Silver River

Erroll Flynn epitomizes the American dream in his movie.he is the perfect go-getter,uneducated but very smart,who pushes everyone out of his way .Hints at David and Bethsabea are thoroughly relevant and gave the whole movie a timeless side.Stanley is a scientist,an engineer ,but what can he do?Wife Georgia is more reluctant but for her too,it's just a matter of time.

The story is parabolic:the rise and fall of a young Turk ,during the "silver rush" .The most important scene is the banquet ,in Mike's desirable property which chic people are quick to leave when a "drunk"

PLato has finished his long diatribe against his pal.Those posh people would never accept a nouveau riche in their aristocratic circle anyway.That scene is the central one,cause it contains both McComb's apex and his downfall.

This is another great movie by a director who made dozens of gems.

Despite Stephen Longstreet and Harriet Frank's too verbose screenplay (was it really necessary to give Thomas Mitchell THREE condemnatory speeches of Errol Flynn when one would do?) and noted action director Raoul Walsh's obvious discomfort with examining the vicissitudes of the passionless Ann Sheridan/Bruce Bennet marriage to say nothing of trying to enliven business intrigue centered around cornering the silver market, I kind of enjoyed this rare foray of Flynn into anti hero-dom. Don't know whether it's because it mirrored what was going on in his private life or if he's just an under rated actor, but the guy does dark complexity of character rather well, in my opinion. Give it a B minus.

PS...The scene with U. S. Grant has to be the most superficial Hollywood portrayal of an American president until Pat McCormick essayed Grover Cleveland in Altman's "Buffalo Bill And The Indians", (another flawed but fun western).

This Raoul Walsh's movie looks like a Republic western, most of them urban western taking place in Frisco in music halls, lobbies, or aboard a river boat more than a classic western shot in Death Valley. It is not what you could expect it to be, especially with Errol Flynn. It could have been written by an optimist Norman Mailer or Scott Fitzgerald, because this movie is not sad, not gloomy, saving a predictable ending for Hollywood standard. Good stuff for gem lovers. Not my Raoul Walsh's stuff for sure. And far too long for my taste.

This movie is a bit of a downer. The plot is hardly upbeat. It is a pessimistic story. Pessimistic stories can be engrossing-look at "The Treasure of Sierra Madre" for example-but, here, not all that much interesting happens. The performers do their usual shtick.. Sheridan, Bennett, and Mitchell are exactly the people you expect them to be, based on countless other movies. No great disadvantage, but no real advantage either.

Flynn is the main problem, but the problem is not with his looks. He appears older but still fit and handsome. He reads his lines and does his character well enough; his character is bitter and angry and cynical. But something very important is missing. The character is in no way likable. He is without humor, and, except for anger, without any juice, without any elan, without any positive emotion. We don't sympathize with him. We don't care if he repents.

Flynn looks unattractive because he plays an unattractive character. The movie has only a modicum of entertainment value primarily for this same reason.

Flynn plays an unscrupulous sleaze-bag for most of the film, and it fits him like a glove. Sheridan is plucky but not quite as beautiful as I'm used to seeing her. Flynn is out after the married Sheridan with a leer in his eye, but there's not a lot of sexual tension once he's got his hands on her. Large-scale battle and mob scenes show off the large budget. Better than usual score from Max Steiner. A nice A-production from Warner Brothers that you probably haven't seen, but not much more than that.