El último mohicano

Those who enjoyed the 1992 Michael Mann/Daniel Day-Lewis version of this American classic might also like to take a look at this older Hollywood production and contrast the two. Randolph Scott plays Hawkeye as a much more affable, almost happy-go-lucky character than does the famously intense Mr. Day-Lewis. The Indian roles are played by palefaces here, but at least they're not egregiously insulting to native Americans.

It still surprises me from time to time when I see how well movies were made so long ago, when the art form didn't have that long of a tradition behind it. Techniques and temperaments change over the years, but the world is big enough for more than one good version of 'The Last of the Mohicans.'

Colonel Munro's (Hugh Buckler) 2 daughters, Alice (Binnie Barnes) and Cora (Heather Angel) are led to the fort where their father is fighting for the British against the French. During the journey, a Huron Indian scout, Magua (Bruce Cabot) leads Alice, Cora and Major Heyward (Henry Wilcoxon) through a short cut but it is a trap. An American frontiersman, Hawkeye (Randolph Scott) and two Mohican Indians, Chingachgook (Robert Barrat) and Uncas (Phillip Reed) rescue the party and deliver them safely to Colonel Munro. However, the girls are then captured and taken to the Huron tribe and it is up to Hawkeye, the Major and the two Mohicans to rescue them from their fates as determined by the Huron leader.

I have seen the recent re-make of this film and I wanted to like this film better. Unfortunately, I didn't. It's still a good film - it's just not as engrossing. The relationships between the characters are not as deeply portrayed and poignant moments are not dwelt upon to give the film as much depth as occurs in the re-make, eg, the love between Uncas and Cora. The character of Magua is also far more scary in the re-make although I prefer Randolph Scott's "Hawkeye" to the extremely wooden Daniel Day Lewis. Speaking of wooden, the two Mohicans are exactly that. Their "me Tarzan, you Jane" style of dialogue is laughably bad and reminiscent of Daniel Day Lewis's attempts in the re-make.

A couple of other moments weren't as good as the re-make. In that film, the story ends with the line "......Last of the Mohicans" - a far more poignant ending to the film.

There are good moments, eg, the canoe chase and the sparring between the Major and Hawkeye, and it's still an engaging film. But the re-make is better on many levels, including, scenery, music, and romantic development

For those of us immune to the charms of James Fenimore Cooper's novels this movie is a godsend. I've never understood Cooper's plots, his characters, his appeal, his (apparent) greatness. He strikes me as nearly unreadable. The 1936 movie of Last Of the Mohicans, however, is quite good, though none of it makes much sense. It is set on the American frontier of the 18th century, which then meant upper New York state. Two sisters are involved; as are several British officers; a tribe or so of Indians, some virtuous, others not; and a chap named Hawkeye, who is exceedingly brave and an excellent shot with a long rifle. There are magnificently photographed scenes featuring forests, lakes, rivers and waterfalls. The birch-bark canoes, the costumes, the way the Indians look and act, the fort, the feeling of excitement, alternating with fear, and with it the sense that the Native Americans are quite as proficient at killing one another as the white man is of killing the whole lot of them, and maybe even better, are all conveyed with admirable realism. There is also an air of tragedy in the film, for white and red alike, though this is not dwelt on for long. The entire movie feels like a product of the period in which it is set, not the twentieth century. Many of the Indians are played by white actors, all of whom do an excellent job. Bruce Cabot's performance as Magua is the stuff of nightmares, and one's image of him lingers in the mind long after the film is over.

Although I am a committed movie buff of many decades experience now, I had somehow never seen this famous old adventure flick until I acquired the excellent Hen's Tooth DVD of it for Christmas.

It proved to be a delightful surprise and far better than I was expecting. As an independent production, it may have lacked the big budget production values of a Warner or MGM film, but it still managed to look impressive, with some clever use of glass shots, hanging miniatures and other film tricks.

It is only 92 minutes long yet packs an astonishing amount of incident for its length, all helped along by a throbbing music score that relies heavily on judicious borrowings from Max Steiner's famous score for KING KONG, which surprisingly fits the action rather well.

An excellent cast of 1930s favourites is led by a young Randolph Scott who makes a terrific Hawkeye and clearly enjoys himself in the role.

1936 was an interesting year for him. Not yet typecast in "oaters", he made, in rapid succession, a big musical (Follow the Fleet with Astaire and Rogers) a sexy comedy (Go West Young Man with Mae West)and this, which was a logical follow-up to the previous year's SHE. He was a much better actor and more versatile than he is usually given credit for and in this role, he may well have found his career best.

The DVD offers what is probably the best surviving print of this old movie and it is rather variable in quality, though it does get better after the 3rd reel. I would love to have seen a restored print but I am guessing this would be impossible now unless an original nitrate can be found.

George B. Seitz directs the whole show with flair and keeps things moving at a considerable pace. The film easily bears comparison to better known films in the genre, such as BEAU GESTE, GUNGA DIN and THE FOUR FEATHERS.

In short, it's a grand old fashioned adventure film, the kind Hollywood turned out with ease and great skill and long before the inflated budgets, running times and CGi of today.

The kids back in 1936 must have been on the edge of their seats....I know I was, in 2017!

Made right after the Full Implementation of the Hays Code that Limited the Portraying of Certain types of Violence and Behavior, this Film shows Signs of Capitulation and Adherence but not Complete Surrender.

There is Interracial Love making, Scalping, Torture, and other Displays of Nastiness that give this Movie a Real Feel for the Frontier Days and the Conflicts of Cultures and Countries.

Quite Impressive, the Film Holds Up really well and Modern Audiences will be Surprised that this Early Hollywood effort is a Testament at how Good they could be at their Craft when everything was Clicking. It has very Little that is Dated or Embarrassing Today. Especially the Reverence and Tolerance given All Points of View from All Points of View.

A good companion piece to the Michael Mann remake, this is a film that could be offered as one of the best of the early "period" films of the slowly evolving studio movie machine that would peak just a few years later.