Run of the Arrow (1957)

Run of the Arrow is a slightly flawed but generally brilliant western, that deserves to be more widely seen. It's got a powerful story, epic battle scenes and some unique perspective on human nature and American history.The story rarely goes exactly where you expect it to. Along the way, it provides insight into Southern anger at the end of the War Between the States. And it dramatically shows the kind of duplicity that was routinely applied in treatment of Native Americans.Rod Steiger, never my favorite actor, is well-cast as a Southerner angry with the world. Ralph Meeker depicts extreme villainy deftly enough to somehow remain disconcertingly likable. Brian Keith has a pivotal but rather thankless role, which he handles with his usual aplomb. The biggest surprise is Charles Bronson, remarkably convincing as a Lakota chief.Despite the casting of Caucasians, Sam Fuller presents an unusually nuanced view of Native American culture, spanning both brutality and honor. And despite an obviously limited budget, Fuller directs brilliantly. The opening scenes are reminiscent of Peckinpah (especially Major Dundee), and the later Indian attacks rival the grandeur of John Ford. Run of the Arrow is a visually-arresting film that deserves high-def restoration.The flaws are minor. Someone has pointed out Steiger's weird accent. It is explained in the film, and is perhaps intended to establish the character as even more of an outsider. I didn't find it at all distracting. Some of the dialog is a bit awkward, but it always achieves its intended purpose - and actually gives the film more of a unique flavor. Worst of all is the preposterous casting of Jay C. Flippen as an Indian; you just have to accept him and move on.Run of the Arrow reminds me of other Western 'hidden gems,' such as Only the Valiant, or the films of Bud Boetticher. It's cleverly written and tautly directed, and leaves you with a lot to think about. See it if you get a chance.

"Run of the Arrow" seems to have noble intentions. It portrays the conflict between the North and South in the Civil War as actually having two sides to it, as opposed to most films that only portray the North as having a moral imperative. It also shows the later conflicts with the Indians with more balance than most westerns, which usually make the Indians out to be heathens who impede the (rightful) progress of the American juggernaut across the continent.Rod Steiger plays O'Meara, a rebel infantryman who hates the Yankees and heads westward at the end of the Civil War. There, he confronts the Sioux who adopt him as one of their own. The story is all about allegiance. Does O'Meara identify more with Americans or Sioux? He hates the U.S. because it symbolizes the demise of the South, but what really is his country?He even marries a Sioux woman, Yellow Moccasin, played by Sara Montiel (dubbed by Angie Dickinson). For an interesting read, check out Montiel's bio; this film was not the highlight of her career.Despite a story that might have been riveting as a Louis Lamour novel, "Run of the Arrow" is plagued by technical glitches (problems with light/dark sections, continuity in a chase scene and regarding the use of flaming arrows, a bad special effect depicting the trail of an arrow) and numerous distractions.I could have done without some of the irrelevant religious symbolism. Did the Indians use so many flaming arrows just because it was more dramatic on film?And the heavy-handed ending is the worst. Wait till you see the written message.

"Run of the Arrow" has an ex-Civil War soldier taking an Indian wife (Sarita Montiel) and here the Indians are less idealized… Steiger, deserter from the Southern cause, is a highly credible character, tough and able to effect a compromise with the Sioux until he finds one aspect of the culture he can't stomach, let alone assimilate—that of skinning a captive alive… He still, however, rides out of the picture with his Indian wife alongside… Whether she will assimilate what she finds in a different culture remains unanswered… The film remains a bloody little Western in the accustomed Fuller vein of unpleasantness...

Run of the Arrow is the 50's equivalent of 'Dances with Wolves', so if you wanted to watch Dances with Wolves in the 50's, you had to watch this. That's not such a bad thing, however, as although this film isn't brilliant; it's better than Dances with Wolves. The story follows the adventures of Pvt. O'Meara (portrayed impressively by Rod Steiger), a soldier on the losing side of the American Civil war. He is dismayed by his side joining with the other side at the end of war, and he wants no part of the unified American nation. So, he travels south to the land of savages, because "at least they have pride". On the way to the south, he meets up with a renegade Sioux Indian scout and he finds an admiration for the Sioux culture. He later becomes the first man to beat the 'run of the arrow', and finds himself taking a squire and being accepted into their tribe.The visuals are gritty and fairly brutal. There is also lots on offer in the way of entertainment: the scene in which our hero beats the run of the arrow is well filmed and exciting, which is just the way it should be. Aside from this, the movie also features a quicksand scene, a near skinning alive sequence and a great Americans vs. Indians battle scene. It also stays entertaining all the through, and that is much to the movie's credit; it's something that Dances with Wolves couldn't manage anyway. The film also features two great actors, which very much impress. The aforementioned Rod Steiger is the first, who takes the lead role. Although he doesn't ever set the screen on fire, he is always believable in his role, and that is enough. Aside from Steiger, the film also features the talents of the very talented Charles Bronson as a Sioux Indian.The story is nothing new for those who have seen films like Dances with Wolves, or Witness; but remember, this film predates both of those by nearly thirty years, so it's not unoriginality on the part of this. In fact, my only major criticism of the film is that it's under-ambitious. It never really gets under the skin of it's story, and that is a loss to the film as if it had have done; it would have been a more well rounded film. Smaller criticisms are that it's very short, and related to that; the ending feels very rushed and doesn't really satisfy the viewer. Still, The Run of the Arrow is a classic film and one that should not be missed by anyone lucky enough to see it.