Directed
by Anthony Mann; produced by Aaron Rosenberg
Not
long after the Civil War in the United States, a wagon train of settlers is
being guided to the Oregon Territory by a man (James Stewart) who, scouting
ahead, stumbles upon a lynching. Sensing an injustice, he rescues the victim
(Arthur Kennedy). The two recognize each other’s name as that of a former
outlaw far to the east, in Kansas. They become friends and, between them, shepherd
the colonists to Portland. There, enough supplies are purchased to last through
the coming winter. But that was before a gold strike turned the district
upside-down…
Stewart
is often cited as developing harder characters in his movies after the Second
World War, tough, often violent characters, with plenty of latent anger. But I
have long thought that this was a trait Stewart had shown earlier. Witness his
bitter resentfulness in It’s a Wonderful
Life, and his hair-trigger temper when made a fool of in Mr Smith Goes to Washington. In Bend of the River, that quality becomes
manifest in Stewart’s readiness to use a firearm, and may be heralded in the
quiet, subdued manner in which he speaks, at times similar to the silence
before a volcano bursts. This creates one of the two intriguing characters in Bend of the River. Kennedy’s is the
other, a seemingly easy-going rogue, who does too much good to dislike, and
implies too much villainy to trust. How he will ultimately act in the story
creates a great deal of suspense.
The
supporting cast is good, but largely over-shadowed. Prominent are Rock Hudson
(so young his voice sounds like a boy’s) as an amiable gambler who seems to
change sides with the turn of a card, and Jay C Flippen as the settler’s patriarch.
Howard Petrie has an interesting part as a civic leader whose transformation
under gold’s influence makes Jekyll’s switch to Hyde seem ordinary.
Bend of the River is
the second of Stewart’s western films directed by Mann, and it’s clear here why
the pair eventually made eight movies together. Mann not only brought out the
aforementioned menace in Stewart, but excitingly arranged fight scenes, whether
with fists or guns. His eye for scenery, aided by the advantageous countryside
and the colourful cinematography of 1950s big screen films, makes the movie
gorgeous.
Admittedly,
the story is almost mundane, but since it features the battling dichotomies in
both Stewart and Kennedy, I won’t complain about it, though I did wonder why
two men, both trying to escape their unsavoury pasts, didn’t use aliases. In
the 19th century, a new identity two thousand miles from one’s
notoriety must have been a simple thing to achieve.
In
a decade when westerns were produced a hundred a week, Bend of the River is a stand-out, a seemingly run-of-the-mill tale
raised above the average in half a dozen ways.
I remember catching this on TV a few years ago. It was a quite good film, but I had the same thought: "Guys, you never heard of ALIASES?!" That kind of bugged me.
ReplyDeleteJimmy Stewart was fantastic in this one, and your are right...it's not a run-of-the-mill western!
ReplyDeleteStewart, like Tom Hanks of today, hid much of his characters beneath the surface. One often had to wait or watch for it in his movies.
Delete