"THE SHADOW RIDERS" (1982) Review

"THE SHADOW RIDERS" (1982) Review

When I first set out to discover how many of author Louis L'Amour novels had been adapted for the movies and television, I had assumed at least a handful had gone through this process. I was surprised to discover that many of his works had been adapted. And one of them turned out to be the 1982 television movie, "THE SHADOW RIDERS". 

I have only seen two L'Amour adaptations in my life - "THE SHADOW RIDERS" and the 1979 two-part miniseries, "THE SACKETTS". Both productions seemed to have a great deal in common. The two productions are adaptations of L'Amour (which is obvious). Both featured three brothers as the protagonists. Both starred Sam Elliot, Tom Selleck and Jeff Osterhage as the leads. The two productions also feature Ben Johnson as a supporting protagonist and Gene Evans as a villain. But in the end, "THE SHADOW RIDERS" and "THE SACKETTS" have their differences. The latter aired as a two-part television movie or miniseries that mainly featured action and drama. "THE SHADOW RIDERS", on the other hand, is a ninety-six minute television movie, with comic overtones.

L'Amour's tale is basically about two brothers - Dal and Mac Travern - who returned home from the Civil War after fighting on different sides and discover that a company of Confederate cavalry had raided their family's Texas ranch and the neighborhood for cattle, horses and especially people to sell in Mexico. Among those kidnapped by the raiders were other neighbors, the Traverns' younger brother Jesse (also a Civil War veteran), their younger sisters Sissy and Heather, and Dal's former sweetheart Kate Connery. The Confederate troopers, led by one Major Cooper Ashbury, hope to raise enough money or "merchandise" to trade for guns and ammunition from a notorious local gunrunner named "Colonel" Holiday Hammondin order to continue the fight against the Federal government. 

Upon learning what happened, Dal and Mac discover that the local lawman, Miles Gillette, seem incapable of going after the raiders. And once the Traverns recruit their jailbird uncle "Black Jack" from prison to help them, Gillette becomes more obsessed with capturing the latter. With no law to help them, Dal and Mac set out to rescue their family with the help of their Uncle Jack; Jesse, who managed to escape from the raiders; and Kate, whom they managed to rescue halfway through the story.

It seemed rather odd that a story about family kidnapping would have a comic tone. I have read other reviews of the movie and some L'Amour fans seemed put off by this tone. Personally, I have no problems with it. Yes, I have read the novel and it was pretty good . . . and somewhat grim. But I thought director Andrew V. McLaglen and screenwriter Jim Byrnes did a pretty damn good job in mixing the grim nature of the story with a strong comic element. The screenplay did not shy away from the horror of Major Ashbury's actions or how they affected the Travern family - especially Sissy and Heather. More importantly, most of the comedy came from the family interactions between members of the Travern family - especially Dal and Mac's reunion at a local tavern right after the war, the three brothers' reaction to Jack Travern's criminal past and the emotional reunion between Dal and Kate, who had become engaged to another man after hearing about Dal's erroneous death.

"THE SHADOW RIDERS" also featured some outstanding action sequences. My favorites include Jesse's escape from Ashbury's raiders, the three brothers' rescue of Kate, and the family's main rescue of the Travern sisters and their neighbors from Holliday Hammond's camp in Mexico. Being a veteran of many movies and television productions set in the 19th century, it seemed obvious that McLeglen was in his element with "THE SHADOW RIDERS". The action featured in the film struck me as very exciting, without any of the excess that seemed to mar a good number of action films and television shows, these days.

I only have few complaints about "THE SHADOW RIDERS". Despite its comic element, the main narrative focused a good deal of situations that involved family reunions between the Travern family. I certainly had no problems with most of them. But I had a problem one - namely the Travern brothers' reunion with their Uncle Jack, who was serving time at a local jail. I found it . . . rather lackluster. A bit too laconic and understated for my tastes. I understand that this scene featured mid 19th century American men, who may have been conditioned to keep their emotions in check. Yet, other reunion scenes - whether it was between Dal and Mac, or the pair's reunion with Jesse or their parents - seemed to feature some element of emotion. Is it because the brothers were dealing with the slightly larcenous "Black Jack" Travern? Who knows. I also had a problem with Mac's war background. The movie made it clear that he was a Union cavalry officer, who was in Georgia at the time the war ended in April-May 1865. I just do not understand why he was in Georgia at that time. He must have entered the state with William Sherman's forces in 1864. So . . . why did he remain in Georgia and not accompany Sherman into South Carolina?

If anyone would ask me, I believe the shining virtue of "THE SHADOW RIDERS" was the cast. They were outstanding. All of them - from the four leads to the numerous characters that appeared in this movie - were first-rate. They all seemed very comfortable in their roles, while at the same time, managed to provide a good deal of edge to their performances. In "THE SHADOW RIDERS"; Sam Elliot, Tom Selleck and Jeff Osterhage renew the screen chemistry they had created in"THE SACKETTS" with great ease. However, I was a little disappointed that Osterhage's role in this film seemed slightly diminished in compare to his role in the 1979 production. Katherine Ross made an excellent addition as the classy, yet strong-willed Kate Connery, who had been Dal's former sweetheart. This also gave Ross an excellent opportunity to share some rather funny and romantic scenes with her off-screen husband, Elliot. Hell, she even managed to work well with Selleck, Osterhage, Geoffrey Lewis and Gene Evans.

Ben Johnson was a hoot as the Traverns' laid-back, yet larcenous uncle, "Black Jack" Travern. I could also say the same about Gene Evans, who portrayed the very charming and very cold-blooded gunrunner, Holliday Hammond. On the other hand, Geoffrey Lewis made a very intense Cooper Ashbury, the Confederate cavalry officer who is determined to continue the War Between the States with only a company of men. "THE SHADOW RIDERS" also featured first-rate performances from veterans such as Jane Greer, Harry Carey Jr., and R.G. Armstrong; along with Dominique Dunne and Natalie May.

I may have had a problem with one or two scenes with "THE SHADOW RIDERS". And yes, I found the Civil War background for one of the major characters a bit confusing. Otherwise, I really enjoyed the movie. I enjoyed it when I first saw it as a kid, many years ago on television. And my recent viewing only confirmed that my feelings about the production has not really changed one whit. Director Andrew V. McLeglen, screenwriter Jim Byrnes and a cast led by Sam Elliot and Tom Selleck continued to make this movie a joy to watch.

"THE SHADOW RIDERS" (1982) Image Gallery

Below are images from "THE SHADOW RIDERS", the 1982 adaptation of Louis L'Amour's novel. Directed by Andrew V. McLaglen, the movie starred Tom Selleck, Sam Elliot, Katherine Ross and Jeff Osterhage: 



"THE SHADOW RIDERS" (1982) Image Gallery

"GETTYSBURG" (1993) Review

"GETTYSBURG" (1993) Review

In 1974, author Michael Shaara’s novel about the famous three-day battle at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania was published.  Titled ”The Killer Angels”, it told the story of the Gettysburg battle from the viewpoint of certain military leaders – Confederates James Longstreet, Robert E. Lee and Lewis Armistead and Union leaders John Buford and Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.  The novel went on to win the Pulitzer Prize in fiction.  But despite this accolade, Shaara never really made any money from the novel.  Nor did he live long enough to reap the benefits of his creation in the years to come – including the movie adaptation called ”GETTYSBURG”.  

Released in the fall of 1993, ”GETTYSBURG” starred Tom Berenger as Longstreet, Jeff Daniels as Chamberlain, Sam Elliot as Buford Richard Jordan as Armistead, and Martin Sheen as Robert E. Lee.  The movie was directed by Ron Maxwell and produced by Ted Turner.  And despite being over four hours long (the running time is officially four hours and fourteen minutes), managed to surprisingly maintain my interest without me falling asleep.  And that is something that the 1939 Oscar winner, ”GONE WITH THE WIND” cannot boast.  True, one could say that ”GETTYSBURG” is a movie filled with a great deal of combat in compare to Margaret Mitchell’s story, which featured no combat at all.  But despite being a story about a famous battle, ”GETTYSBURG” featured a lot more narrative drama than it did combat action sequences.  And yet, director Maxwell managed to keep the movie at a good pace – with the exception of one period in the story.

Ronald Maxwell had not only directed ”GETTYSBURG”, but also wrote the screen adaptation of Shaara’s novel.  I must admit that Maxwell did a pretty good job in closely following the novel.  Although there were times when I wish he had taken a few short cuts.  Actually that time occurred in the series of conversations leading up to the final action sequence – namely Pickett’s Charge up Cemetery Ridge on the third day.  It simply lasted too damn long.  I had found Chamberlain’s discovery of his first sergeant’s death, Longstreet’s instructions to Pickett and the latter’s brigade commanders, and Longstreet’s gloomy prediction about the Charge dramatically satisfying.  But honestly . . . I could have done without Armistead’s speech about Virginians to the English observer – Lieutenant Colonel Fremantle (James Lancaster), Armistead’s last conversation with Richard Garnett, Chamberlain’s conversation with Hancock and the sequence featuring the Confederate troops cheering Lee.  It was only during this last act that the movie threatened to bore me.

There had been complaints that ”GETTYSBURG” had failed to make any allusions to the slavery issue.  Well, whoever made those complaints had obviously failed to see the movie.  Not only did Longstreet commented about the slavery issue to Fremantle – before the latter immediately changed the subject – but an encounter with a runaway slave led to an interesting conversation about race, slavery and bigotry between Chamberlain and the 20th Maine’s First Sergeant Kilrain (Kevin Conway).  There were other aspects of the movie that I had also enjoyed – Buford’s commentary about the importance of the Gettysburg location, the aforementioned Longstreet’s prediction about Pickett’s Charge and Lee’s ironic comments about being a military commander.  And I also enjoyed some of the movie’s more comic moments – Chamberlain’s efforts to prevent his brother Tom (C. Thomas Howell) from being too informal in the presence of the 20th Maine men and the conversation between Pickett and his commanders about Darwinism.

But ”GETTYSBURG” is, first and foremost, a war movie about a specific battle.  And like many other war movies, it is filled with battle sequences.  On the whole, I found them pretty satisfactory.  One must remember that this movie had been released at least five years before Spielberg’s World War II drama, ”SAVING PRIVATE RYAN”.  Which meant one should not expect the battle scenes to be particularly detailed in its violence in the same manner as the 1998 movie.  In other words, most of the battles seemed to feature a great deal of musket fire, explosions, and bodies either falling to the ground or being blown sky high – something one would see in television miniseries like ”NORTH AND SOUTH:  BOOK II” or ”THE BLUE AND GRAY”.  The most graphic scene I can recall occurred during a non-combatant scene that featured the field hospital filled with both bodies and body parts, where Longstreet visited one of his division commanders, John Bell Hood.  However, I must commend at least two battle sequences.  The actual charge up Cemetery Ridge had a great sweep, enhanced by Kees Van Oostrum’s photography from a helicopter.   That effectiveness of that sweep was nearly ruined when the Confederate troops finally reached the Union position.  There, the scene became nothing more than a confusing mess of both Union and Confederate troops merely shoving each other around.  Too bad.  Another memorable battle sequence featured Chamberlain and the 20th Maine’s conflict with the 15th Alabama regiment on Little Round Top.  The battle started in a generic manner as the two regiments exchanged musket fire.  But once the 15th Alabama came across the 20th Maine’s position, the violence became rather detailed and spilled into hand-to-hand combat and short-range firing.  I can even recall one Union soldier slamming the butt of his musket into the crotch of a Confederate.  And the 20th Maine’s charge down Little Round Top turned out to be as exciting as the charge made by Pickett’s division up Cemetery Ridge.

But it was the cast that really impressed me – especially the performances of Tom Berenger, Martin Sheen, Richard Jordan, Kevin Conway, Stephen Lang and especially Jeff Daniels.  Berenger did an excellent job of portraying the very human James “Pete” Longstreet, Lee’s ”Old Warhorse”.  But his most poignant moment occurred when his Longstreet regretfully ordered Pickett to commence his charge without uttering a word.  I was amazed at how the actor allowed Longstreet to age within seconds during this sequence.  Martin Sheen portrayed Robert Lee beyond the historic icon as a brilliant, yet obviously flawed man.  Both Conway and Lang gave vibrant performances as the Irish-born Buster Kilrain and George Pickett.  Lewis Armistead turned out to be Richard Jordan’s last role and many have claimed that it was one of his best.  I heartily agree.  In fact, one of his finest moments on screen occurred when his Armistead rallied his troops up Cemetery Ridge by sticking his hat on his sword (which actually happened, by the way).  Unfortunately, Jordan died of a brain tumor nearly three months before the movie’s theatrical release.  For me, the heart and soul of ”GETTYSBURG” turned out to be Jeff Daniel’s masterful portrayal of the talented Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.  Not only did he managed to portray the Union leader as a flesh-and-blood human being, he also gave one of the best speeches – in which he attempted to convince the remnants of the mutinous 2nd Maine to join his regiment – on the silver screen.  It seemed a shame that Daniels had never received an acting nomination or award for his performance.

I would not go as far to say that ”GETTYSBURG” is one of the best war movies ever made.  Quite frankly, it is not.  But it is one of the better Civil War movies I have ever seen.  Not only did director/screenwriter Ronald Maxwell managed to adhere closely to Michael Shaara’s novel, but maintain a steady pace for a movie that turned out to be over four hours long.  It presented its historical characters as human beings and not waxwork dummies that seemed prevalent in a good deal number of other Civil War movies.  And more importantly, it provided a history lesson on one of the most famous battles during that particular period.  I heartily recommend it.

"GETTYSBURG" (1993) Photo Gallery

Below are images from "GETTYSBURG", Ronald Maxwell's 1993 adaptation of Michael Shaara's 1974 novel, "The Killer Angels":



"GETTYSBURG" (1993) Photo Gallery