Ulzana's Raid (1972)
7/10
Thoughtful Cavalry vs. Indians
27 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Nobody can accuse the writer (Alan Sharp) or the director (Robert Aldrich) of an excess of political correctness in this movie. The Chiracahua Apache Ulzana and his dozen or so followers are pretty brutal characters. They torture captives, rape women, mutilate the dead bodies of their enemies and are generally pitiless.

As a matter of historical fact, the Indians of the high plains and the Southwest didn't fight according to the rules of fair play that governed Western armies. I don't know about rape. The ethnographies are too genteel to get into it. But the Apache in particular were given to deboning some prisoners beginning with the fingertips. And not just the warriors. The Mojave men turned their wounded captives over to the women, who REALLY knew how to deal with them. But let me get off that subject because it's beginning to remind me of my marriage.

Ulzana is dissatisfied with the treatment his tribe is receiving on the reservation so he leads his band off on a series of raids, pursued by a green lieutenant (Davison), a detail of cavalry troopers, Burt Lancaster as the weary scout, and Jorge Luke as the reformed Apache guide. So far, so routine.

But this is fairly well done. The renegade Indians may be savage but the troopers show that they can mutilate bodies too. And the inexperienced but well-meaning lieutenant reveals some subtle expressions of prejudice against a different race or, more accurately, a different culture. The script doesn't justify or explain the difference between the cavalry and the Indians. Rather, it describes them, and with reasonable accuracy. For instance, the Apache are shown as especially adept at fighting on foot, which was the case.

Lancaster doesn't seem to put much into the role, a little surprising given his social and political leanings. Bruce Davison as the lieutenant is quite good. It's too bad he looks fourteen years old because he delivers his lines well and has the properly innocent features. But his voice cracks, a little like Jimmy Stewart's, as if he were pubescent, and his frame is diminutive.

As usual, it's nice to see Richard Jaeckel in uniform again. Here -- grown a bit more husky with age -- he is top sergeant of Davison's detail. I do wish the poor guy could be promoted, maybe get a commission. He began as a mere Marine private in "Guadalcanal Diary" and had only made sergeant in the US Army by "The Dirty Dozen", a quarter of a century later. Now, five years after that, he's stuck in grade, but I understand he was finally retired as Warrant Officer and now lives in Coronado, California, where he spend his time cursing sea gulls and writing angry letters to the San Diego Union-Tribune about the deep need of Americans for more war in order to speed up promotions.

This film isn't a masterpiece but the photography is nice, the action abundant, and the objectivity pronounced. If it isn't politically correct, at least it's not obvious propaganda like the Westerns of the 30s or "Stagecoach" or "Little Big Man." Polemics get tiresome and dated. This one opts for stimulating thought instead of binary emotions. As Lancaster's character puts it, "We'd be better off thinking' instead of hatin'." But the point is usually made with more subtlety.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed