ManiakJiggy This is How Movies Should Be Made

WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

James Hitchcock Len Merrick, a US marshal, and his two deputies rescue an elderly farmer named Timothy Keith from a lynch mob. Keith is something of a disreputable character and freely admits to being a cattle rustler, but the leader of the mob, a local rancher named Ned Roden, indignantly denies that he would seek to take a man's life for a few head of cattle. He believes that Keith is guilty of a much more serious crime, the murder of Roden's son Ed who has been found shot in the back. In view of the seriousness of the allegation against Keith, Merrick agrees to take him to Santa Loma to stand trial, but this does not satisfy Roden who wants to kill Keith with his own hands, not leave the task to the public hangman. The rest of the film tells the story of the journey to Santa Loma and of Keith's trial. Merrick and his deputies are pursued across the desert by Roden and his gang who are determined to administer their own brand of justice and who would have no compunction about killing Merrick in order to do so. Keith himself does not make the task any easier. Although he claims that he is innocent of the murder charge, he clearly does not believe that he can expect a fair trial in Santa Loma because he is continually trying either to escape or to persuade Merrick to set him free. He clearly does not realise that it is only the presence of the three lawmen which protects him from Roden's rough justice. Further complicating factors are the fact that Merrick is forced to take Roden's other son, Dan, as a hostage and the presence on the journey of Keith's beautiful daughter Ann. Merrick and Ann fall in love, but their romance is a difficult one because she believes passionately in her father's innocence whereas Merrick believes him to be guilty. This was Kirk Douglas's first Western. Although he was to make many films in this genre during his long career, few of the ones which I have seen really rank among his greatest, apart from the modern-day "Lonely Are the Brave" and, possibly, "Gunfight at the OK Corral". "Along the Great Divide" does not really qualify as a great film either. The plot is a complex one, and at times too much so for its own good. The whole romantic subplot between Merrick and Ann is one of the complications which could easily have been omitted, but the producers evidently wanted to see a pretty girl in what would otherwise have been an all-male film, and in the early fifties few young actresses were prettier than Virginia Mayo. Walter Brennan seemed to specialise in playing irritating old men, and here he makes Keith the sort of irritating old man that audiences would quite happily have seen hanged, if not for murder or for cattle-rustling then for being a general pain in the ass. This may not be a great film, but Douglas himself certainly gives an excellent performance. The film is a "psychological Western", one of a type which was becoming popular in the early fifties; in the next few years James Stewart was to make some great films of this type with director Anthony Mann such as "The Naked Spur" and "The Man from Laramie". Merrick is not a straightforward hero but a difficult, conflicted individual, torn by guilt following an incident in his past. His relationship with Keith is not eased by the fact that the old man reminds him of his father, with whom he also had a difficult relationship. His determination to save Keith from the lynch mob, even though he believes him to be guilty, is only partly due to a belief that any man, even an accused murderer, deserves the due process of law. It can also be seen as an attempt to confront his feelings of guilt and to make amends for the incident which gave rise to them. Douglas's performance gives the film a greater psychological and moral complexity than it might otherwise have had and lifts the film above the level of some of his more run-of-the-mill Westerns like "The Big Trees" or "The Indian Fighter". 7/10

Richie-67-485852 Ah yes...the classic Western which when done right lives in the hearts of every Western lover. This one has it all. Cowboys, the law, a love story, outdoors, cattle and frontier justice. What we tend to forget but are reminded thanks to Westerns like these that it was no cake walk back then and life was not given to anyone on a platter. You had to work hard and long and even then who knows what can or would happen living out-there in the wilderness and on the edge of civilization. Kirk was made for Westerns as we find out in future movies as he went on to star in some pretty nice stuff. Walter Brennan is a guaranteed good time as the man captured every role he ever played no matter where you put him. Add some horses, some other familiar faces and we are being entertained no problem. Imagine going to see this for the first time in the big theater. Its a slow-popcorn eating movie with a tasty drink all the way to the end with some chair-gripping scenes along the way complimenting the title Along The Great Divide. Mount-up on this one and lets all head back to the ranch fore supper time. Enjoy pards

Spikeopath Along the Great Divide is directed by Raoul Walsh and written by Walter Doniger and Lewis Meltzer. It stars Kirk Douglas, Virginia Mayo, John Agar, Walter Brennan, Ray Teal, James Anderson and Morris Ankrum. Music is by David Buttolph and cinematography by Sidney Hickox.U.S. Marshall Len Merrick (Douglas) and two deputies rescue suspected murderer Tim Keith (Brennan) from a lynch mob led by a local cattle baron who is convinced that Keith killed his son. The lawmen embark on a hazardous journey across the rugged terrains, determined to get Keith to Santa Loma for a fair trial...Kirk Douglas' first Western is something of an undervalued treat. It was a film he didn't enjoy making, where working out in the desert with Raoul Walsh proved something of a cross to bear. Yet the director got a very good turn out of Douglas, allowing the actor to put down a marker in the genre that would serve him well throughout his career.It sits very much in the psychological Western realm, a fact that some critics of the time failed to grasp - since complaints about not being a standard Oater were floated about! It really shouldn't have surprised anyone given that Douglas had already made a handful of superb film noir pictures, he was surely cast for this pic on the strength of his noir characters.There's big father issues abound in the whole film, the various strands keeping the narrative edgy. Merrick is a damaged man, and his companions that make up the group will all test his metal to the max. Not just for father issues, and a lack of water, but also via the presence of Keith's daughter, Ann (Mayo), who mercifully isn't just a token female dressage character (she's feisty with believable emotional outpourings). It's a fraught journey for many reasons and Walsh, notwithstanding cheesing Douglas off, keeps it deftly wound tight.The surroundings offer more troublesome discord to envelope the characters. Shot in gorgeous black and white by Hickox, the Alabama Hills and Mojave Desert locales provide barren landscapes that are juxtaposed with threatening looking rock formations. This often at times feels like an Anthony Mann/James Stewart landscape, which is high praise indeed. While the cast can't be faulted as they bring the drama to life, benefiting from the fine research of writers Doniger and Meltzer.Undeniably the film's major drawback is the lack of whodunit worth. The pic unfortunately plays its hand far too early in this respect, meaning we know who the killer is. This could have lessened the excitement at story end, damagingly so, but we are never sure if we are going to be party to an Ox-Bow Incident or otherwise. This is well worth seeking out for fans of psychological Westerns, the many Oedipal themes and the scorching landscapes ensure it's a tasty little number. 8/10

gue_gg_ila It is a quite dated film, but that is not exactly it's problem! It is far from the best film ever. Quite out off reality. Terrible script, which lead to bad performances. Kirk Douglas manages to look credible, but the rest of the cast doesn't achieve what this great actor could in this film. This film proves that bad movies have been made since way before the 90s! Although it has good things, it is dated in almost every way, and it is full of too many flaws! Also, the film is quite predictable, but it has a good scenery and fails to deliver emotion. They make the character of Virginia Mayo very annoying too, and she fails as an actress!TERRIBLE! That forces me to give the film a 5/10, but because Kirk tried to make it better, I would actually rank it with a lower grade!