Sillyhuron The Big Sky is one of my favourite western novels - because it goes against all the "Western" rules. It's main character is vicious, angry and dangerous. In the first chapter, he tries to kill his own father (a fate the old creep richly deserves). If he's insulted,he pulls out a knife. When someone whips him, he comes back later planning a killing. People die throughout the book,they get scalped and VD and smallpox - kind of the way people did in the frontier.So what does Hollywood do? Make the lead the supporting character, the sidekick the lead (& make him Kirk Douglas - nice & non-threatening). Start the movie several chapters in, so you don't see Dada cop it. Oh, and the boatload of characters waving at the Indians at the end? Halfway through the book, those same Indians wiped them out. 'Nuff said. If you decide to make a movie of a book, why change it?

Tweekums Most westerns I've seen were set in the years after the US civil war but this one is set several decades earlier when much of the west was part of the United States in name only with vast areas that had rarely if ever been visited by white men. One such area was the upper reaches of the Missouri river; a land inhabited by the Blackfoot Indians. This film tells the story of a group of independent fur traders who intend to travel to this area because of the potential for profit and because most of the closer territories are controlled by 'The Company'. The protagonists are Jim Deakins and Boone Caudill; two men who became friends on the way to St Louis and signed up for the job there along with Boone's uncle Zeb who they met in jail. Normally such a job would be impossible as they would not be welcome in Blackfoot territory but the boat's captain has an Indian woman named Teal Eye on board; the daughter of a chief, who had had been captured by another tribe. One the way up river they have many things to contend with including Company men, Crow Indians, nature and Teal Eye who wants to kill Boone because he has the scalp of the Blackfoot warrior he believes killed his brother.I was a little surprised when the film started to see it was in black and white and 'narrow screen'… I'd imagined with a title like 'The Big Sky' it would be in Technicolor and widescreen to show of those big skies to maximum effect. Given its age I shouldn't have been too surprised though and the film still looked good; in fact the black and white was an advantage for the many night scenes where colour often looks slightly unnatural. The actors did a fine job although looking at it with a modern eye it is a pity that the Indian characters weren't played by Native Americans. That said the politics seemed admirably liberal for a film of this time; the Indians weren't portrayed as savages and most of the furriers respected them and Boone's dislike was based on his brother's death and even that changes over time. Even the hostile Crow are only hostile because the Company has stirred them up. As well as their various adventures there is the inevitable romantic subplot; Deakin's clearly has feelings for Teal Eye but by the end she sees him as a brother and fancies Boone… something that will test their friendship. If you like westerns don't be put off by the lack of colour; watch it and enjoy a fine story well acted.

Cristi_Ciopron A delicate ,cheering exercise in genuine lightness—of the subtlestThis exquisite poem is as close as one can get to a personal cinema; it is a triumph of style.A lesson in fluidity, mastery, cleverness and what not … As fine as its script might be, Hawks' … still amazes the viewer by how independent of the content is its style. This movie is pure style, pure understanding. It lives by its inner wit, being one of the most palatable films ever—on a par with a Demme comedy. It is pure delight, pure cinema, and pure joy. The directing is incredibly refined. This justifies the movies; this makes them worth. If one such movie is made once in a decade, then the cinema is justified. One single flawless movie. Its content is its style. Here, Hawks reached the heights. The substance of … is very subtle and noble and satisfying. It is a source of limpid, clean beauty; it gives strength to the mine. It testifies of a subtle and healthy taste. It is one of Hawks' very great movies. The mastery is thorough. One an immense science of cinema is at work here! How to make the movies a pure delight, a source of force. It is like the restoring of intelligent craft in the cinema. Like in music or in literature (the arts of time) –a fluid synthesis. Hawks' extraordinarily enjoyable film enhances in us the sense of the cinema's beauty. The beauty of Hawks' movie is simple, noble, intelligent, masterful—not a single trace of clumsiness.If one day I will sketch a top of the most enjoyable –in a distinguished and intelligent way—features, Hawks' film will have its place of honor. This is a film made up of pure enjoyment.Hugely enjoyable—as fun, and as art of fun.

bkoganbing One of my favorite Kirk Douglas films is The Big Sky where he plays mountain man/trapper Jim Deakins. It's a great part for Douglas with his incredible charm and quick burn when someone does him wrong.The Big Sky was RKO Pictures big production for 1952. I'd like to say that Howard Hughes spared no expense in making this film, shooting a good deal of it in the Grand Tetons, the actual location for the adventures of many fur trappers. But for the life of me I don't understand why Hughes and RKO after doing that, didn't spring for color.Possibly because director Howard Hawks wanted black and white. His last epic film Red River had done well in black and white. Still I really think something was missed. RKO did use color on films with a lot less budget.There's a lot of similarity between The Big Sky and Red River. Both films involve a group of men on an epic journey into the unknown for business reasons. In Red River, John Wayne has to get that huge herd to market and has to use a trail few have used. In The Big Sky a group of independent trappers basically want to land a nice fur contract with the Blackfeet Indians where few whites have gone up the Missouri River. Going against them is a fur trading consortium kind of like the one John Jacob Astor put together.The trappers are mostly French Canadian Metis headed by Steven Geray, but also along is Arthur Hunnicutt who speaks the Indian language. Their ace in the hole is Elizabeth Threatt, a Blackfoot princess the trappers have rescued and are bringing back to her people in the hopes that her old man will be grateful. Hunnicutt is also the narrator of the film.Douglas and Dewey Martin join up with the group in St. Louis and the trappers have the usual adventures as they take the flatboat up into the Missouri River country. The scenes showing journey upriver are nicely photographed.Two others in the cast merit attention. Hank Worden does a nice job as a lost Blackfoot Indian who the trappers pick up. He may not be playing with a full deck, but he does come in handy. Jim Davis is one lean and mean villain as the company troubleshooter who wants to keep the independents out.Arthur Hunnicutt got an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his role, The Big Sky proved to be his career film. Unfortunately he lost to Anthony Quinn for Viva Zapata. Still Hunnicutt's folksy charm was always something to look forward to in any film he was ever in.The Big Sky is one of the best films ever done about the mountain man era of the American frontier. If they'd only spent for color.