La rivière rouge

The last time I saw the original 1948 "Red River" with John Wayne was when I was about ten years old. I don't remember a whole lot of it other than it was a rich, enthralling Western like "The Searchers" (1956) and in no need for a remake. But, four decades after its release, it was remade…and rather poorly, which is very disappointing since its two leads were very well-cast.

Wayne's friend James Arness takes his role in the remake and Montgomery Clift's role is redone by Bruce Boxleitner. These two would later work well again in one of the "Gunsmoke" movies. And even with this mincemeat teleplay, they manage to communicate much of the spirit that the original actors did in the original film.

However, that does not make the remake of "Red River" a good movie. Rather, it's a flat and mediocre adaptation of a beloved classic. There is some nice scenery, good performances, and swell intentions, but the problem is that the screenwriters wrote this with such low enthusiasm and maybe a little too much respect for the original, as if they realized in the process of writing that they couldn't even come close to the source and didn't bother to put much effort into it. It seems like they expected all viewers to already know the original "Red River" by heart and therefore be able to close up all the holes and gaps that were being formed here. The point of a remake is to at least illuminate the original, update it, and maybe strength a few weak spots, not open new ones. There is very little character strength, no real sense of connection, gaps of logic, a completely unnecessary addition of a love triangle, and an ending that is even more rushed than the surprisingly sudden ending of the original. In short, the remake of "Red River" can be described in two simple words: boring and unnecessary.

Amazing.

I would have thought Marshall Dillon could play John Wayne better than he did. But I wouldn't have thought there'd be a reason for having him do it in the first place. The confrontation scenes called for Wayne's swaggering in-your-face style, but, despite his lines, James Arness seemed to be trying to defuse his own fight, keeping law and order in Dodge City on Saturday night.

Taking a truly classic movie and trying to improve it by having different actors repeat the same lines is basically stupid. Adding a minor twist here and there in an otherwise identical plot only makes the viewer think someone made a mistake.

As for realism, where did they get the height-challenged cattle to walk around the street? Were they all calves born during the drive? I know the actors are tall, but not that tall. And need I mention the Indians that kept getting shot off their horses while the number riding in circles uselessly shaking tomahawks never decreased, and there were never any casualties lying on the ground?

If a band of village idiots ever remake The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly they'd better keep the original music, or they'll find that only it and Clint Eastwood made the movie a legend. If anyone doubts this, they need only watch the remake of Red River to understand.

I like James Arness. I grew up with Gunsmoke. Unfortunately, he doesn't dominate a scene like John Wayne, nor does he have the acting range of Wayne. Bruce Boxleitner's Garth was not as good as Montgomery Clift's, nor was Gregory Harrison's Cherry up to the standards of John Ireland's. However, these are not fatal to the movie. Dunson is the heart of the movie. If you're going to remake Red River, you'd better have a good Dunson.

Maybe it has to do with learning the right cadence of delivering your lines so that they take on real meaning, maybe it's reacting to the other actors so that it seems like you're actually listening to them.

I'm a little surprised, since Arness was a friend of John Wayne's and acted in several of his movies. You'd think Arness would have learned something. Just compare the bar scene where Dunson lays out the plan and the rules for the upcoming cattle drive.

Too bad. This movie has a great cast, with old names from the past (like Ty Hardin, John Lupton, LQ Jones, etc.), but every single member of the cast has done far better work in other movies or other TV shows.

It also hurts that the original was directed by Howard Hawks and had that wonderful Dimitri Tiomkin score.

Though James Arness and Bruce Boxleitner are a good fit for the roles originated by John Wayne and Montgomery Clift and Ray Walston stands in very well as the old-timer sidekick to both instead of Walter Brennan, the television remake of Red River sinks right to the bottom.

The thing that I missed most from the original film was Dimitri Tiomkin's music, one of the finest film scores ever done. It really set the tone for the film, actually helped give you that sense of movement of the cattle, helped you empathize with the size and scope of the herd and the task that John Wayne undertook in the original.

If the producers had done nothing else, they should have paid whatever price was necessary to get that music.

Whole chunks of dialog from the original is taken. There is a new plot component in this film that of black cowboy Stan Shaw who Boxleitner and Arness take on despite racial objections from some of the ex-Confederate soldiers would have made. Shaw does a fine job and his inclusion is the only improvement on the original because in real life Wayne and Clift would no doubt have had black cowboys on their drive.

Laura Johnson as a Civil War widow is an extreme let down from Joanne Dru's slinky Tess Millay from the original. It wasn't Johnson's fault, just not a good idea to change her type. But that was necessary to set up the confrontation between Bruce Boxleitner and Gregory Harrison who has John Ireland's part which is also a big plot change from the original.

I think those who remember fondly the John Wayne classic will be much let down with this one.

Everybody knows that John Wayne was the King of the westerns, but dumping on this TV movie remake is really unfair. Compared to all the reality and talent shows, this was a nice change of pace. Lots of us wish more westerns were made but it is a genre that is sadly overlooked with all the spy, war, kung fu and bizarre sex shows being produced nowadays. The story line for this remake was an improvement over the original. Bruce Boxleitner is still a hunk. James Arness played against type which had to be a real challenge. I believed he was an embittered old man who was used to his word being law. I always thought Clift was a little over-the-top and tried too hard as opposed to Boxleitner who showed the change that comes over a man who sees too much of the horrors of war. Gregory Harrison tried a little too hard as well, but the young cowboy and the black horse-breaker as well as Ray Walston more than made up for what Harrison lacked. If you judge the movie on its own merit and without comparing it to its predecessor, I think a good western story still beats out most of the trash passing for entertainment on TV. So give these guys a break, why don't you?