Sitting Bull (1954) User Reviews (26)

Heroic confrontation between Sioux chief and US cavalry , including battle of Little Big Horn

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 15 January 2007]

The picture concerns Sitting Bull (J. Carrol Naish) , celebrated chief and mystic of the Hunkpapa Sioux and Major Robert Parrish (Dale Robertson) . Parrish clashes Colonel Custer (Douglas Kennedy) and his superiors . He's degraded and sent an Indian reservation where the starving natives are mistreated and suffering extreme famine . Meanwhile , being developed a loving triangle between his girlfriend (Mary Murphy) and a war journalist (William Hooper) . Later on , he is appointed by President Ulysses S. Grant (John Hamilton) to achieve a peace treatise with Sitting Bull to attempt to prevent the bloodshed and he then fights a dangerous duel against Crazy Horse (Iron Heyes Cody) . Parrish helps Indians and is accused as a traitor , being court-martialed for "collaborating" with the enemy . Chief Sitting Bull of the Sioux tribe is forced by the Indian-hating General Custer to react with violence , resulting in the known Last Stand at Little Bighorn .

This exciting movie contains western action , romance , shoot-outs and spectacular battles . The yarn was shot outside of Mexico City and in the Churubusco Azteca studios . Washed-out print , the film needs urgently a perfect remastering . It appears as a technical adviser and designer Indian costumes , a secondary actor named Iron Eyes Cody , usual player as Indian roles (Great Sioux Massacre , A man called Horse) , though with Sicilian origin . The motion picture was regularly directed by Sidney Salkow .

The film is a fiction , but partially based on real events . The reality happened in December 1873 when the Commissioner of Indian Affairs directed all Sioux bands to enter reservations by the end of January 1876 or be declared hostile . Many bands of Sioux did not meet this deadline and were attacked by US troops . Crazy Horse and his Oglala people moved north to join forces with Sitting Bull , by the spring of 1876 some 3000 Teton Sioux and Northern Cheyenne warriors had assembled at Sitting Bull's camp in the valley of the Little Big Horn in Montana. On 25 June 1876 Crazy Horse and other war chiefs led the allied warriors against General Custer and his seventh Cavalry , Custer and all the man under his direct command were killed . This victory , however , brought relentless retaliation from the army and Sioux were scattered . Sitting Bull and his followers fled to Canada and stayed there until July 1881 , when he returned to the US and surrendered at Fort Buford , Montana . After he was placed on a South Dakota reservation . For a year Sitting Bull went a tour with Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show . He continued to regard himself as chief of his people and he earned the enmity of an Indian agent . On 25 December 1890 , Indian policemen went to take the chief , his followers tried to prevent this and in the struggle he was shot dead .

"When the white man win a battle they call it Victory. When the Indians win they call it Massacre".

[richardchatten · 6/10 · 19 January 2022]

The white men spend more time fighting each other than the Indians until eventually they arrive at Little Big Horn in this rather static and talky western in which J. Carrol Naish brings gravitas to the title role and Douglas Kennedy's briefly-seen Custer isn't the usual flamboyant caricature.

Prone Bull

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 20 February 2009]

No western hero who was in the military ever took more on himself than did Dale Robertson in Sitting Bull. Not even Errol Flynn who buried Confederate gold in violation of orders in Virginia City got himself in as much trouble as did Major than Captain Robertson did here.

This B film from MGM is yet another version of the events of surrounding the Little Big Horn battle where Douglas Kennedy as Custer got himself surrounded and massacred by some angry Sioux Indians. This version does show the Indian side of the events, how badly treated they were on reservations, how the whites once word of gold being discovered in their sacred Black Hills of Dakota territory systematically broke the treaties signed. Yet in fact the film went a bit overboard with presenting the Indian side and took great liberty with the facts.

Dale Robertson's an army major who zealously follows his orders about respecting the Indian rights, to the dismay of former General now Colonel George Armstrong Custer. Robertson's maverick tendencies wouldn't be liked in the army in any event, but his fiancé Mary Murphy who is General John Litel's daughter wants an upwardly mobile career man and Robertson doesn't look like a good bet. For standing on his beliefs Robertson loses her to newspaper reporter William Hopper.

But Dale gets himself in an even bigger jackpot. He's got an agreement with his former commander Ulysses S. Grant who is now president of the United States, the big chief of all the white folks. But when Custer moves prematurely and gets massacred and troops are sent on reprisal, Robertson does a very daring and potentially foolish thing to keep the peace process alive. That's the essence of our story.

Which of course never did happen. Neither did Ulysses S. Grant as played by John Hamilton on hiatus from the Superman series ever come west to negotiate with J. Carrol Naish as Sitting Bull. That's the biggest flaw in this film.

Murphy's character doesn't ring true either. From a woman who makes no bones about her desire for an upwardly mobile man, she does an about face and would make Tammy Wynette proud if Tammy had in fact ever seen Sitting Bull.

The film's heart is the in the right place, but the rest of it is out to lunch.

Though I will say one thing. If what I read is true about Mary Murphy's bout with Montezuma's revenge on location for this movie, she may have given one of the great performances of all time just getting through this film without a hint on screen.

Interesting "Custer's Last Stand" Film!

[bsmith5552 · 6/10 · 1 January 2005]

"Sitting Bull" as one might expect, takes place at the time of the infamous and oft filmed "Custer's Last Stand".

The story involves the efforts of the fictional Major Bob Parrish (Dale Robertson) and Sioux Chief Sitting Bull (J. Carroll Naish) to prevent a war between the Sioux nations and the U.S. Cavalry. On one side, Sitting Bull's chiefs led by Crazy Horse (Iron Eyes Cody) and Colonel Custer (Douglas Kennedy) on the other push their superiors into war.

The requisite love triangle involves Parrish, the General's daughter Kathy (Mary Murphy) and newspaperman Wentworth (william Hopper). Kathy turns away from Parrish when he is charged with insubordination and reduced in rank to Captain. She then becomes engaged to Wentworth.

Parrish meanwhile with the assistance of former black slave "Sam" (Joel Flueller)arranges a meeting between President U.S. Grant (John Hamilton) and Sitting Bull. However, before the meeting can take place several incidents occur and war breaks out culminating with Custer's last stand at the Little Big Horn.

J. Carroll Naish lends dignity to his portrayal of Sitting Bull. We see him as an intelligent caring and cautious leader who will stoop to war only as a last resort. In a move unusual for its time black actor Joel Flueller was cast in one of the leading roles in the film.

The battle scenes are spectacular and well staged by director Sidney Salkow. In spite of the contrived Hollywood ending, this western is a lot better than some would have you believe.

Last feature of W. R. Frank

[ckjarrett · 22 January 2006]

TCM played this last night. It's cheap and shallow Saturday matinée stuff as the other comments suggest. I noticed two things: the day-for-night shots look good but the director(s) rarely used closeups. Most of the shots are long or waist shots, or two shots.This was an early CinemaScope production and perhaps they were limited by the lenses they had (the lenses were not plentiful at this time, especially to non- Fox producers). "Sitting Bull" was the first independent production to be shot in CinemaScope. This was W. R. Frank's last feature film production; he was a Minneapolis, MN theatre owner. The world premiere was held August 19, 1954 in Sioux Falls, SD. What did the Sioux Falls cinema-goers think of this picture being shot in Mexico?! It opened October 7, 1954 at the State Theatre in Minneapolis and Paramount in St. Paul. Both of the cities' film critics, Will Jones and Bill Diehl, hated the film. Comment cards were handed out at both theatres. A trade magazine item in April 1953 said that Frank had set May 20 as the production's start date, but decided to put it off until July when CinemaScope equipment was available. As early as 1950 actors such as Victor Jory were announced as being signed for this production. Later, names such as Boris Karloff and Dennis Morgan were mentioned in the trade press.

Not nearly as bad as it might have been

[MOscarbradley · 6/10 · 20 December 2018]

The critic Dilys Powell once said there were no bad westerns; there were great westerns, there were good westerns and there were westerns and I suppose you could say Sidney Salkow's film "Sitting Bull" falls into the last category. As you might guess from the title it culminates in the Battle of Little Bighorn which, given that this is fundamentally a B-Movie western, is actually quite spectacularly handled while the movie itself falls into that small group of films to offer a sympathetic view of the plight of the Native American.

J. Carrol Naish is Sitting Bull and Dale Robertson, the cavalry man who's on the side of the Indians. Its view of history may be a little off the wall but it's a perfectly accessible 'Cowboys & Indians' picture which makes you wish it were better written and acted; the on-again-off-again love affair between Robertson and Mary Murphy is frankly embarrassing. Not a great western, then and maybe not even a good western but as Dilys might say, not a bad one either.

"Silly Bull"

[aimless-46 · 1/10 · 23 July 2007]

Rebecca: "This is so bad it's almost good".

Enid: "This is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again".

You could make a pretty good case that this silly little 1954 movie represents the bottoming out of Hollywood. There had been and would be worse movies, super-cheap independent productions and exploitation films by second tier studios, but it is unlikely that a top studio like United Artists has ever been associated with something quite this God-awful.

"Sitting Bull" was intended as a historical epic (or at least a modest budget example of one), another in a fast growing line of movies dealing with the Battle of Little Big Horn or Custer's Last Stand. What is amazing about Hollywood is their continued unwillingness to tell the straight story about the engagement, as the true events of this military action have generated a sustained interest for over 130 years. Like the James gang's raid on Northfield, Minnesota, the true story is far more interesting that any of the embellished movie versions. If Hollywood is going to distort the events then they should change the names and call it by its correct name, fiction.

I've seen most of these Hollywood efforts and "Sitting Bull" is pretty much in a class by itself in the distortion department. Curiously, it appears that a fair amount of historical research went into the production as recognizable names are bandied about throughout the movie but rarely are they linked to the individual's real actions. A relatively obscure officer like Miles Keogh, who was killed with Custer, is a character in the film but his rank is incorrect and he not present at the climatic battle.

Earlier comments point out the most absurd of the movie's inaccuracies and distortions. It is certainly sympathetic to the Indians as Hollywood was actually remarkably quick to adopt this attitude. But even here there are distortions as the film specifically shows the Chief ordering that brave dead troopers not be desecrated. In fact the Indians stripped the bodies and went into mutilation frenzy at the conclusion of the fighting.

Dramatically the film is flat with Dale Robertson wooden as the lead actor (too bad they didn't use Cliff Robertson instead). Mary Murphy ("The Wild Ones") is his love interest and Douglas Kennedy is Custer.

Indian sympathizer Major Bob Parrish (Robertson) sacrifices his Army career and his romance because of his Indian sympathies. He stands in the way of greedy prospectors who want the Indian Territory opened up so they can search for gold. This was actually to some degree Custer's position, but in the film Custer is portrayed as a rabid Indian hater. Custer was a rash glory-seeking cavalry officer, he attacked rather than wait for reinforcements because did not want to share the glory of a victory with Crook and Terry. While no friend of the plains Indian, he was at worst indifferent to them. His main fault lay in underestimating their will and ability to resist his relatively small command.

Murphy's relationship with Robertson is unintentionally hilarious and devoid of basic logic. So if you are forced to watch this thing, you can at least look forward to their scenes for some much needed (if unintentional) comic relief.

"Sitting Bull" doesn't limit its social conscience factor to the red man, Parrish finds time to free a runaway black slave Sam (Joel Fluellen) from prison. It turns out that Sam has lived with the Sioux and he takes Parrish to their camp for a peace conference. The mad dog Custer messes up his efforts by disobeying President Grant and attacking the Indians at Little Big Horn. Of course nothing like this actually happened. Nor did Custer find himself standing up in the middle of a flat piece of prairie as the Indians rode around and around his command like it was a wagon train in an early Hollywood western. How do you say pathetic in Sioux?

Than again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Great cast and score, lousy script

[morrisonhimself · 6/10 · 12 December 2010]

Seeing "Sitting Bull" somewhat by accident on a "retro" TV channel, I sat through the whole thing, partly in dumbfounded amazement at another Hollywood butchering of history, partly in awe of a superlative cast trying really hard with such a poor script.

During the movie, I was also struck by the lush score. Naturally, the TV network didn't have the decency to show all the credits, but to my ear it sounded like the outstanding work of Raoul Kraushaar -- and praise all the gods of technology for IMDb, I was right.

In my opinion, he is a terribly under-rated composer. Even the cheapest Allied Artists movies attain the ranks of quality when he wrote the score.

J. Carroll Naish as the title character is another under-rated actor. That is, he does not seem to be known among viewers although apparently he was never out of work. He almost always played some accented character, some Latin or European or, as in this case, "Indian" character. And he was almost always extremely believable.

The rest of the cast, from the excellent Dale Robertson to the excellent John Hamilton, were almost uniformly perfect.

A great period piece... for how Hollywood made 'em back then

[acg_imdb · 3/10 · 20 January 2006]

Okay, I admit it, we haven't finished it yet; we're somewhere into the second hour. It was packaged as the back half of a dollar-store DVD with "Custer" on the other side, so we bought it on a whim to see how badly you could repackage an old (probably public-domain) film in modern technology.

The answer is: pretty badly. Watching this film is a challenge to determine which part is the filmmakers' fault (e.g. wooden acting; stilted dialogue) and which part is the result of an aging film that no one can be bothered to handle properly (e.g. a badly discolored old print; a truly horrendous pan-and-scan job of what was once an interesting-looking widescreen film).

Of special note is the maddeningly constant, wall-to-wall musical background: cheesy weeping strings and such, non-stop, as if the filmmakers were terrified of having actual silence in the background once in a while. On the other hand, this _is_ how they liked to make films back then, so if you look at it as a period piece -- no, not as an example of life in the west, but as an example of what Hollywood churned out in the early '50s: the lighting, the acting, the hairstyles, etc. -- then it's actually interesting to watch... for a while, anyway.

Sluggish account of the Little Big Horn disaster...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 9 June 2008]

SITTING BULL is a sluggish western about a cavalry major (DALE ROBERTSON) who is compassionate toward the Indians and must face insubordination for some of his actions against harsh superior officers.

There's a traditional romance thrown into the mix, between a General's daughter (MARY MURPHY) and Robertson, with rival suitor WILLIAM HOPPER as another man interested in Murphy. J. CARROL NAISH is Chief Sitting Bull, who wants peace and refuses to put on his war paint although some members of his tribe are anxious to fight some of the white men's injustices. DOUGLAS KENNEDY is flamboyant and seriously miscast as the yellow-haired General Custer of the 7th Cavalry.

It's handsomely produced in outdoor settings that look authentic, but the stilted dialog is handled indifferently by a lackluster cast of players. DALE ROBERTSON gives a leaden performance in the major role and he doesn't get much help from WILLIAM HOPPER or MARY MURPHY, who in real life, married Robertson after this film. Their chemistry on film fails to register and her motivations throughout are sketchy, to say the least.

A major plot development has President Grant helping Robertson when he is condemned for helping Chief Sitting Bull and there are a few other subplots before we get to the battle at Little Big Horn. Robertson's compassion for the redskins almost lands him in big trouble toward the end, until Chief Sitting Bull intercedes just before he's about to be executed for treason by a firing squad.

Good western should have been much better but is marred by dull performances and uninspired direction of Sidney Salkow. The director unwisely allowed few close-ups of his cast throughout the film, depending solely on medium shots for most of the scenes, probably because he was new at the CinemaScope process. Since most of the cast underacts considerably, this is a real drawback in the more intimate moments.

What a load of Bull . . .

[frankfob · 4/10 · 4 May 2002]

Cheap, stupid, maddeningly idiotic western supposedly about Sitting Bull and the Battle of the Little Big Horn. Everything about this movie is tenth-rate--the acting is terrible, the script is absolute horsecrap with not even a PRETENSE of historical accuracy, the photography is awful, at times the camera actually shakes . . . you name it, this movie sucks at it. One of the most glaring examples of its almost complete incompetence is in the battle scenes. They'e stiff, mechanical and wretchedly directed; it looks like the actors playing the soldiers and Indians got tired of standing around waiting for someone to tell them what to do and went ahead and did it themselves. Even more irritating is the fact that the same battle scenes are replayed every 30 seconds or so, apparently in hopes that no one would notice that there wasn't enough footage shot to show a complete battle scene. The movie was filmed in Mexico (another stupid mistake by the filmmakers; the hilly, boulder-strewn, semi-desert Mexican terrain is nothing whatsoever like the rolling prairie country that was the actual locale of the battle) by American director Sidney Salkow and Mexican director Rene Cardona. Separately they were, at best, mediocre directors; together they merged into a really lousy one.

All in all, this is a complete botch job at every conceivable level. Don't bother wasting your time on it.

Much better than its current rating of 5.7!

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 3 June 2019]

"Sitting Bull" is a film that shocked me. For a biopic/western, it's actually much closer to fact than I would have suspected. It also is much more sympathetic towards the Sioux nation than many westerns....and is well worth your time.

The story revolves around an officer who has been demoted. Bob Parrish (Dale Robertson) is not your typical cavalry officer, as he thinks that the American government should respect and treat the natives much better than they do. As he put it, 'they just want to live and raise their families'. But folks like General Custer and the rest give him a lot of guff and they seem to follow the old axiom, 'the only good Indian is a dead Indian'. What's to become of him and his mission to work WITH the natives instead of AGAINST them?

It is ironic that not only did Iron Eyes Cody appear in the film as Crazy Horse, but he was the consultant to the production about native culture. Only later in life did folks learn that Cody (the most American Indian looking guy on the planet) was actually an Italian!! But you can't blame the film....at the time everyone thought Cody was exactly what and who he pretended to be! But he and the filmmakers STILL got so much right in this one...and the movie holds up far better than most from the genre*. Well worth seeing and an excellent picture in so many ways.

*For the worst possible depiction of this same story, try "They Died With Their Boots On". While the cast was incredibly impressive (with Errol Flynn and Olivia de Havilland), the facts are pretty much tossed out the window and Custer is depicted as a great man...not the incompetent he actually was.

FICTION?...FACT: A ROUSING EARLY CINEMASCOPE COLOR...B-EPIC

[LeonLouisRicci · 7/10 · 7 August 2021]

Historians Love to Quibble and Nit-Pick with Hollywood's Treatment of "Real History".

But the "Bottom-Line" is that Most Movies are Made as Entertainment with a Profit Motive.

So Historical "Facts" Aside, as an Entertaining Piece of an Early Cinemascope Film (the first Independent) In the First-Half of the "Decade of the Western",

You Could Do Much Worse than this Nobly Intended Movie about the Sioux Chief "Sitting Bull",

His Constant Battles with "Forked-Tongue" Treaties and the General Inhumane Treatment of Prisoners,

Leading Up to the "Battle of Little Big-Horn" and Custer's Last Stand.

Playing Fast and Loose with some "Facts" is a Consideration to Make the Movie Box-Office Friendly.

But the Film Deserves Credit for Bucking the Trend of "White-Man Wins Called Victory...Indian Wins Called a Massacre" and Taking a Liberal Other-Sided Approach.

In the End it is Not Guilty of Over-Indulging the Re-Writing of History and Shows Respectable Behavior on Both Sides.

The Casting is Weak but the Story and the Epic Battles are Well Staged, Engaging, and Somewhat Informative.

All Things Considered...A Fine Film and Definitely...

Worth a Watch.

TMC blew it on this one

[hzox221 · 1/10 · 23 January 2006]

They said that this was one of the most factual accounts of the Battle of Little BigHorn.

The movie was crap.

It had Iron Eyes Cody as the Indian adviser. He is and Italian Actor that pretended that he was an Indian. The portrayal of the Sioux was comical. I half expected that Mel Brooks would make a cameo as an Indian Chief. Everything about the Indians was wrong. A two year old could have made better props. There have been much better and more factual depictions of this event.

In short if this comes on find something else to watch!

Its Heart is in the Right Place, if not the History!

[spookyrat1 · 6/10 · 22 June 2020]

Rather than a biopic of Sitting Bull, the famed Hunkpapa Lakota leader who led his people during years of resistance against United States government policies, this is a heavily fictionalised story of events leading up to and including The Battle at Little Big Horn. The story is told through the eyes of an undoubtedly fictitious cavalry officer Major Robert Parrish, who according to the movie's storyline, also had a secret Presidential assignment to set up a peace treaty with Sitting Bull.

Even told through a white man's eyes, the film doesn't hold back in depicting the native Americans, as being continually stiffed, if not by greedy prospectors deliberately trespassing on to their land, then also by the military who frequently turned a blind eye to these sort of injustices, while coming down hard on any transgressions by the Indians. Despite Parrish's best efforts, events play out as we know they will resulting in Custer's Last Stand.

Sitting Bull was one of the first Westerns made in CinemaScope and it has to be noted that the battle itself and the preliminaries leading up to it, are quite spectacular for what really amounts to a "B" grade oater, with a slightly larger budget than normal, but boasting a strictly "B" grade cast. Filmed in Mexico, the elongated line-ups of horses and riders from both sides is visually very impressive. The conclusion to the piece with Sitting Bull's intervention into goings on at the fort, whilst completely fictitious, is emotionally uplifting, whilst again shining a very positive spotlight on the Native Americans, who it has to be said were frequently being portrayed by Mexicans and white Americans.

What throws a damper on much of the proceedings is just about any thing to do with the faintly ridiculous, on again, off again, romantic sub-plot between Parrish and Mary Murphy's general's daughter Kathy. Quite honestly, the less said the better. Just turgid melodrama! Director/co-writer Sidney Salkow should have concentrated on what the movie did best. Focus on the dramatic, historic content of the story, which fictional or otherwise was interesting and engaging, as many tales of The Big Horn are.

"Sitting" is the right word!

[JohnHowardReid · 7/10 · 22 October 2013]

Back in 2003, when CinemaScope celebrated its fortieth anniversary, some of the films chosen to mark this occasion were rather odd. Few people would argue with River of No Return but where was King of the Khyber Rifles or Drum Beat or Moonfleet or Sitting Bull? Films which really utilized the full width of the screen for dramatic effect. Producer W.R. Frank's aim was obviously to make a spectacle that took the fullest advantage of CinemaScope's wild, wide spaces. And in this aim, he has surprisingly but admirably succeeded. You wouldn't think there'd be much left to re-ignite the excitement of Custer's stand at the Little Big Horn after so many other screen treatments, but producer Frank has spent so much money on this version, critical faculties are swamped by the sheer weight of manpower. Not since Griffith's Birth of a Nation have we seen battles so spectacularly staged in natural terrain. It's odd that the scope of the anamorphic screen to re-present such encounters was rarely exploited. Admittedly, all the money has been lavished on the last couple of reels, but what's wrong with an unforgettable climax? Aside from the staging of the action however, production credits are pretty mundane and conventional. The producer has not spared us a title song for both front and end credits (in fact the music score throughout is delightfully pedestrian), the photography (due to the early CinemaScope lens) is rather grainy, and the cast hardly aspires to the top drawer. Dale Robertson is as stolid as usual, Mary Murphy is given few opportunities to transcend her conventional role, whilst J. Carrol Naish, repeating his characterization from Annie Get Your Gun, makes a boring, half-hearted Sitting Bull. Fortunately, the support lineup includes old favorites like John Litel and Tom Brown Henry (as a briefly effective villain). In addition to the distracting grain, the lighting in the CinemaScope print tends to be rather dark. Obvious day for night photography is also no help. Nor is the noticeable difference in the lighting between the main and second unit. (Fortunately, none of these defects are apparent in the pan-and-scan TV print utilized on DVD by Platinum Disc). And whilst the action is great stuff, as stated above, I didn't like the use of such obvious stuntmen in the fight between Robertson and Cody.

"Go, make your war."

[classicsoncall · 4/10 · 12 November 2005]

Right out of the gate, it probably would have been best if this film came with a warning to sit back and view it as the work of fiction that it is, rather than try to figure out which elements may or may not have been historically accurate. As it is, I'm ready to dismiss it entirely as a contrived piece of movie making that has little to recommend it.

Of the figures presented, Chief Sitting Bull probably acquits himself most favorably, portrayed by veteran J. Carroll Naish. He's generally characterized as preferring peace, though from a pragmatic point of view, knowing that the next great war against the white man will probably wipe out his people, the seven great nations of the Sioux. His warrior chief Crazy Horse (Iron Eyes Cody) on the other hand, chomps at the bit to don the war paint and go on a tear. When a proposed meeting between Sitting Bull and President Grant (John Hamilton) fails to materialize, events converge to play out in a scenario that we now know as the Battle of Little Big Horn, but again, with great liberty taken with the known facts. Yes, Yellow Hair Custer (Douglas Kennedy) dies in battle, but this time around at least two men survive to report back to General Howell, along with the film's top billed Dale Robertson, as Captain Robert Parrish. Parrish escapes a firing squad for treason after leading the Sioux to safety after Little Big Horn (huh?), thanks to the intercession of Sitting Bull (double huh?).

A lot of emphasis in the film is put on Sitting Bull's requirement that President Grant meet with him by the next full moon to consider a peace plan. As the time draws near, we see Sitting Bull on the final night looking skyward to the full moon with no word of the president. The very next moment he's walking in broad daylight to counsel with his war chiefs.

I got a kick out of the opening credits, mentioning Iron Eyes Cody as "Technical Adviser and Indian Costumes"; in brackets he's called a "Famous T.V. Star". Speaking of costumes, both Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse are routinely shown in full regalia and war bonnet, though my limited knowledge of Indian custom tells me that full head dress was limited to rare occasions, so chalk up another one to poetic license.

I guess it's fitting then that the movie humorously closes on what probably best describes it in a closing credit, though my copy may have been improperly cropped. There in big bold letters, it states "A Rank Product", distributed by United Artists - sadly, how true.

Sitting Bull review

[JoeytheBrit · 6/10 · 15 May 2020]

Events leading up to Colonel Custer's demise at the battle of Little Big Horn are saddled with a domestic sub-plot regarding cavalry officer Dale Robertson's troubled romance with Mary Murphy in this adequate but unremarkable Western from independent producer W. R. Frank. Unfortunately, the scale of the story is a little too grand for Frank's budget, although director Sidney Salkow stages the final battle scenes quite well. It's interesting to see how Hollywood's opinion of Custer, played here as a vainglorious blowhard by Douglas Kennedy, had changed so dramatically since he was deified in Raoul Walsh's They Died With Their Boots On just 13 years before.

Skip this one...Spoiler Warning

[hailebear2002 · 1/10 · 27 July 2006]

Unless you are a big fan of the Italian actor Iron Eyes Cody, this one doesn't have much to offer. The subplot with Dale Robertson being rejected by his fiancée because he is demoted was irritating, that he takes her back after her new fiancée is killed is puerile. The historical blunders are pretty well covered in other reviews. The battle scene was sad, the same Indian was shot off his horse many times. The final shot of Custer, lying there with an obvious box under his shirt to hold up the arrow, was laughable. When they decided to have Sitting Bull arrive at the fort to save Robertson from a firing squad, they drove the final cinematic nail in this film's coffin.

Even when they are right, they are wrong

[ingrasin · 4/10 · 8 July 2007]

I give them credit for trying to be politically correct. There intent was noble, portraying the Indian as a victim of the American Military and indeed American Policy. That being said, I must admit that the acting in general was terrible, the dialogue was stilted and the historical accuracy was missing. I often laughed at Hollowood's early attempts to portray Native Americans with actors who did not have an ounce of Indian blood in them. J. Carroll Nash, a truly fine actor was Irish and sounded like an Indian from Brooklyn. Mr. Cody, who claimed to be an Indian was only married to one. He was Italian.

It was difficult to be sympathetic to the lead character, Major Parrish only because the actor who portrayed him, Dale Robertson, was so bad. A for intent, F for execution.

Disappointingly Routine

[FightingWesterner · 5/10 · 17 October 2009]

As tensions between the Souix and the United States Army heat up, sympathetic Cavalry officer Dale Robertson asks and is sent to try to quell the anger of Chief Sitting Bull, who's son was recently murdered by a brutish bureaucrat.

Although this gets high marks for attempting to be even handed, this American-Mexican co-production is too long and too ordinary, with a silly fifties-style romantic subplot that gets in the way of the action and swells the running time.

The usually excellent character actor J. Carroll Naish is a pretty wooden Sitting Bull while Iron Eyes Cody fares much better as Crazy Horse.

For a film called Sitting Bull, it spends way too much time with the Cavalry and not enough time with the title subject. Despite the disappointing performance by Naish, his scenes with Cody are much more interesting than Robertson's.

The well staged battle at the Little Big Horn, reportedly the most faithful ever filmed, occurs way too late in the proceedings to help the picture and the ending is way to corny.

Good intent, maybe, horrible execution

[ghatbkk · 3/10 · 18 May 2021]

Made in 1954, this film does attempt to tell the story of the Black Hills from the point of view of the Sioux. It just does an absolutely terrible job of it. Simply telling the story historically accurately would have been a far better account, and that information was available in 1954 (at least enough of it).

The good parts?

The impact of corrupt Indian agents, and prospectors going into the Black Hills. Showing Sitting Bull in a positive light.

The bad parts?

Pretty much everything else - the entire role of the main protagonist, the portrayal of Custer (although it does get it right that he was a prima-donna and he disobeyed orders), the Court-Martial (as demonstrated with the Court Martial of Captain Reno), and the Battle of the Greasy Grass.

Spoiler?? Every MINUTE of this mess is a spoiler!

[donnieland · 1/10 · 10 December 2005]

The only thing worth watching is the opening credits. The film's downhill from there. Everybody in this film must have needed work really badly. The only 'Indian' in the movie is Iron Eyes Cody. Remember the TV commercial Iron Eyes did against polluting the environment, when, seeing a river full of trash, a tear rolls down his cheek? The guy must have been bawling his eyes out after being in this crap. J. Carrol Naish, an Irishman, plays Sitting Bull with a Yiddish accent. The faithful Indian scout is played by a black guy with a 'Rochester' accent. The dialog, the acting, is stiff as a board. Whoever told Cliff Robertson he could act should be made to watch this movie 10 times. If only I could tell you this movie is so bad it's good...... sorry..... So many great movies on nitrate film deteriorated and were destroyed, and THIS one has to survive??? I haven't seen this whole movie. I couldn't make it past the 30 minute mark.

Historically Inaccurate

[Uriah43 · 4/10 · 15 December 2021]

This film begins with some white prospectors crossing into Sioux territory illegally. Since this isn't the first time that something like this has happened, both "Sitting Bull" (J. Carrol Naish) and "Crazy Horse" (Iron Eyes Cody) decide to attack the column and seize the food and supplies being carried in some of the wagons. For their part, even though they are well armed, the prospectors retreat in great haste and in doing so leave their wagons so that the Sioux warriors can have them. It's during this time that the prospectors come upon a cavalry troop patrolling the general area and demand that the officer in charge of the squadron, "Major Robert Parrish" (Dale Robertson) attack the pillaging Indians. To their consternation, Major Parrish decides to head back to the nearby fort-not because he is afraid of battle but rather because he totally understands the Sioux point-of-view and has disdain for the illegal acts of the prospectors. Unfortunately, when he and the prospectors return to the fort, he is met with severe criticism from his superiors with "Colonel Custer" (Douglas Kennedy) being particularly upset with him. So much so that he has Major Parrish transferred to another assignment. If that wasn't bad enough, his fiancé, "Kathy Howell" (Mary Murphy) breaks off their engagement due to his inability to distinguish himself whenever an opportunity comes along. But what neither she nor Colonel Custer seem to understand, however, is that sometimes discretion is the better part of valor and that perhaps Major Parrish is correct in his assessment that an unnecessary war with the Sioux Nation is something that should be avoided at all costs. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that I didn't particularly care for this film in large part due to the historical inaccuracies and revisionism within the plot. Along with that, I found the portrayals of General Custer and "President Grant" (John Hamilton) to be rather shallow and one-dimensional as well. That being said, while I don't consider this to be a bad film necessarily, it deviated too radically from real events and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Slightly below average.

True "Bull"

[HoosierBob · 2/10 · 15 July 2019]

This film was made before the value f real Native Americans was considered in lead roles by Hollyweird.

Even "Iron Eyes Cody" was not a Native American...but was passed around as one for decades because he "looked the part"..

As for "history"...this film is fiction.