utgard14 Of all of the John Ford films I've seen, this is the only one that I would classify as "artsy." That isn't to say his other films have no artistic merit. Absolutely not. He's got a long list of films that are artistically brilliant as well plenty of popcorn films too. But this is the only one where it feels like Ford got lost in experimenting and trying something different instead of making a more solid film with a good story. The plot is about a priest (Henry Fonda) in some fictional Latin American country trying to get away from a government that has denounced religion and is looking to eliminate all religious leaders.There's a lot of Christian symbolism in this one. If The Quiet Man was Ford's love letter to his Irish roots, this is Ford's love letter to his Catholicism. Both are deeply personal films for the director. The art-house feel of the film with the overtly religious nature of the story and its symbolism unfortunately will turn some viewers off. Some of the vitriol I've seen directed at this film on this basis is truly disturbing. I get not connecting with someone's religious or spiritual beliefs, but why react with hatred towards it? I don't get that. Nothing in this film warrants that kind of reaction. It's not offensive in the slightest. At its worst its simply dull. Bizarre, fascinating, and a very different film for Ford. Admittedly it's heavy-handed at times but I think it has value. It's certainly a beautiful-looking film. If you're a fan of Ford or Fonda, you really should see it at least once. It's different enough to warrant you try it.

Luis Guillermo Cardona With the important Mexican team that did the most famous films of director Emilio Fernandez ("Flores Silvestres", "Maria Candelaria", "Las Abandonadas" ...): Dolores del Rio, Pedro Armendariz and cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, based on work Graham Greene's "The Power and the Glory" outstanding writer and an actor of the caliber of Henry Fonda for the leading role, everything seemed to assume that it would result in another great drama like that in the 30s and early 40s we had given the remarkable director John Ford. The story begins with a perfect plane: after wandering a good trip, Henry Fonda comes to the doors of a church in a altosano. When you open the doors, we see from the inside and then pushes the wings leaving a cone of light entering from outside. He stops for a moment with arms outstretched and thus draws a significant cross that serves as a signal to understand that we are facing another martyr. Then his personality is revealed and we know that is a priest, a fugitive from an authoritarian system that pursues anti-clerical.And then guess the first flaw of the script by Dudley Nichols: Spend a long time before we see a significant gesture that motivates us affection and empathy with the priest or to explain that it is unjust persecution that is being targeted. In addition, certain to appease the church, the writer removes all characters in the work of Greene, recreating the priest as an earthly man, and prefers to characterize it as a man who does not break an egg and is left to manipulate the whole who wants to do. ¡Pure fiction! Credits, to emphasize the universality of history are made in the manner of Chaplin: Henry Fonda... a fugitive, Dolores del Rio... an Indian woman, Pedro Armendáriz... a lieutenant… And soon we realize: It is neither more nor less than the story of Jesus, moved to the 40s of the twentieth century, which is telling us. Of course! María Dolores is none other than Mary Magdalene and the bounty is the same Judas. The triangle of Nazareth to the mero mero.Unless the pertinent images Figueroa, nothing relevant that this film offers us nothing in surface waters and quite sugary.

MisterWhiplash It's been written somewhere that the cruelest thing you can say to an artist is that his work is flawless. John Ford thought of the Fugitive as, despite not being a box-office success, a perfect film and one of his very favorites. It's perhaps more than prudent then to point out some of the criticisms one would have of the film (which, perhaps, is moot since he's been dead for decades). As a fan of the Ford work I've seen there are some times when he's touched perfection (Grapes of Wrath and the Searchers are it for me), and sometimes not so much, which goes without saying he directed many films. With the Fugitive it's recognizable to me why it's split its audience: some hail it as being totally underrated and a brilliant depiction of religious allegory and suffering, and some say that it's a total crock for being far too heavy-handed and acted over-the-top.Both sides have their right points; it is an underrated picture, if only for its technical feats of cinematography (Gabriel Figueroa is just right for this kind of material for Ford) and Ford's usual talents as a basic storyteller with a tendency for pure cinema expression (i.e. lack of dialog is a plus with the emotion expressed through the camera and actors. But it is also not well-acted in a couple of instances, notably the beautiful but overbearing Delores Del-Rio as the woman living in the town who's baby is baptized by the Priest played by Henry Fonda. For Fonda, it should be said, he at least gives all he can for a performance that possibly other actors could have played with more magnificence. In fact it's for him that some of the picture is most watchable, as he flexes his emotional chops for a scene where it's required for complexity like when he misses the boat and is asked to bless someone dying only to realize there is no wine and must go to ask from a vulgarian for wine (which, as it turns out, is drunken with brandy and all by him).While it might not be the Fonda we all know and love from Grapes of Wrath or My Darling Clementine he does what he can with the part, and it's a tribute to him and Ford that they make it engrossing on a very simple level that carries some complex connotations. When focusing on the actual chase and flight from the Mexican police it works very well (particularly with a hammy but effective informer played by J. Carrol Nash). It's just when Ford over-indulges in the spiritual aspect of the picture, which is only made clearer towards the end, that it loses its footing. Indeed the start of the picture kind of threw me off for a little bit as Fonda comes in with the Christ-like symbolism highlighted on the wall, and the townspeople come in with tears in their eyes and a somber song to sing and Fonda blesses and baptizes others. I wondered: is this a little TOO much in the way of what Ford does best, which is telling the story? He can be brilliant in throwing in his deep-rooted Catholic ideas as pure visions on the screen, and once or twice in the Fugitive he does... and then other times it falls flat or goes too high where it starts to become a full-blown religious picture as opposed to a societal thriller.Should Ford fans see it? Of course; even a lessor Ford picture will have something interesting. Will everyone like it? Surely not. Yet it is usually fine, traditional work and shouldn't be completely dismissed.

bkoganbing When Herbert J. Yates of Republic Pictures made a deal with John Ford to produce The Quiet Man he first made Ford agree to do one of his cavalry epics with John Wayne because he wanted a surefire moneymaker before taking a chance on The Quiet Man. The cavalry picture was Rio Grande.He must have been talking to the folks at RKO who lost their collective shirts when the public stayed away in droves from The Fugitive. It got great critical acclaim and no box office at all.My guess is that The Fugitive was sold all wrong or was made a year or two too early. If it had been sold as an anti-Communist as opposed to a pro-Catholic film it might have done better in those beginning years of The Cold War.The Fugitive is based on a Graham Greene novel The Power and the Glory and it is about a priest in an unnamed South American country who is a fugitive because of his calling. An anti-clerical government has taken control of the country and they are doing their best to drive the Catholic religion out of the country.Henry Fonda turns in a good sincere performance as the cleric, but he's about as convincingly Latino as Toshiro Mifune. The other members of the cast are well suited for their roles.The best performance in the film is from that chameleon like actor J. Carrol Naish who could play any kind of nationality on the planet. He's the informer who rats out Henry Fonda to the police. Very similar to what Akim Tamiroff did to Gary Cooper in For Whom The Bells Toll and Naish's own performance in another Gary Cooper film, Beau Geste.This was the first of three films Pedro Armendariz did with John Ford in an effort to broaden his appeal beyond Mexican cinema. Dolores Del Rio as his estranged wife was already familiar to American audiences from the silent screen.The original novel by Greene had the priest as somewhat less than true to all his vows. He's a drinker and a womanizer. Del Rio's character is also quite tawdry. And this from Greene who was a well known Catholic lay person. But this Hollywood in the firm grip of The Code so a lot of what Greene wrote had to be softened by Ford for the screen. It lessened the impact of the film.And with the whitewashing of Fonda's character came some rather heavy handed symbolism of Fonda as a Christlike figure.Still The Fugitive might be worth a look for Ford, Greene, and Fonda fans.