Drango

Its worth a watch because it is a decent Western with all the right mix except this one takes place right after the Civil War and shows you quite effectively the hatred the South had for the rest of the country. I found this depiction rather accurate right down to the prejudice, murders and realism as this really happened. Remember, people were so opposed to this war that they went to war to make their point. We got whiskey drinking, fighting, horses, love interest, lynchings, farms and a good look at things back then. The plot is a good one and it cost many people their life (in the move and out) to make the point of stopping what doesn't work and doing what does. Killing always starts with a reason and ends with a reason to stop as well. I had a hard time with the name of this movie i.e. "Drango". It makes no sense, doesn't capture a personality or point and leaves you with a sense of unfinished business even though it is the name of the main character. Obviously whoever named this movie wanted to get it over with or had an appointment elsewhere. Even when I accepted the name, hearing others say it took effort. It just doesn't have the Western flavor and in fact detracts. Pay close attention how people lived with the seasons as you needed a crop in one season to make it through the next one. Miss an opportunity and it can cost you your life and your farm in other words everything. Nice little portrait of an orphan family whose mom & dad were killed. They had shelter but lacked food and clothing. This is as real as it gets as well as the solution given. I like to eat during movie watching. This one is a sandwich or even some beef jerky with a tasty drink. Confederate or rebel, ride into this, dismount and sit a spell

DRANGO is a sturdy little western that has an interesting tale to tell but doesn't quite fulfill its potential as a saga about a town in Georgia that is still bristling with hostility over what the dirty Yanks have done to their burned out village. And what they have yet to learn is that Major Clint Drango (JEFF CHANDLER) had a large part in destroying and pillaging the town under orders from Sherman to do exactly that. Now he's involved in the town's reconstruction.

It's an interesting story, directed in crisp, no nonsense fashion with the major finding out just how hard his job is going to be the moment he sets foot in town with his helpmate Captain Marc Banning, played by JOHN LUPTON. He also has to contend with a woman (JOANNE DRU) who has her own reasons for despising him until she learns that he's a caring man who is only seeking justice in a town torn apart by hatred and fear.

The villain of the piece is Clay Allen (RONALD HOWARD), the man who opposes Drango every step of the way, leading an angry mob to hang Dru's father before his trial can even begin. Julie London is wasted in a colorless supporting role. Ronald Howard is the spitting image of his father, LESLIE HOWARD, only a bit finer in features--but he has the same walk, the same voice pattern and was, judging from this film, a very competent actor.

Overall, it's an unusual western with some slow spots but it's a western best appreciated by Civil War fans.

Drango is directed by Hall Bartlett and Jules Bricken and Bartlett writes the screenplay. It stars Jeff Chandler, Joanne Dru, Julie London, Donald Crisp and John Lupton. Music is by Elmer Berstein and cinematography by James Wong Howe.

In the months that followed the War between the States, the South lay in pitiable desolation. Within the people, a fire still smouldered. proud, unbowed, they watched with ominous foreboding as the hated Yankees again rode down upon their land ... this time as military governors.

Drango offers up two genuine delights for fans of Westerns and Civil War pieces. Firstly it further adds weight to the pro argument case for Jeff Chandler being under valued as an actor, secondly is that the theme of the reconstruction period at the end of the Civil War simply doesn't have enough cinematic ventures. Here in plot we have Chandler as Major Drango, sent into Kennesaw, Georgia, to help rebuild a town that as part of Sherman's March he helped destroy. He is up against it since nobody trusts him and certain factions want to continue the war.

Tone is magnificently set by Wong Howe's (Pursued/Hud) monochrome photography, visually sombre as it portents troubles ahead, this is at one with Major Drango's battle to not only win over the town, but also to exorcise his demons. The bitterness left over from the war is evident, strikingly born out by some scenes that stir the emotional heart, while the political machinations on offer are deftly played into the narrative. The two ladies of the piece are most important, each offering up a different side of the political divide, with both Dru and London competent in their acting turns. Action is played well enough in a film that has more to say in characterisations than blood stirring for sake's sake, all while the great Elmer Bernstein provides a score that tantalises the tonal flow of the narrative.

The whole thing is anchored by Chandler's strong performance, for even when he is not delivering potent dialogue from a thought provoking script, he exudes pained anguish via visual touches, believably so.

The absence of black characters has rightly been noted across the review spectrum, the area where the story is set and the period of reconstruction at the film's heart demands more insight there. And yes! it can be argued that there's a little bias in the writing. But this holds up as a most intriguing pic, it's well performed, with technical merit as well, whilst simultaneously reminding us all that the end of wars doesn't mean work isn't still to be done. 7/10

The director and writer of this movie, Hall Bartlett knew the far-west because he made a documentary fiction about a Navajo Indian who was brought up in a white school (Navajo 1952). You can see that this movie looks more real than other westerns. Jeff Chandler as Major Drango is an officer who understands this villagers and he has self-reproach because he sacked the village during the civil war. He did it by order but anyway he wants to make it good. The officer of the confederation, Captain Marc Banning (John Lupton) is full of lust for revenge and at the end there will be the confrontation with his own father -the past- and with Major Drango who claims a peaceful future for the people who lost the war. After each war people have to try to live together again but all wounds cannot be healed in some months. This movie is a serious attempt to show the psychological difficulties in the reconstruction of a nation after a civil war.

For a story set in Georgia in late 1865 the absence of any blacks in the town and surrounding rural areas is utterly absurd. The labor force the farmers would mobilize to replant would have included the freed slaves. They would certainly have been a source of support for the Union military government.

The movie perpetuates the cry-baby version of history that the state of Georgia has foisted on the consciousness of the nation. Sherman's armies did not ravage Georgia anywhere near as bad as they complain. They did NOT routinely burn down houses and churches and schools. They did destroy supplies that could help the military effort of the South. It was noted at the time that where Sherman marched through Georgia, hardly a house in any town was torched.

By contrast, when the same armies marched through South Carolina, hardly a house in any town was left standing. That was no accident. Sherman blamed South Carolina for the war and gave orders to his men to burn everything. When his armies crossed the border into North Carolina, his forces reverted to the milder policy they had observed in Georgia.

South Carolina was the only state of the Confederacy whose citizens did not supply at least one regiment for the Union army. In all the others there were Unionists who made their way north to enlist and fight for the United States.