MerchantVenturer

I don't profess to be a judge of directing, acting or screen writing.

I am a simple viewer of films (movies in US-parlance) who likes to be entertained.

Did Cimarron entertain me when I watched it? Yes, it did for the first hour or so and I had high hopes for the remainder.

It then seemed to drag and some of the twists and turns of the story are unconvincing and a bit obvious, except perhaps for the very end. The story also seems to cover the long time span unevenly at times to the point where it can be slightly off putting.

I have to admit I found Maria Schell's accent disconcerting and not easy on the ear. We British have to become used to so many different types of American accent on the cinema and televisions screens, and we usually accomplish this without too much difficulty, but 'Sabra's' non-British European accent did impinge negatively on the flow of the film for me, although I accept it was probably realistic in the type of character it portrayed.

It is stated in another review that the 1960 version of Cimarron does not follow closely Edna Ferber's book. Well, I saw enough in this version to leave me in no doubt that it is based on the template of the same person who wrote the basis for the film and show Showboat. Her episodic plots seem to follow a pattern.

I do concur with others though that this film is one of those that begins to bridge the gap between the 'cowboy films' of my youth (the goodies always wore white hats) and the more realistic westerns of the latter half of the 20th Century.

Looking back from the safety of 2005 it is difficult to conceive of the difficulties that must have ensued in making decent films in Britian at the height of WW II. Of course they are going to be patriotic, flag-waving type of affairs but within the constraints of the time there were some fine stories, excellent acting and first rate directing.

We Dive At Dawn is not one of the absolute best of this genre but it is very good. Any film involving John Mills would have a problem being bad. And there is also the marvellous Eric Portman.

Sir John's recent death, happily after a long, long life, brings home the journeyman qualities of so many modern actors. He was equally at home, and equally convincing, as a private soldier, airman or naval rating, or as a senior officer. It is difficult to think that many of today's crop, who seem to speak with their own regional accents both on and off duty, are anything like as versatile, and very few are anywhere near as good.

As to the film, it is a rattling good yarn, with glimpses of the family life and problems of some of the crew. I recently watched it again on afternoon television and was still entertained royally.

I had to smile at an American reviewer having difficulty with English accents. We British have to put up with all sorts of American accents in films all the time.

Having read several other comment features on this film I haven't much to add.

I think it is a rattling good story, well acted and directed, with the additional virtues of superb scenery and plenty of railway action. I often wonder whether the film appeals more to war buffs or railway buffs.

My main purpose in writing this short comment is to answer a query posed by another member in his/her comment.

I was told many, many years ago that the railway scenes through the mountains involving the tunnels were filmed on the line that runs from Innsbruck, Austria up to the mountain resort of Seefeld. The line is still open, used mainly by trains travelling from Innsbruck to Munich (Munchen), Germany (and vice versa).

I have travelled this stretch of line and have little doubt this is the route used in the film.