sekander The best part of this movie was how much Randolph Scott looked like Errol Flynn. The rest? Well, let's cut them some slack. After all, it was only 1936, the beginning of time as far as film making is concerned. The book is only a rough guideline for the movie. I won't get into spoilers, but if you've read the book, the plot line here will have you scratching your head saying, "What gives?!" This is typical Hollywood sentiment. The main thrust here is romance, not the strength of character of the novel's protagonists. Little, if any attention is paid to the ways of the Indian. While Cooper went to great lengths to describe their customs and living conditions, the movie just ignores that in favor of a couple of dreamed up romances. Typical of the times, there are no real Indians, either. While the same prejudice was shown in Charlie Chan movies, at least Warner Oland and Sidney Toler were enjoyable to watch. The ersatz Indians here just bring the proceedings down. I'm gonna watch the 1992 version next and I sure hope its a more authentic account of the time of the French & Indian War.

LeonLouisRicci Made right after the Full Implementation of the Hays Code that Limited the Portraying of Certain types of Violence and Behavior, this Film shows Signs of Capitulation and Adherence but not Complete Surrender.There is Interracial Love making, Scalping, Torture, and other Displays of Nastiness that give this Movie a Real Feel for the Frontier Days and the Conflicts of Cultures and Countries.Quite Impressive, the Film Holds Up really well and Modern Audiences will be Surprised that this Early Hollywood effort is a Testament at how Good they could be at their Craft when everything was Clicking. It has very Little that is Dated or Embarrassing Today. Especially the Reverence and Tolerance given All Points of View from All Points of View.A good companion piece to the Michael Mann remake, this is a film that could be offered as one of the best of the early "period" films of the slowly evolving studio movie machine that would peak just a few years later.

Robert J. Maxwell This is kind of enjoyable in an old-fashioned way. I've never read the novel so I don't know how closely the film follows it, but the film gets by in its own right.The story is a complicated one involving conflicts of various sorts during what we called The French and Indian Wars and what Europe called The Seven Years War. The principal oppositions are between the colonials, led by Scott, and the British leaders, led by Henry Wilcoxin. The two men are also at odds over a young lady, Binnie Barnes. Then there is the battle between the British soldiers and the French under Montcalm, with both sides oozing honor and virtue from every pore. There are the Huron Indians, who side with the French but are basically against the palefaces. And there are definite vibes between Uncas, the next-to-last of the Mohicans, and Heather Angel, as a British general's daughter. This affinity cannot stand in 1936 -- whether or not it stood in 1826, when James Fenimore Cooper published the book. Both Uncas and his blond cutie die proudly, his hand over hers.The movie is almost as rough-hewn as the story and it doesn't spare the killing of horses, the bloody scalpings, or the altruistic suicides. That's not to say that the Indians are all stereotyped, although there are some scenes that are exceptions. The iconography is all Eastern Woodlands and looks correct as far as elementary stuff goes. The round-topped communal housing is traditional for the area that is now New York state. The torture was real enough. Uncas wears a puka-shell bracelet from Hawaii but, okay.Some of the location shooting was done around Crescent City on California's northwest coast and some extras from the Hupa and Yurok tribes were hired. They were an interesting group in themselves. The Yurok had the equivalent of a Protestant Ethic, as Max Weber described it. They used the shells of razor clams for currency, called "tsik", and went around THINKING of tsik, believing that would bring them more of it. Well, I don't want to get into it.Randy Scott, as Hawkeye, wears a coonskin hat and a tailored buckskin outfit. He comes across as a likable guy and gets the job done. The British are portrayed as mostly proud, if not arrogant, but dumb about how to manage the colonies. Hawkeye and the Indians know how to creep around in the woods, and they do a lot of it in the near absence of horses. The British troops march in easily targeted columns wearing red coats that stand out like bulls eyes in the forest.Historically, the French and Indian Wars cost the British an awesome amount of money and lives but it saved the colonies for the settlers and for the British who governed them. In an attempt to get the colonials to pay back some of that expense, the British imposed a stamp tax, which turned out to be a bad idea.There's nothing particularly special about the film. Nice action sequences but not a whole lot of gun play and no galloping steeds. It's not a Western. The stern British army manages to come to terms with Scott's woodsman and vice versa, but there's no message to speak of, except maybe that codes of honor, while necessary for the smooth functioning of societies, should sometimes be bent to allow for unusual circumstances. Nothing wrong with that. As a novelist, to the extent that I understand it, Cooper was popular but not a literary giant. If he'd been French, he might have written "The Three Musketeers."

railyard Although I have never read the book, I have seen several movies about "The Last of the Mohicans" including those that starred Harry Carey, Michael O'Shea (Buster Crabbe as Magua), Steve Forest, Daniel Day-Lewis, and Randolph Scott as Hawkeye (Nathaniel). Also the TV program starring ex-Lone Ranger, John Hart. For me the number one is Randolph Scott. I'm not saying that the others aren't good, but he is my idea of a clean cut, all American hero whom I'd like to have as a friend especially in time of danger. Actor for actor, the 1936 version has the best cast. Nobody is better than Bruce Cabot as Magua and Robert Barrat is the greatest Chingachgook of all, even though neither one is a real Indian. The final fight to the death between the two of them is far superior than that of any other version and Barrat's homage to his dead son Uncas (Phillip Reed) brings me to tears. There is room for all of these versions, and if you can, watch all of them and pick your own favorite.