verbusen I DVR'd films with James Garner in it, and this film was recorded from the MGM channel as a result. When it started with the Bowie knife slashing the screen, I knew this would be a different western. The title cards were really weird, they used a white font similar to those I've seen on low budget drive in films next to a custom dark font that just seemed weird but interesting, it beckoned low budget to me. Then I watched the aerial shots of the beautiful scenery, which were amazing in HD, good job by MGM in presenting this film, watch it in this format and not on low quality like on a Youtube, it's a difference to the overall enjoyment. So I quickly reasoned, yes it's kind of low budget but the people involved considered it more then just a cheap western. The next scene starts with violence and graphic (for the time) torture, I knew pretty fast that this would be exploitative as far as the action goes. Spoilers, I predicted to my wife when the soldiers are riding out on the mission that 90 percent would die, and I nailed it. The morality tales concern race and mixed race relationships. The Indians are presented as really ruthless and willing to be killed off in droves which seemed over the top. The arrows are shown multiple times hitting soldiers in all body parts, however they did that, it was a very effective effect. I'm guessing they played the arrow scenes in reverse. Funny blooper that I caught, Poitier is twirling his pistol and when he puts the gun back in the holster he misses the holster and has to quickly pull it back and reset it. I'm surprised that wasn't re-shot but I guess the low budget comes into play. The woman character is played by a European with a thick accent and so is the Army Officer, which lowered my suspension of belief but I guess is plausible. Poitier's role seems unnecessary since the racial morality is already being addressed with the white woman and her mixed race child, luckily, it doesn't get over the top on the morality issues to the point that it detracts from the action. I noticed only one other black soldier and he has no lines and is only seen briefly which also made me question why Poitier is the only Buffalo Soldier around. Weaver's role is schizophrenic, one scene he's a total bigot, the next scene a caring husband. For those who like character actor roles, I enjoyed seeing William Redfield, he reminds me in this movie of a character I would be like, realistic. There is a tread in there about Garner's murdered Indian wife that loosely ties it all together but there are some bad plot holes and character motivations that I didn't think were realistic. With all that said, the film is entertaining and if you are looking for some good action check it out. 7 of 10, for this unconventional western, entertaining.

grahamchalk2008 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"

dbdumonteil Mrs Grange is a distant relative of Christa,the heroine of Nelson's "soldier blue" ;both lived among an Indian tribe ,Mrs Grange had even a child from an Indian man:it's not surprising that the character who welcomes the baby of mixed race with warmth and tenderness is Sidney Poitier's.Besides,both Bibi Anderson and Candice Bergen are blond;it's all the more bewildering to see Anderson in a western since she is primarily an intellectual actress, famous for her roles in Bergman's works.That said ,one can prefer the way John Ford told us about the fate of the white "squaws".In spite of this minor quibble,"duel at Diablo" is an exciting western ,with a lot of subplots and even an unexpected twist (which makes sense),notably concerning Garner's late wife ;violence and cruelty (Indian tortures) are present and predict the final slaughter in the 1971 effort.A great scene shows Garner giving his revolver to a suffering dying man so as to he can finish HIMSELF off.Many interesting supporting parts.

lost-in-limbo 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.