L'Esclave libre

In Kentucky in the antebellum of the Civil War, Amantha Starr (Yvonne De Carlo) is the pride and joy of her father, the plantation owner Aaron Starr (William Forrest) that treats her slaves with dignity. When he dies, Amantha learns that he mother was black and she is included as a slave to be sold to pay his father's debts. She is sent to an auction in New Orleans and bought by the wealthy Hamish Bond (Clark Gable) by a fortune. He brings her home and treats her as if she were a guest. Amantha meets the slaves Rau-Ru (Sidney Poitier), who is treated like a son, and Michele (Carolle Drake), who is Hamish's mistress and in love with him. Soon they fall in love with each other, but Hamish discloses a dreadful secret from his past, their relationship ends. Meanwhile the Civil War breaks out and Hamish becomes a wanted man while Rau-Ru joins the Union Army. Will the love of Amantha and Hamish be doomed by the war?

"Band of Angels" is a romantic epic that seems to be a soap opera with a story with many twists. The plot seems to be a melodramatic version of "Gone with the Wind" and Rau-Ru first attitude is ungrateful. The best moment of this melodrama is when Amantha discovers that she is considered a black woman and consequently a slave. Her situation is impressive and heartbreaking. The spoiled woman is suddenly transformed into a property of despicable men. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Meu Pecado Foi Nascer" ("My Sin Was to be Born")

I have to say this film was much better than the civil war potboiler I was expecting. Yes it definitely has overtones of Gone With the Wind but if you put Clark Gable in a Civil War movie that's what you are going to get. Warners have obviously spared no expense with this one and the money shows on screen. Gable's salary would have been a part of that and frankly he is too old for the role of a slave trader turned plantation owner in the old south but he brings a legacy with him that is there on the screen. His big scene where he comes clean to Yvonne De Carlo about his slave trading past could almost be paraphrased as "Frankly my dear you really shouldn't give a damn" and it's almost as if Gable knows it. De Carlo is also too old for her part by at least 10 years but she does some her best work here. The trouble is that her best work can only be described as competent when the part of Amantha requires more fire than De Carlo can offer. The real acting pleasures here are provided by some of the supporting players. Carolle Drake, in her only screen appearance, gives a cool and knowing performance as Gable's housekeeper and former mistress who still loves him. Likewise Juanita Moore makes something out of the nothing the script gives her in a brief appearance as a maid on a steamboat. Andrea King leaves you wanting more as Miss Idell who seemingly ends up with Amantha's inheritance. King's exit scene (quite early in the piece) as she walks away towards the plantation house with her back to the camera is beautifully shot. Sidney Poitier on the other hand seemed a little self-conscious to me as the educated slave (and by proxy Gable's adopted son figure). Overall this is a film that has improved with age and deserving of a re-evaluation today.

I've often felt that a movie--even a bad one--can be enjoyed on many different levels--for example, the acting alone, the script, the direction, photography, atmospheric effects, etc. It's hard to find anything to say about BAND OF ANGELS except that it was photographed in excellent technicolor and Max Steiner actually manages to create an interesting score--though definitely not one of his best.

Indeed, no one is at their best in this film--not Clark Gable, as an older and tired looking version of Rhett Butler, nor beautiful Yvonne de Carlo--each given some of the worst dialogue any actors have ever been saddled with. It's a murky tale of a plantation owner in love with a woman of mixed ancestry. Patric Knowles and Sidney Poitier try to bring some semblance of dignity to the acting but there's simply too much tripe to allow anyone to look good. And by the way, it's not based on a Frank Yerby novel, as someone has said previously. It's based on a novel by Robert Penn Warren which I hope was better than the movie. Had to be.

Only the Steiner score provides a point of interest. Certainly nowhere near the level of that other Civil War epic starring Gable. No way!

It's obvious that Warner Brothers decided to duplicate the success of Gone With the Wind when they hired Clark Gable for the lead role in Band of Angels. As Hamish Bond, former slave trader, and now plantation owner in the Louisiana delta country, Gable is an older and more worldly wise Rhett Butler. A man deeply concerned about the sins he committed in this life as a slave trader, living it down as best he can.

One of his new charities is Yvonne DeCarlo who received one rude shock when her father died. Her mom was black, one of the plantation slaves and she is technically one also. She's not the mistress of her father's plantation, she along with the rest of the property, real and human, is to be sold for back taxes.

Gable buys her and sets her up in his New Orleans home. Also in that house is a young black man named Ra-Ru played by Sidney Poitier. Poitier, in violation of the laws of the time, has been educated. And he's acquired enough education to appreciate the situation he's in. He's got a great hate for his benefactor who he really sees as no different than other, crueler slave holders.

Today's audience which has seen Steven Spielberg's great true film Amistad about the illegal African slave trade, can appreciate far better Gable's dilemma. It's as if the owners of the Amistad grew a conscience. Gable's description of life in the slave trade when he levels with Yvonne DeCarlo is a high point of the film as is his description of the rescue of an African baby who grew up to be Sidney Poitier.

The film does borrow liberally from Gone With the Wind in terms of Gable's character. But it also borrows from Birth of a Nation. Catch the scenes at his plantation on the delta when his slaves greet him and DeCarlo coming off the riverboat. Very much in keeping with that flawed classic. Had Gable done this film at his former studio MGM, I'm sure Ava Gardner would have been cast opposite him. Though DeCarlo is fine, Ava would have made the part a classic.

Actually it's Poitier who walks off with the acting honors here. His Ra-Ru is filled with fire and passion. What Gable thought of as an act of kindness, is not perceived by Poitier as that. He's educated enough to see exactly the institution of slavery for the dehumanizing force that it is. His confrontation with another plantation owner, Patric Knowles, when he tries to force himself on DeCarlo is not something one with the slave mentality would do. Knowles makes a big mistake in assuming Poitier thinks that way.

Actually Patric Knowles has another important scene with Gable after Poitier assaults Knowles and escapes. Gable has no use for him at all. He's originally from New England and doesn't like southern aristocrats as a group. Though Knowles is reputed to be a dead shot as a duelist, Gable faces him down and makes him turn tail in my favorite scene in the film.

Band of Angels did not get the best of reviews at the time it came out. I think it was ahead of its time and can be better appreciated by audiences today.

It's with some sense of poignancy that, in the late 1950s, the old guard of Hollywood began to finally fade away. With Band of Angels we have a middle-aged Clark Gable in one of his last ever archetypal he-man roles, Raoul Walsh, one of the few directors left who had been around since the beginning, and John Twist, a writer of adventures and romances who had started back in the silent era. These men were professionals of their day, still able to turn out a good production, and yet it was also clear they were becoming hopelessly out of time.

Band of Angels is one of many pictures from this time to take a stand on racial issues, and yet even by the standards of the time it is a woefully misguided attempt. Rather than using Yvonne De Carlo's situation to demonstrate the horrors of slavery and make the point that a person's colour is skin deep, it seems to present her being branded black as something horrifying in itself. It holds up kindly masters in mitigation of slavery, and even goes so far as to condemn a slave (the Sidney Poitier character) who is ungrateful for this condescending attitude. There's also a full supporting cast of cringeworthy stereotypes – including a "mammy" – and all the drawling and eye-rolling that cinema had mostly put-paid to by this time. The makers of the movie meant well, I'm sure, but it is clearly a case of old Hollywood trying to do The Defiant Ones while still stuck in Gone with the Wind mode.

And yet there is much to be said for old Hollywood. Walsh's dynamic direction brings an iconic look to scenes like Gable and De Carlo's kiss during the storm. He brings real intensity to the duel between Gable and Raymond Bailey, stealthily moving the camera forward as the two men get closer to each other (a trick he first used in his 1915 feature debut, Regeneration). Despite his age Gable is still very much the virile, eye-catching lead man, and this is a decent performance from him – check out the look in his eyes when he slaps his rival at the slave auction. There is also some achingly beautiful cinematography from Lucien Ballard, with some gorgeous Southern scenery and really effective lighting of interiors, achieving a look with candlelight and shadow that was hard to pull off in Technicolor. Band of Angels is, if nothing else, a movie to be enjoyed visually – and in this way more than any other harks back to a bygone age.