User reviews

Charlton Heston plays an Indian-hating scout very loosely based on famed frontiersman Al Sieber (who, in reality, was a German immigrant who not only didn't hate Apaches but often lived with them and spoke fluent Apache dialects; he spoke almost no English because he detested American whites and refused to learn any more English than he considered necessary). He goes up against Jack Palance, an Apache he knew from his boyhood who is returning from several years at an Indian agency school that is supposed to have "civilized" him (also based on fact; many Indian children were forcibly sent to such a school in Carlisle, Pennsylvania). Heston, unlike the local military and civilian authorities, doesn't believe that Palance has been "civilized" and suspects that he's secretly planning to lead the Apaches in attacking and massacring the local white population. This is a tough and, for its time, brutal little western, well written and directed by Charles Marquis Warren, and pulls no punches in its depiction of racism on both sides; Palance hates whites as much as Heston hates Indians, and both have no compunction about killing those on the "other" side they've known for years simply as a matter of course. Palance and Heston are suitably intense in their roles--Heston perhaps a bit too much so--and the action scenes are handled very well, although the final confrontation between Heston and Palance is a bit of a disappointment. A good supporting cast of veteran western actors--Milburn Stone, James Anderson, Robert J. Wilke (not playing a villain for once), among others--contribute greatly to the film's pace and atmosphere (although the rivalry between Heston and army officer Brian Keith over a girl at the post is a bit superfluous). Well worth your time.

Considering the vast amount of Cavalry-vs.-Indians Westerns made during the genre's heyday, this emerges as a reasonably engaging entry – thanks to the pleasant Technicolor hues but, even more so, the scenery-chewing antics of its two stars (Charlton Heston and Jack Palance). I'd owned a copy of the bare-bones Paramount DVD for quite some time, but found the perfect opportunity to check it out now in tribute to Heston's recent passing.

He plays a maverick scout who, in the past, had spent some time with the Apaches; he knows them inside out and is, therefore, indispensable to the Cavalry because he can anticipate what their next move will be. The tribe has ostensibly capitulated and is heading towards the reservation but, when the current chief's son (Palance) arrives on the scene – having undertaken an education merely to fulfill a prophecy which would make him the savior of his people! – the attacks start anew, thus confirming Heston's skepticism of the whole deal (and which had practically ostracized him from his office). The film, whose title remains unexplained throughout, generally delivers in the action stakes (even if Heston and Palance's long-awaited showdown, the 'war' being resolved in single hand-to-hand combat between them, is a disappointingly hasty affair) – but is let down by a couple of obligatory romantic rivalries: Heston is torn between half-breed Katy Jurado, who's wasted, and Mary Sinclair, the widow of the Fort Commander who's also desired by his successor (Brian Keith).

Heston made a number of such minor genre fare (which, I have to admit, I had all but ignored all these many years) – including another Western penned by Charles Marquis Warren, PONY EXPRESS (1953) – before carving a niche for himself playing larger-than-life roles in a myriad big-budget spectaculars. Having mentioned the writer/director, I recently acquired another Western of his – the well-regarded and, reportedly, noir-tinged LITTLE BIG HORN (1951) which, naturally, revolves around Custer's infamous Last Stand.

Arrowhead is one of that batch of films that Charlton Heston did between his two DeMille pictures, some good, some mediocre. Arrowhead kind of falls between both categories.

It is one of the most uncompromising films in terms of the place of the American Indian. It's point is that the more we get rid of, the more room for the whites. So either pack 'em off to reservations or kill them. At least Charlton Heston's character feels that way.

Now there apparently is some justification for Heston's feelings at least as far as this group of Apaches are concerned. He was raised among them and knows them well. And knows that the young warrior prince. Jack Palance, is not going to go quietly off to a reservation.

None of which is really explored in the finished product. I have the feeling the editors left a lot of this film on the cutting room floor. Also Heston's relationship with Katy Jurado who acts as a spy while living without benefit of clergy with him is similarly untouched. But for that I blame the Code. What there is is quite daring for its time.

The ending is kind of silly also. When he has the drop on Palance, Palance asks Heston why he doesn't shoot him. Good question Jack, I can't figure it out either. More I won't say.

The film was shot on location in Texas and done very well. Palance, fresh off the acclaim he received from Shane, has the best role in the film. This is also an early film for Brian Keith and he acquits himself well as a young cavalry officer.

But Arrowhead could have been a whole lot better.

(possible spoilers)

It's a shame that the world has gone so Politically Correct these days that a straight-forward film like ARROWHEAD is so maligned and probably couldn't be made today. It starts off with Charlton Heston as a very despicable and prejudiced cavalry scout who hates Apaches with a passion (he's grown up with them and claims to know their ways), and continually foils any efforts at peace talks between the Indians and the white men. When his bigotry results in the killing of a group of Apaches as well as his own people, he is fired and his boss Brian Keith wants nothing more to do with him. But even while ousted from his duties, nobody is spared Heston's personal wrath -- not even his pretty half-Mexican, half-Apache laundress (the beautiful Katy Jurado).

When the respected Indian Chief Toriano (Jack Palance) arrives on the frontier to make peace, Heston still warns not to trust him. And in an old-fashioned turn of events (by today's standards that is), everything Chuck has tried to impress upon his men from the very start actually turns out to be true... Toriano and his followers are in fact planning an ambush. So in a very bizarre twist, Heston's hateful character is hired back to help the fight and turns into the hero.

Not a "great" film, and a tad long at 105 minutes. But it's a strong depiction of the personal animosities and prejudices from both sides that often get in the way of progress. The performances of Heston, Palance and Keith are all good. Those who wish to change history and act as if these things never really happened should remember that this film was based on factual, real events. *** out of ****

I was about ten (10) years old the first time I saw this film on television and after watching it a second time most recently it still brings back those deep rooted emotions of adventure, action, fear and gets my adrenalin pumping on over drive.

Yesterday's black and white western with the unsettling dust from the thunderous horses hooves between the calvary and the Indians is still a memory rooted deep in my head that is a lost art now overtaken by todays films oversaturated with CGI, digital sound, and lousy script writing.

Charlton Heston, Katy Jurado, Jack Palance, Brian Keith, and Milburn Stone, add enormous street cred to this classic western and I always enjoy these 1950's black and white westerns. I have now watched it at least three times and if I am lucky enough to live into the next decade I will most likely watch it again....and again....and again.

I give the film a stellar 7 out of 10 IMDb rating.

Throughout the thirties and most of the forties Hollywood's attitude to Native Americans was quite a simple one. It wasn't quite as simple as "The only good Injun is a dead Injun", but it wasn't much better. There was little or no attempt to challenge the "Manifest Destiny" ideology, namely that white Americans had a more advanced civilisation than other races and that they consequently had a God-given right to dominate the whole of the North American continent, regardless of the wishes of its indigenous peoples.

This attitude began to change in the late forties and early fifties. In particular, "Broken Arrow" from 1950 has become famous as one of the first major Westerns not only to treat the Indians sympathetically but also to treat them as the equals of the white man. An Indian character is given equal prominence with the main white character and it is made clear that the whites are just as much guilty of cruelty and savagery in their conduct of the war as the Indians. "Apache" is another example of a film from this period made from a pro-Indian viewpoint.

Not all Westerns from the fifties, however, were so liberal. "Only the Valiant", for example, takes a straightforward "Whites good, Indians bad" line, and "Arrowhead" is, if anything, even more reactionary. The story is set in the 1880s and the US government has tasked the army with implementing its policy of making peace with the Apaches. "Peace" is something of a euphemism for a policy of ethnic cleansing which will see the Apaches relocated to reservations in Florida, leaving their land free for colonisation by white settlers. (As this land seems to consist of little more than arid semi-desert, I couldn't actually understand why any white settlers would want it).

The main character is Ed Bannon, a scout working with the US cavalry. Bannon is that stock Western character, a white man who has grown up among the Indians, but his childhood experiences have not made him sympathetic towards them. Quite the opposite. Bannon loathes the Apaches, whom he regards as cruel and treacherous savages. Believing as he does that all red men speak with forked tongue, he opposes even the Government's harsh peace terms as unduly lenient, and does all he can to obstruct them. His argument is that the Apaches are only feigning acceptance of the whites' terms and that the real aim of the Apache leader, Toriano, is to launch a bloody uprising. The army, inevitably, distrust and disbelieve Bannon, and he, equally inevitably, is proved right by events.

It is often argued that films and other artistic products of past decades should not be judged by modern standards of "woke" political correctness, but the truth is that the attitudes expressed by Bannon, and impliedly endorsed by the film, were unacceptable even by the standards of 1953. The war, which had finished only a few years earlier, should have taught us the dangers of blind hatred of entire races of people. Racist attitudes, however, are not the film's only weakness.

Charlton Heston made a number of Westerns, but with the possible exception of "Will Penny", few of them are as well-remembered as his work in other genres, notably the epic. His performance in "Arrowhead" is not one of his best, but he was struggling with the difficult problem of "how do you play a guy who's supposed to be the hero but who in fact is a complete racist jerk?" Probably the best acting comes from Jack Palance as Toriano (this being a period when it was still politically correct to cast white actors as non-whites) but I felt that even he did not really merit the fulsome praise which Heston showered upon him in his autobiography.

The film's other weakness is the direction of Charles Marquis Warren, specifically the pacing, as the first half is very slow moving, with all the action coming in a rush at the end. This is one of the weakest westerns of the period, and the prime candidate for the title of Heston's worst-ever film. 3/10.

Like most racist films (or books, for that matter) that lack the saving graces of humor and/or ambiguity, this movie is a bloody bore. Charles Marquis Warren's screenplay, from W. R. Burnett's novel, is unspeakably bad (pun very much intended). Every scene in this very long film is, to a greater or lesser degree, (usually greater), given over to Indian scout Ed Bannon's discoursing on the evil, perfidy and downright odiousness of Apaches. Makes for rather repetitive, didactic viewing, in my opinion. And Warren the director is little better than Warren the adapter. Pace, as alluded to above in discussing the film's inordinate length, is quite deliberate and the battle scenes are sluggish, at best. Ironically, I admit to a prejudice where Warren is concerned since I feel that my favorite TV series, "Gunsmoke", didn't start to take off, both in quality and popularity, until Warren yielded to Norman Macdonnell as show runner. Still, I think the evidence is undeniable that this is one of your clunkier westerns and for that the director must take the biggest hit. Second biggest culprit is DP Ray Rennahan and his prosaic often out of focus camera. In short, the film looks as ugly as the stuff spewing from the main character's mouth. Which leads me to the acting which, unsurprisingly, since it boasts a cast of pros like Heston, Palance, Keith and Jurado, among others, is solid and saves this thing from a three star, D plus rating. Give it a C minus instead and hope that TCM doesn't show it too often.

PS...Sure is strange to see Milburn Stone in a Western sans shuffle, ear tugging, string tie or stethoscope.

As opposed to the politically correct people here, i think this movie portrays the Indian more realistic than the politically correct image will have it. Fact is it wasn't only the white man who broke treaties and peace initiatives. It's not good to show this down the politically correct memory hole. That's why I think this kind of movies are important and should of course be shown on TV. Of course, I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that this movie should be banned like some reviewers have hinted upon.

A strong performance by Palance and a fine Heston plus a very interesting storyline makes this one of my favorites.

Ed Bannon (Charlton Heston) is a no-nonsense scout at Fort Clark, Texas, who used to live with the Apaches. He is suspicious when the son of the chief, Toriano (Jack Palance), is returning from his education back East at the same time the Chiricahuas are meeting the U.S. Army. He solemnly warns that they will not peaceably be shipped off to Florida. Brian Keith plays the new commanding officer of the fort in his feature film debut. Katy Jurado and Mary Sinclair are also on hand.

"Arrowhead" (1953) was based on W.R. Burnett's novel wherein the author patterned Ed Bannon (Heston) after the real-life Albert Sieber. Meanwhile the film was shot at the actual Fort Clark in Brackettville, Texas. As such, it has some authenticity in its favor even while a bit marred by the dated style of its era. The problem is some people don't want ugly reality, but rather political correctness.

I don't get what the problem is. Bannon is understandably cheerless in a tense life-or-death situation while the Chiricahuas are depicted as formidable warriors who are willing to fight to the death. The movie portrays the culmination of the Indian Wars (as far as the Apaches go) in a fictitious story backed by factual material and it's not pleasant, but rather grim and brutal. It was the Indian WARS, after all, not the Indian love-in.

The film runs 1 hour, 45 minutes.

GRADE: B

In the 1950s, westerns changed a bit in how they treated the various natives tribesmen...and for the better. Quite a few films showed these folks as victims of White society or the Cavalry or at least tried to humanize them. Well, "Arrowhead" is certainly NOT one of these more enlightened films about Native Americans....as it clearly sends the message that the only good Apache are dead ones! It's virulence is pretty striking when you see the film.

When the story begins, the US Army out west is about to conclude a peace with the Apache and an offshoot of the tribe, the Chiracahua. However, their Chief Scout, Ed Bannon (Charlton Heston), knows better...the Apache cannot be trusted and so he kills their peace party! When the peace does fall apart, the Army blames Bannon's actions...but Bannon insists the Apache and Chiracahua would have attacked anyway and he was just saving them the trouble of killing them later! Not surprisingly, pretty much everyone in the film hates Bannon.

The truth is that the Apaches were fierce warriors and were feared by many neighboring tribes. They were not especially friendly nor 'nice'. But the film seems to be saying all of them were awful and really helps you understand nothing about why they were especially angry and dangerous at this time. In other words, the film is missing context. Now I am NOT saying films like this should be banned or ignored...I hate this and would rather be offended by films like "Arrowhead" than living in a world where nothing could possibly offend. Plus, on a superficial way, it IS an entertaining film. Charlton Heston is entertaining as Bannon...a man who seems perpetually grouchy (or perhaps constipated). Brian Keith is exceptional...and I think his acting was probably the best in the film. As for Jack Palance, he's very good and LOOKS like an Apache but is Ukrainian by ethnicity! Even among the more enlightened (and less, like this one), the American Indian leaders in films were nearly always played by white guys (such as Jeff Chandler or Rock Hudson or Iron Eyes Cody). Worth seeing but pretty nasty in its sensibilities.

Arrowhead, the mere mention of it in Western circles sometimes induces a sharp intake of breath, even a furrowed brow or two. Starring Charlton Heston and Jack Palance, directed by Charles Marquis Warren; who also adapts the screenplay from W.R. Burnett's novel, Adobe Walls, Arrowhead rewrites the Indian Wars and firmly paints the Apache as distrustful thugs.

Based in essence on real life Indian scout, Al Seiber, with Heston in the role but named as Ed Bannon here, story is set in Texas 1878 at the Fort Clark Cavalry post. Peace has been brokered and the good old Cavalry boys have arranged for the Apache, led by a newly educated Toriano (Palance), to be dog tagged and whipped off to some arid land in Florida. However, the pesky Toriano has been plotting a revolution and is ready to lead his people in an all out assault on whitey and to hell with the treaty. Only white dude who smells a rat is Bannon, who with some Indian blood coursing through his veins, hates the Redskins and will never trust them. But the Cavalry hate Bannon as well, because he is in the way, causing friction, a hindrance to their wonderful ideas for piece.

No surprises for guessing what happens next! If Warren and the big wigs at Paramount Pictures were aware of the racist overtones here in 1953? Is cause for debate. I tend to agree with the theory that puts this as a sort of anti-communist allegory, but of course that doesn't excuse the xenophobic narrative whoever is on the receiving end! Yet surely the makers were genuine in trying to make a good old Cavalry versus Indians actioner? That the picture often meanders and is not carpeted with action, is a little moot, but it is well put together, well acted and looks nice with its actual real Bracketville location filming (Ray Rennahan on cinematography). Paul Sawtell does one of his robust thematic musical scores, and fine acting support comes from Robert Wilke and Brian Keith.

It's a solid routine Oater, and can be enjoyed if you can forgive it its sins? Forgive them for they know not what they do...or something like that! 6/10

Charlton Heston is Bannon, Chief of Scouts, fighting the apaches. The army was trying to meet with the apache peacefully, but Bannon and his men have started off on the wrong foot, and now he's in trouble with his leaders. a few other big names here... Brian Keith and Jack Palance. The apaches appear to surrender and live on a reservation... but Bannon isn't falling for it. he spent part of his life among the apaches, and he doesn't think they will give in so easily. he knows the chief, his son (Jack Palance) , and apache law, and he is suspicious. Katy Jurado is Nita... part indian, part mexican, and Bannon isn't quite sure what she's up to either. Jurado will be nominated for Broken Lance, one year later. Heston and Palance were both oscar winners, of course. The story is quite good, and partly based on a real scout. it all leads up to a final showdown between the scout and his blood brother, the apache. Written and directed by prolific western writer and director Charles Warren. according to wikipedia, he had a large hand in creating Gunsmoke and Rawhide, not to mention writing on TONS of other great films. Arrowhead is pretty good.

This is as near to American evil as you can get. The Apaches are named and tagged like people going off to a concentration camp and they revolt. I will not spoil the story more than this, but please, all those who have a shred of humanity, avoid it, and remind yourself that it was a holocaust. 'Soldier Blue' shows this clearly, but is considered too violent to be shown now. White men scalping Indians is not for America, but the other way yes. It is the myth that has brought elements in America that are still dreadful today.

Katy Jurado is always good, and sadly far away from the Mexican cinema of Luis Bunuel. She was excellent in 'El Bruto' but ham meets ham in both Charlton Heston and Jack Palance. Palance has the edge; he was convincing ham, but Heston is convincingly callous in the dull way he delivers dialogue. A nasty film. Children in the 1950's were indoctrinated by this hatred. It still lingers today as I am sure Katy Jurado would admit if she were still alive. There should be a -10. It is what it deserves.

Charlton Heston and Jack Palance make formidable adversaries squaring up against each as an alpha male Apache-hating Cavalry scout and a very saturnine Indian brave heading an insurrection in this rugged Technicolor western based on a novel by W. R. Burnett vividly rendered on location in Texas by veteran cameraman Ray Rennahan.

This movie has it all: great names, great locations, bad acting, bad writing and plot holes. The racism from both sides serves no purpose at all. Chuck Heston and Jack Palance both over-act, especially the former. Brian Keith does well for his first acting job but his character changes direction so many times it's hard to tell what his objective as a cavalry officer is supposed to be. There isn't enough of a story so extra characters were brought in that are really not needed to support the story. Confusing Apache culture and dress with that of the Lakota does nothing to create authenticity. Main characters do and say things that don't make sense. Not worth watching twice. Too bad. Katy Jurado was never more beautiful.

This is typical Hollywood revisionism with the US Cavery constantly talking about peace and respect for the Apache, while all the Indians want is to kill and destroy. Nonsense. I could never figure out the Charlton Heston character. He plays someone who learned everything he knows from having lived and been raised by the Apaches, yet he hates them with a vengeance, always referring to them in degrading and subhuman terms. At home, however, he has no problem using the beautiful Mexican-Apache laundress (Katy Jurado) as his concubine.

Poor Katy Jurado. Only a year away from her pillar 1952 role in 'High Noon,' this doll, with more class and talent in her little finger than most of her female Hollywood contemporaries, can only get offered this role playing a half-breed concubine to a hate-mongering character who insults her at will and doesn't deserve her company. Kind of puts it in perspective why 40 years later we similarly didn't see most of the intelligent kids from 'The Cosby Show' cast in any roles of substance once that non-stereotypical show ended. Maintaining your integrity while remaining employed is a monumental challenge for many in Hollywood. No wonder Katy never relinquished her Mexican citizenship or Mexican movie acting career.

The end credits to the movie state that Heston's character is based on the true life of the Army's Chief of Scouts during this period, Al Sieber (1844-1907). If so, it isn't exactly a flattering portrayal. After seeing the movie, I wonder if Sieber's family sued the studio for 'definition' of character. Watch this one only if you've never seen how Hollywood depicted American Indians in the West.

Underrated classic made so by the outstanding performances by Jack Palance, and Charlton Heston. A little slow in the beginning but it once it discards the obligatory love interest, which isn't really needed, the movie focuses on the compelling aspect of the movie, which is the rivalry between Palance and Heston's characters.

Worth a look!