Mann gegen Mann

1845 Texas, Independent, survived Alamo, Goliad and San Jacinto ... But Annexation?

Quite often the joy in being a fan of genre film making, in this case Westerns/Southerns et al, is that a pic can coerce you into reading up on real instances. Thus making this particular picture a requisite requirement for literature delving.

Directed by Vincent Sherman and written by Borden Chase (who would supposedly be irked by the depiction of his writing) and Howard Estabrook, Lone Star comes off as an "A" list film given "B" list production values. Nothing wrong with cast performances, Gable still has charisma in his fifties, Gardner oozes sexuality and Crawford dominates like a great presence should. However, it looks stagy, is overly talky as the makers try to make a politico pot boiler out of a sow's behind, while the action - in spite of a grandiose battering ram finale - just doesn't have an oomph factor.

Romantic love triangle feels pointless in the context of such historical filmic tellings, but this is off set by the Sam Houston and Native American splinter of the narrative. Rendering this as a frustrating whole, not without merits, and above average for sure, but difficult to recommend as one to seek out as a must. 6/10

Clark Gable stars in this 1952 Western which deals w/Texas's road to statehood. Boiling down to two different factions for & against annexation of Texas w/Andrew Jackson, the president at the time, played by Lionel Barrymore, getting Cable's help for the pro while Broderick Crawford stands against the action. Meeting during an Indian skirmish, Gable & Crawford actually manage to be civil to each other (no kidding!) but Cable doesn't divulge who he is & his agenda. Meeting Crawford's squeeze, Ava Gardner, Cable becomes enamored w/her but then Gable goes into motion on his plans which culminates in a tense standoff where Texas politicians, which includes Ed Begley, deliberate Texas's fate, as opposing forces are in the midst of battle. Entertaining to be sure but doesn't make a lick of sense when it comes down to the actual politics which took place at the time but the stars' charm make all of this nonsense go down handily like warm soup on a cold afternoon.

It's 1845. Texas' future is in the balance. Sam Houston recently published an opinion against annexation after earlier attempts. News reaches ex-President Andrew Jackson (Lionel Barrymore) who decides to send in cattle baron Devereaux Burke (Clark Gable) to talk to Houston and recruit for the cause. He is opposed by powerful state senator Thomas Craden. He battles injuins on the way to Austin where he meets Craden's girlfriend Martha Ronda (Ava Gardner) who runs a local newspaper. He is assumed to be anti-annexation and decides to play along while Craden supporters hunt for him.

Historical accuracy is not always important. In this case, I find the history rather interesting and I wouldn't mind having the real story. This is obviously not the real story. I don't know anything about the real story and this is not going to enlighten me that much either. Some of the background issues are presented. The cast is headed by the great looking Clark Gable. This is a fine film but I would probably be more interested in a deep dive into the history.

A movie set in 1845 Texas that deals with Texas either joining the union or going off and becoming an independent republic. Lionel Barrymore plays Andrew Jackson is who for joining the union and so is Clark Gable. Broderick Crawford and Ava Gardner want Texas to become an independent and Crawford wants to be the leader. Both sides are waiting for what Sam Huston has to say, but he is out helping the Indians form a peace treaty. Crawford is willing to do anything to get what he wants and Gardner begins to fall for Gable. At the end, of course, there is a big battle between Gable and Crawford's army and then a fight between the two of them. Clark Gable is the same as always and Broderick Crawford is miscast in this role. Ava Gardner is only OK and Lionel Barrymore is only in two scenes.

The diplomatic and political machinations around the admission of Texas to the USA are incredibly complex and are touched on in this film. It would have taken a longer and better film to explain it all. I think MGM had plans for one in this, but Dore Schary was budget cutting at the time and this got B western treatment for a stellar cast.

One thing they show is true and that is the influence of 77 year old former President Andrew Jackson on the Democratic Party he founded. His prestige was that big, he was the dominant political figure for 20 years or so in the country before, during and after his presidency.

Lionel Barrymore reprises the role of Jackson, he had previously played in MGM's The Gorgeous Hussy. He's still wheeling and dealing and he doesn't like what he's heard that his old friend and comrade in arms Sam Houston is climbing off his position of being for the annexation of the Texas Republic to the United States. On his own he sends Clark Gable as Devereaux Burke Texas cattleman to seek out Houston and get the real story.

On the way to completing his mission Gable finds Ava Gardner who is the editor of a local paper in Austin and Broderick Crawford another Texas cattleman who is violently opposed to annexation. They get a good political rivalry and a personal one over Gardner.

In the film as in real life Sam Houston, played by Moroni Olsen, is running a big bluff. He's playing footsie with the British by negotiating a treaty of alliance with them in order to force the hand of northern politicians who are against slavery, but who would like even less the British moving into Texas.

There's an exciting battle between the pro and anti annexation forces while the Texas Congress meets. It results however in a very unreal conclusion to the story.

It's unfortunate given the stellar cast Lone Star has that a better scripted story was not developed for them, even one that is completely factual. It's an A picture subject that got B picture treatment.