MovieChat Forums > Devil's Doorway (1950) Discussion > Should it be remade? I think so

Should it be remade? I think so


I'm glad I saw this movie recently on TCM. However, I don't think it's the masterpiece that many are saying. I think it just suffers from being unique, such that a competent remake (I say competent because as you know most remakes are not competent) could produce a great film.

Certainly the technology of today would allow for much better visuals, in colorful widescreen. This is a story that calls out for that, and I'm disappointed we're left with black and white, and TV dimensions.

Also, the opportunity would be there to correct one mistake and cast an American Indian actor in the lead.

Last, I feel that the story's emotion didn't really come across. It was more of an intellectual lesson, and unfortunately lacking subtlety in places. There should have been more background on the ex-reservation folks who just happened to show up at the right time, and it would have been nice to see more about the Civil War, and the Congressional Medal of Honor. Actually, it could go even further back than that. The opportunity is there to make an epic film in three parts: Life at Sweet Meadows, Lance in the Civil War, and then the events in this film.

Wouldn't you see it?

reply

Certainly the technology of today would allow for much better visuals, in colorful widescreen.
Well, uh... I disagree. First of all, I don't really buy the notion that visuals are somehow better (or worse) now than they were 60 years ago. Some of the greatest visual stylists in all of film worked in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, etc. (see, for example, some of Murnau's films or some of the films of the German expressionists.)

John Alton was a great cinematographer, and very few westerns have surpassed this - "visually" speaking. 60 years later and it's still as cinematographically wonderful as the day it was made.

-

Though I think it might have been interesting as an epic covering a wider period of his life - that's not the film that was made, and I believe it works remarkably well as it is. I wouldn't mind seeing a modern film covering similar themes - but I don't think there's any need to remake this. Emotionally and visually, it's pretty much perfect as it is, in my opinion.

That is all to say, I respect your opinion - I just strongly disagree with it.

I do however agree that the casting of a white actor for the main part is a major blemish.

I suppose on a clear day you can see the class struggle from here

reply

I agree with you -- no need for remake. I detest the assumption these days that "art" is on a linear incline -- improving just because push-button technology has more bells and whistles. I don't agree about the race of the lead actor being a crucial point. Robert Taylor gives one of the best "readings" in his career here, I believe, as a Native American somewhat "white-ized" by his time in the army and having to convert back to home ways in civilian life.

How far do you go with "authenticity"? Given a fully authentic production, given that the pool of Shoshone film talent was likely to have been tiny just post-War -- wouldn't a "pure" Shoshone production be so much of a documentary that it would not have found a commercial-sized audience? At some point you have to just calm down and say "It's acting!" -- just depicting what's happening in the story with the best resources feasible. The feat that this film was in 1950 was a minor miracle, harking back to more miracles in "The Vanishing American" and others a generation before.

reply

Good Camera work included showing Sgt Major Poole in shadow.

Can you fly this plane?
Surely u cant be serious
I am serious,and dont call me Shirley

reply