The Vanquished (1953) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Which side are you on?
jdcowtown30 September 2021
Wikipedia tells me B movie production champs Pine-Thomas known as "the Dollar Bills" committed to a rising production budget in the late 40s from 200-300k to 750k-1mil and it is evident in the oppulent costumes, quality props and plethora of extras in this well shot tense post bellum drama ably directed by seasoned old hand Ed Ludwig.

Bit of a Scarlet Pimpernel feel as Pine-Thomas stable hot property John Payne takes a beating as he outwits an excellently ruthless Lyle Bettger who is superb in this film as the wicked opportunist traitor of the South. Colleen Gray's indefatigably loyal Southern Belle is quite the contrast to Jan Sterling's terse white trash harlot who has risen way above her station.

More than a hint of apologist claptrap does not sway the story too far away from the commonplace post war corruption, coming to terms with era ending loss, retribution, reconciliation and the strength of the Union as the pathway foward narrative. A familiar theme in many of Payne and Ludwig's western projects such as the Restless Gun TV series.

Strong production values, vibrant Technicolor, solid story and good acting with a stellar performance from arguably the baddest baddie in the west Lyle Bettger in one of his greatest performances earn this time capsule an easy 6 stars.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
And when our rights are trampled
bkoganbing13 December 2012
As was pointed out by the only other reviewer of The Vanquished so far, this is one of a gazillion plots of post Civil War stories that take the southern point of view. This is a tradition going back to the Birth Of A Nation and up to and beyond Gone With The Wind. All three are based on historical novels. But the trend in that was also the usual historical interpretations of the times. That changed with the civil rights revolution.

John Payne is a local southern hero who while in Yankee prison received many letters from friends about the corrupt rule of local administrator Lyle Bettger. He returns home and goes to work for Bettger, but only to gather evidence of his corruption. Doing it that way makes him a lot of former friends in his town.

It was a big mistake to let us know from the beginning that Payne was undercover. Robbed the story of a great deal of suspense.

Bettger's part has some antecedents with Gone With The Wind in the peripheral character of Jonas Wilkerson. If you remember Wilkerson who was briefly and memorably played by Victory Jory was a slave overseer whom the O'Hara family kicked out and came back as a Yankee scalawag just like Bettger and just as vindictive and mean. Bettger, who played some of the best villains of the Fifties, has his character far more developed as it is more central to the plot.

The one who really makes this film have whatever life it does is Jan Sterling. She plays a white trash girl whom the genteel families of the area snubbed before Fort Sumter. Now she's making them pay big time. Coleen Gray is the girl who Payne left behind and fights for her man whom she never lost faith in.

The Vanquished is a competently made enough film, but hardly Gone With The Wind.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Reconstruction drama, with vindictive scalawag civil administrator
weezeralfalfa16 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
In complaining about the excesses of Reconstruction as relates to southern whites, the film totally ignores the main function of the continued military occupation of the South after the war: to enforce the civil rights of African Americans as formalized in the 14th, 15th,and 16th amendments. As long as the audience understands the importance of this omission, this film makes its valid point......The screen play starts right off introducing the prime villain: oily, vindictive scalawag Roger Hale(Lyle Bettger), civil administrator in his neck of the woods. We also meet his mistress: Rose Slater(Jan Sterling), from the wrong side of the tracks, as was Hale. We also meet Captain Kirby((Willard Porter): a Union officer in Hale's pay. They are all present for the hanging of a poor southerner: guilty of murdering Union soldier. His hysterical wife pleads that he was only defending his property. Hale remarks that there should be a couple of hangings each week, just to instill and maintain fear the administration. ......The 'hero', Rockwell Grayson(John Payne)appears only later, after released from a Union prison camp. While there, he received many letters from friends telling of the crooked and mean things Hale had done as administrator. Rockwell forwarded these letters to General Hildebrandt, who took them seriously. He later visited Hale to talk to him, and to Rockwell, who was then employed by Hale, in an undercover role. Hale knew his game was up when the General insisted on taking his books to the state auditor. Thus, he took an extreme measure to prevent this. He devised a plan to make it look like Rockwell killed the General, writing a note telling the General to come to Rockwell's hotel room that evening, signing it Rockwell. His plan worked, as Rockwell panicked, and fled out the window when he heard soldiers coming to investigate the noise of the shot. From then on, Rockwell was assumed to be the killer.......I consider Rose and Rockwell to be the most interesting characters, because they SEEMED the most ambivalent. Rose is ambivalent with respect to Hale and Rockwell, being Hale's mistress, yet increasingly flirting with Rockwell. When Rockwell was wounded by the posse, he headed for Rose's house, since he assumed the posse would soon check out the house of his girlfriend: Jane(Coleen Gray). While Rockwell was passed out from loss of blood, Rose took Hale's note from his pocket and hid it. Rockwell needed that note to compare with samples of his and Hale's writing. Jane, who never gave up hope that Rockwell was innocent, figured out that Rose must have taken the incriminating note. Thus, she rode to Rose's house and, in a dramatic gesture, threatened to stab her if she didn't hand over the note. She then fled to bring the note to the attention of authorities. Meanwhile, Hale's vigilantes raced to Rose's house to look for Rockwell, who had returned to her house. Rockwell ran up the stairs to escape via a back window. Hale ran up the stairs after him, and Rose shot Hale dead. Why did Rose do this? Probably, she saw that Hale's game was up, and decided to definitely switch her loyalty to Rockwell. Also, she had blackmailed Hale into signing a will giving her all his property and money when he died. Don't know if this would stand up in court, since the bequither was murdered by the beneficiary??.......In Rockwell's case, it only APPEARED that he was ambivalent regarding Hale, in order to better accomplish his goal of pinning illegalities on Hale. As things turned out, he wasn't actually the hero. Rather, the 2 women were, in saving and exposing the incriminating note, and in killing Hale ......With the reservation stated in the beginning, I found this an entertaining and valid story. See it at YouTube.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Only fair...and a lousy history lesson
planktonrules23 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Wow--yet another film with the same plot! I must have seen at least a coupe dozen westerns with the exact same plot at this one! This one is about the Reconstruction--a period during which the victorious Union (Northern) troops occupied the South and enforced martial law. The Northerners who came to the South for this were nicknamed 'Carpetbaggers' and Southerners who cooperated with them 'Scallawags'. This period lasted about a decade.

When the film begins, you learn that during Reconstruction, tons of evil Yankees and Scallawags (Southerners who helped the Yankees) took control of the South and exploited it horribly--creating injustice and sowing discord. There's only one problem with this theme--it really didn't happen that way! As a history teacher, I recognize that this WAS a very popular view of this period in history books written during the early and middle portion of the 20th century (which, incidentally, coincided with the resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan). The problem is that the books and films fail to mention one important thing--the treatment of blacks. In other words, the view in this period is that the real victims were white men--with no mention of the evils of slavery, the KKK or voter intimidation! Ain't this a bit one-sided?! The truth is that the Northern occupation did, at least temporarily, put a halt to these injustices. Once they left, then in many ways it was 'business as usual'--a far, far different view than you see in these films and books! So, at the outset, I was a bit annoyed at the incorrect history as well as the staleness of the plot. Oh, well...at least it wasn't Randolph Scott in this film, as he made quite a few films with Reconstruction plots.

The film begins by showing some atrocities being committed by the leaders of the occupation in one town. Now the film makers DID say that this was not typical of all of the Reconstruction--which is at least a plus.

In the following scene, John Payne is talking with some high muckity-mucks in Washington about the problems with Reconstruction in his home town. Though he has not been back to town since the war (after all, he was a prisoner of war being held in a Northern camp), he is sure that the letters from his townsfolk are true in asking relief from their new overlords. So, the well-intentioned folks in DC ask Payne to return and investigate the problem first-hand. But, to see what is REALLY going on, he pretends to be a dispirited man--a guy in complete sympathy with the Union cause and has contempt for his own people. This way, he can get friendly with the baddies--but in the process his old friends want to kill him! What will happen to our intrepid hero and the po' folks of this town? Tune in...or not.

Overall, this is a competent film but no more. Payne is fair in the lead but lacks charisma. The story, as I've already indicated, is pretty derivative. Is it worth watching...sure, whatever...
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Good grief
Jazguyz64 December 2023
The only reason to watch this film is to see the type of claptrap that 20th century audiences were being fed about post-Civil War Reconstruction. The film is set in a fictional Southern town in 1866 that is being run by a government appointed civil administrator supported by federal troops, and stars John Payne.

Anyone who paid even minimal attention during Social Studies class knows that federal troops were stationed in the South after the Civil War to see that former slaves were treated lawfully. And yet, slavery is never even mentioned or even hinted at in the film. (I forced myself to watch in order to be certain.) There are a number of Black actors, some with spoken lines, though none have screen credits which is not unusual for films of this era, and their characters all seem to be working at the same jobs (house servants, field hands, etc.) they had as slaves. Presumably these now ex-slaves were so happy with their "slave jobs" that they continued doing those jobs even after winning their freedom. Good grief.

What reason does the film offer for the presence of troops and federal officials in this Southern town? Apparently, the federal government is there only to enrich corrupt individual officials using unscrupulous tax schemes to screw over the poor Southern Whites who are portrayed as the real victims of the Civil War. Again, good grief.

If you're looking for a synopsis, there are plenty elsewhere, but I will offer this brief description that sets the tone for the entire film. In the opening scene, a Union soldier dismounts in front of a blacksmith's shop where the smith and a few customers are chatting, tacks up the announcement of a public hanging for the murder of a Union soldier, then wordlessly ladles a drink from the blacksmith's water barrel and scornfully tosses the remnants into the blacksmith's forge, dousing some of the flames before riding off. This cartoonish scene is meant to let the audience know immediately that the federal troops are the real "bad guys". Later, at the public hanging, the murderer is portrayed as the real "victim" who was only defending his homestead when he killed the dastardly federal soldier. Again, good grief.

The movie is an adaptation of an unpublished novel written by Karl Brown, a cinematographer and screenwriter whose first job as a seventeen year old was carrying and loading cameras on the set of the now infamous Birth of a Nation by D. W. Griffith. Apparently Mr. Brown learned early on what would sell in White America. So did the movie studios.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed