La bataille de la vallée du diable

Lieutenant McAllister and a raw recruit of soldiers have to travel through Apache territory to deliver some much need ammunition to the awaiting Fort Conchos. Scout Jess Remsberg tags along with revenge on mind and horse broker / former trooper Toller who unwillingly receives an order to ride with them to finish off breaking the horses, if he wants the rest of his money. However McAllister and his small party find themselves trying to survive an Apache onslaught led by Chata, as the lady Ellen Grange that Jess rescued from the Apaches has something of importance to the chief.

A competently well-made and satisfying western that's highlighted by the prominent cast and exhilaratingly taut and unsparing action sequences. Ralph Nelson smoothly paces this drum-beating foray, with its adeptly bold and old-fashioned direction. His professional touch lifts the screenplay. Going a long way to giving it a real bravado feel amongst the gritty, dusty and sprawling rocky terrain, which is masterfully framed with a lot of ticker and claustrophobic channelling by cinematography Charles F. Wheeler. The main feature of the film that strikes a chord, has got to be composer Neal Hefti's effectively novel, melodic score that seems to match and illustrate the sequences and overall feel rather well, despite the uncanny tone for this type of film. I found the dynamic cues to be rather contagious. Albert and Michael M. Grilikhes' open screenplay (which is based on the Marvin Albert's novel, "Apache Rising") is pretty much to the point and a little lacking by simply going through the motions. But even with those vague moments, it still thrives on well-rounded dialogues from its sturdy script. In there are configurations of racism, and the unfair treatment of the Indians, but it's the personal confrontations and torment that makes for one gruelling exercise. It never lets any of this get carried away, but the starkly harsh nature stays throughout. The performances are richly devised, to stew up depth and realism due more to their favourable acting than in the way of the material. James Garner's winningly focused performance as rugged, seldom Jess is first-rate. Sidney Poitier classy turn as Toller is a different stroke and admirably good one. Bill Travers' growing performance is very strong and humane. Dennis Weaver eclectically solid. Bibi Andersson was mildly okay, but was hindered and the modest John Hoyt didn't see enough time as Chata.

Dated, but a well handled, compelling and tough as nails western, which finally shines through.

in an age when black actors were confined to black roles, this film shows Poitier in a role that could easily have been played by a white actor-plus he's the coolest dude in the movie.

Bill Travers doesn't have to do an American accent.

this was from a time that people believed that there could be major characters with foreign accents in the USA who weren't villains.

Of course the USA at this time, and at any time, had plenty of odd accents. Except in movies.

The credits are waaaay more imaginative that you'd normally expect.

The music is highly "different" The camera-work is very strange- all those overhead shots.

I love this movie, and is a film I can watch again and again. It's very stylised-the lines are delivered like they were from a comic book.

You know-the sort of thing Quentin T "discovered"

I first saw this movie as a small child on television, and twenty-two years later I finally got the guts to rent it last week to revisit it, and to see why I was so interested in it then. I recalled the exciting cavalry charges etc. and I even remembered the opening refrain of the strange musical score. I really enjoyed this movie unlike most of my childhood favorites. While the movie itself is alot like a John Ford Cavalry opera, it plays out alot differently. This one has more in common with the modern action movie, I think, than with most B-westerns of the 1960's. The fast pace of the movie, unearthly fates of the dead, anti-heroism of the protagonist (James Garner), and well done scenes of horse-borne combat combine to create a Western-Adventure-Morality Play that I certainly recommend. There are multiple forces at play here. Among them the bizarre, scorched desert scenery, Garner's quest for revenge for his dead Indian wife while pining over the married woman disgraced by her captivity with the Apaches, The underlying loyalty of Poitier's former soldier character to his former comrades (despite his overtly self-serving statements) contrasted with the underlying self-promoting purposes of Bill Traver's role as military commander. Too, I see shades of this one in 1993's Geronimo by Walter Hill (burning vistas, Apaches hidden in the ground, Garner's Remsberg character in Duval's Al Seiber etc.) The musical score is off-beat for standard western fare, but who needs more drum beats, flutes, and rattles?! I think the score compliments the movie well, and is perhaps the best indicator that this production thinks outside of the box, even if it remains within it subjectively. This may not qualify as a classic, but I definitely think its a great action flick, and a breath of western fresh air with intriguing insights into race, warfare, culture, and the winning of the west.

A bloody, brutal Western where the action never stops.

First, the Bad (let's get that out of the way). Like all Westerns, the plot has its flaws -- with an Indian war party off the reservation they would not have sent a shipment of ammunition through a narrow canyon guarded by only one squad of green recruits on unbroken/partly saddle broken horses. But so what? In the classic Western Stagecoach the Indians would have shot the horses pulling the stage and then finished off the passengers as opposed to shooting at the people in the coach. Also, Sidney Poitier's silver vest remains immaculate throughout the long desert journey and several pitched battles.

However, the movie moves so fast that you never really have time to stop and remind yourself that you have to "suspend disbelief" to watch it.

Next, the Good. On one level, it's a classic cavalry vs. Indians story. But viewed through a different lens than in earlier Westerns; the Indians are shown with some perspective, if not total sympathy, which probably makes this one of the first Westerns to get beyond a one dimensional view of them. There are a variety of interesting subplots which flesh out the major characters and keep things twisting, turning, and moving along between the combat scenes. In fact, almost every one of the characters is angry about something, creating lots of tension between them. James Garner's character is looking for the men who raped and killed his (Indian) wife, Dennis Weaver's Will Grange is angry about almost everything, including that his wife was held captive by the Indians, Sidney Poitier's Toller (now a civilian) is mad that circumstances forced him to accompany the cavalry on this mission ....

Garner and Poitier give excellent performances and the other actors rise to the occasion, helping us forget that they are, in fact, Scottish or Danish.

At the end of the movie the various subplots are tied up and the issues are resolved with (in one case) a very surprising twist.

On top of that, you have a wonderful (almost superb, for this movie) Neal Hefti score, which always seems to correctly reflect the mood of the scene. It fits the movie even better because it makes heavy use of Western/military instruments: guitars, horns, drums, ....

Finally, the Ugly. There are some fairly graphic scenes here (although not exactly like in the Wild Bunch or Saving Private Ryan). The Apaches could torture with the best of them and some of that appears in this movie, although we're spared the close-ups.

All in all, I must say that this is one of my long time favorites. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do!!

What terrific production values—that trek across a hellishly barren Utah desert had me off the couch, running for a water pitcher. And catch all those cavalrymen, Indians, and wild horses, enough for at least ten more westerns. Then there's the great James Garner to headline, along with a spiffy Sidney Poitier. So, why isn't this a top-notch horse opera, given such promising prospects.

For one thing, there's about ten sub-plots too many. Heck, just the ordeal across the desert should be enough for most westerns without over-crowding the storyline. Sure, the script is making a good point about racism with Ellen's half-Indian baby. But do we need the soap opera sub-plot with husband Dennis Weaver that's mainly a distraction. Then there's Poitier showing it wasn't just white guys who won the west. And, of course, the screenplay has to carve out a large enough role for a second headliner. Add to that Garner's search for whoever scalped his wife that is sort of tacked on at the end, and we've got enough plot material for three more features.

Sure, the movie's heart is in the right place. But messages are one thing, while merging them into a fluid narrative is another, and here the sub-plots add to the general problem of too much storyline clutter. The root of the problem, I expect, was hiring too many name stars, even if Travers and Andersson are known mainly to foreign audiences. Speaking of the cast, Garner's unusual skills are largely wasted in a role any number of imposing presences like Clint Walker could have easily handled.

And I never thought it would happen, but by about the twentieth skirmish across the desert, I actually got a little bored with all the repetitive stunts and endless shooting. 'More', it seems, is not always better, and I suspect the lesson is there can be too much action even in an action movie.

Anyway, I don't want to simply dismiss the movie because of its excesses since there are also a number of good touches (Chata gets some respect as a leader of his people, even though we see him as cruel), along with the generous production values. I'm just sorry the movie doesn't succeed better given its praiseworthy side.