne in various ways.

A Howard Hawks Western is about as close as you can get to a John Ford Western. Ford is the one who re-discovered a languishing John Wayne in 1939, and Hawks was a parallel director, about the same age, specializing in male-dominated adventure dramas. But Hawks also directed some amazing other kinds of films, including a few classic screwball comedies, the terrific "Only Angels Have Wings," and some film noirs including his film before this one, "The Big Sleep."

So I expected something really special here and in fact this is well done all around. But it falls into so many of the already established stereotypes of the genre, I was surprised and had to keep my disappointment in check. Wayne is terrific as the kind of John Wayne you'd expect, and Brennan is the earthy, witty, likable type he always plays. It is probably Montgomery Clift who shines best, here in his first year in Hollywood, just before "The Heiress" and a string of other great films. This is apparently his first major acting role, as the film was shot in 1946, though another movie, "The Search" (which is very good), was released first.

It's interesting to see co-directing status for Arthur Rosson (the photographer's brother), partly because Hawks would not seem to need a second hand. But then that points to some of the really complex scenes here--mostly shot on location and with easily hundreds if not a thousand or more actual cattle. You realize as you watch this long trek through the low dry hills that the actors on horses are having to really move the cattle through this country for the filming. I'm sure they have help, and all those extras must have been good hired hands. It's still pretty neat to watch that aspect, going for example through a wide river.

In a way you can get fully invested in the movie based on the action and the acting and the characters. Directly. They are strong, believable, and their lines are well written. It's the plot that will seem to fall into familiarity too often for many of you.

I really enjoyed this the first time I saw it but it got a little slow on the second viewing. Nevertheless, it's a pretty solid classic-era western that has a deep cast. By deep I mean John Wayne, Montgomery Clift, Walter Brennan, Harry Carey Sr., Noah Beery Jr., John Ireland, Joanne Dru, Coleen Gray, etc. This is more of a man's movie as those last two ladies listed both have small roles.

In addition to the western action, you get some nice black-and-white cinematography. The cattle driving scenes are magnificently filmed.

Wayne plays a "Captain Bligh" type of tyrant for most of the film, although he shows a few soft touches. Brennan has a great knack of making all his characters interesting, and this movie is no exception. Clift usually was pretty interesting, too.

My only complaint is the length of the film. This could have been much better with a tighter script and about 15-20 minutes chopped off it. It's still a compelling story.

Dimitri Tiomkin's thunderous score sets the tone for this rousing story of cowboy ranchers in nineteenth century Texas headed north, with a thunderous herd of cattle in tow. It's the archetypal story of the American West, with its strong, ethical male leader, Thomas Dunson (John Wayne), and his pursuit of a big dream, set in an era when men were men, times were tough, hardships were inevitable, guns ruled, and Native Americans were the bad guys. What a saga ...

What makes "Red River" such a grand adventure is its high quality. Its story is simple, direct, exciting, and well told, with complex characters, interesting and sympathetic because they show weakness as well as strength. Dunson is a good man, but he's stubborn and headstrong. His semi-adopted son, Matt (Montgomery Clift), is good with a gun but a little softhearted. Dunson's chief sidekick is Groot (Walter Brennan), a cantankerous old buzzard who has problems with his teeth.

It's the relationship between these three men that is the heart and soul of "Red River". Trouble ensues along the way, you can be sure. And how that trouble unfolds and plays out presents viewers with engaging human drama, and humor, centered on these three main characters. The lonesome High Plains, with all its inherent risks, adds grandeur to the epic story.

At strategic points in the film, the page of a book appears on screen with text that briefly summarizes upcoming events. It's like we, the viewers, are reading a book about some long ago trailblazers. It's a technique that could have been intrusive. But here, it is handled with such finesse that it actually helps the narrative, by functioning as a transition from one sequence to the next.

The acting is fine. John Wayne is more than convincing as Dunson. Walter Brennan is characteristically funny. And Montgomery Clift is terrific. Had he maintained his looks, and if real-life circumstances not intervened, Monty could have been one of the truly top actors through at least the 50s and 60s.

If the film has a weakness, it might be the cinematography. Not often, but at times, the actors appear to be standing in front of a canvas, an effect that renders a shallow depth of field. Maybe this was the result of technical limitations of photography at the time the film was made.

There are few film westerns that can compare in quality with "Red River". And I don't know of any other cinematic cattle drives that are this good. So, the next time you herd your cattle to market, this is the film to watch. Even if you have no cattle, "Red River" is still a wonderfully entertaining cinematic experience.