bkoganbing If Indian Paint hadn't started out with a bad historical error I might have given it a star or two higher rating. But even a B independent picture should not have made such a bad mistake. Right at the beginning the narrator says that the story is set in the time before the white man came to the western hemisphere and the Indians who are plains Indians are all riding horses.Even high school history students know that the horse came to America first from Cortes who let his stock run free and multiply in Mexico. Horses gradually moved north or were traded north by tribes to the south to their northern brethren who envied what could be done on horseback.Such an incredibly silly error mars a very nice story of a young Indian boy coming of age as a warrior through his love and care for a wild colt that everyone else says can't be broken. Jay Silverheels is the chief of the Arikawaha tribe and he's got considerably more dialog than what he used to have in The Lone Ranger. Silverheels's son is Johnny Crawford two years from The Rifleman and trying to keep his career alive as a teenage heartthrob. He plays the lad trying to tame the wild colt and has quite a few adventures in the process.Some criticism is voiced about not having American Indian players in the roles that whites have in this film. Take a look at the credits and you'll see one Robert Crawford, Sr. is the associate producer of Indian Paint. That should answer the question why his Johnny was cast in the lead. Please note that Robert Crawford, Jr. who was a regular in the Laramie series while Johnny was on The Rifleman is cast as Johnny's best friend. I think this is the last time the Crawford brothers worked together on a project.Indian Paint was shot on a shoestring completely outdoors in Texas where the action would have taken place a few hundred years earlier. It does lack some production values that a big studio could have given, but it's still a nice story, good family viewing.But let no one come away with the fact that horses were being ridden before Columbus got here.

dbborroughs Very much of the time story of a young Indian brave who bonds with a young colt during their time away from the tribe. While away the young man also grows up into a man.Not my cup of tea western tale gets points for trying not to be the typical depiction of native Americans but at the same time it still suffers from some Hollywood conventions such as Caucasian actors playing Native Americans. Aimed firmly at the family audience the film might give some parents kittens with its "graphic" depiction of death between warriors(its not off screen but it is hidden). I liked that the film doesn't really shy away from real life. Unfortunately the film never fully clicked with me since it's, as I said, aimed at the family audience so some of the twists and turns seemed to be aimed more at teaching a lesson then being full realistic.Worth seeing if the plot appeals to you or you like westerns.

zinvester I waited 42 years to see this movie. My mother wouldn't let me when it came out, and it has been virtually impossible to find it on video until I checked Netflix. I was very fulfilled to be able to watch my childhood hero Johnny Crawford in this movie finally. I'm sure Native Americans would not agree with much of the content in here by today's standards, but by the standards of 1964, it was fairly agreeable. The Indians were fighting one another, and there is no conflict with "the White Man." It's an improbable story of a boy and his horse but I sure enjoyed it. If you watch carefully, the horse, as both a colt and an adult, are played by several different horses.

pazu7 I am surprised no one has commented in this film. Sure, it is cheesy by todays standards, and perhaps even for its time. The dialog is pretty corny, and the representation of Native American's might even be considered condescending in its naiveté, especially by our current PC standards. But what I found interesting is that it tells the story of young Indians coming of age from their own perspective. Once again this perspective isn't really theirs, its Hollywoods, but none-the-less it is a story about their life, much in the same way as "Dances With Wolves" tells the story of Indian life. Not that I am comparing the films. "Dances.." is obviously a classic and very few have even heard of "Indian Paint". Rather I am associating the themes of the films and their focus on the lives of the Indians themselves.Not an easy one to find, but if you do, give it a shot. Set your schmaltz meter to the appropriate era and it should be entertaining enough. Plus it's got Johnny Crawford. How bad could it really be?