Savage Sam

Okay...in my opinion, this sequel was better than the original. I cried my butt off in Old Yeller, but something about this movie makes me like it more than Old Yeller. I have seen Savage Sam so many times that I know ALL the words to it. It's a very good children's film, but its a "Movie that all audiences will love" If you like Old Yeller, and Where the Red Fern grows, you will love this movie.

I actually liked the book Savage Sam better even than Old Yeller. But the movie was poor and here are three key reasons why:

1) Dorothy McGuire, Fess Parker, and Chuck Conners were missing, even though their characters (Katie & Jim Coates, and Burn Sanderson, respectively) were key in the book. They were replaced by an uncle who came out of nowhere, played by Brian Keith. It really damaged the continuity of the two films.

2) Secondly, in the book Savage Sam was the son of Old Yeller, but in the movies this is obviously not the case. The puppy at the end of Old Yeller is clearly not a hound dog, and Sam is clearly not the offspring of a Lab mix like Old Yeller. The movie explanation of what happened to "Young Yeller" as well as where Sam came from? None is offered.

3) Finally, and most important, too much time had passed between the making of the films. Tommy Kirk and Kevin Corcoran were clearly too old to be playing the young Coates brothers by the time Savage Sam was made.

Pity, because it could have been a wonderful film.

We all know that "Old Yeller" is a classic. It will always stand out as one of the best live-action Disney films of its time. With that said, does any kind of follow-up film deserve any attention? "Savage Sam" certainly does. It is another well made Disney adventure. Classic? Almost, but "Old Yeller" was a tough act to follow.

I found "Savage Sam" refreshing because it made no attempt to be anything like "Yeller". Sam the dog is not a threat to anyone. In this movie, he is also not the center of attention. This story is different; Travis and Arliss are older. That's how it should be. Six years passed between the release of the movies.

Brian Keith was great in this film. Here, he is supposed to be the younger brother of Fess Parker's character in "Yeller". I really liked him here.

As another DVD in my Disney collection, everyone in the family enjoyed it. I give it *** out of four stars.

Norman Tokar took over directing duties on this sequel to "Old Yeller" that sees Tommy Kirk and Kevin Corcoran return as Travis and Arliss Coates, who, several years later, now have a new dog called 'Savage' Sam(though whether he really is related to Yeller is never established) who still proves as brave and heroic as Yeller, since both boys(along with a female friend) are abducted by a hostile Native tribe, and held for some undetermined reason. Meanwhile, their Uncle Beck Coates(played by Brian Keith) is looking for them, since their parents are away taking care of a sick relative. Just how can the group get out of this predicament? Disappointing film isn't at all bad, but is forgettable and ineffectual, with little of the folksy charm of the first.

This is an entertaining film thanks in part to performances by character actor scene-stealers like Slim Pickens and Jeff York, whose ornery interactions are a joy to watch. Brian Keith portrays well the rugged frontiersman, demonstrating courage and offering avuncular wisdom. Kirk and Kristen are good as the young innocents. The main problem is the frequent intrusion of the Arliss character, who has morphed from mischievous/ornery in Old Yeller to deranged/homicidal in this film. Disney loved the image and performances of Corcoran(he was indeed a good kid actor) and perhaps exerted too much influence on the writing and directing of Savage Sam. The more PC viewers have commented on the film's scenes of cruelty to animals (at times just for laughs) and the stereotyping of native "savages." There is some justification for this criticism, but it should be noted, in regard to the portrayal of the Indians, that they were a renegade band and that some white settlers are equally stereotyped. Also, one of the ranchers actually sympathizes with the Indians in their plight, and there is obvious condemnation of the "only-good-Indian-is-a-dead-one" white settler who wants to shoot the wounded. Another virtue of the film is the sweep and color of its exterior landscape shots. There is even an (almost convincing) deadly prairie hailstorm! All this considered, some first-time viewers may find the film's strengths outweigh its weaknesses.