Duel at Diablo (1966) User Reviews (61)

A fairly violent western, with touches of discrimination and prejudices working themselves into the story

[Mickey-2 · 8/10 · 26 June 2001]

"Duel at Diablo" filmed in 1966, has a cast of both American and international players and touches of violence coupled with prejudices. It makes for an interesting mix and provides the viewer with a tense depiction of the usual struggles of the Apaches against the US Cavalry. James Garner plays Jess Remsberg, an Indian scout now out looking for the man or men that raped and killed his Indian wife. Sidney Poitier adds an excellent portrayal of a former Army sergeant who has quit the job of soldering in exchange for breaking horses, and selling them to the Army. Bill Travers and Bibi Anderson provide the international flavor in the cast, and Dennis Weaver gives the viewer a chance both to detest him and feel some sorrow for his warped prejudices toward those he considers inferior or below his status.

The group of troopers heads out across the desert to another fort in the area, but are headed off by a group of Apaches that have jumped their reservation. Garner does find out the identity of the man who was responsible for the rape/killing of his Indian wife, but in order to extract his revenge, he must first make it to the canyon of Diablo and rescue the beseiged group of Army troopers from being killed by the Apaches.

Good, tense story, sweeping vistas of the Utah landscape, and two actors, Garner and Poitier, delivering masterful performances.

Unconventional Western

[smrgeog · 7/10 · 11 December 2004]

What makes this film interesting albeit unconventional are various themes that swirl beneath the main story line. Made at the time when the Civil Rights movement was in full swing, the film subtly touches on issues that were important during the 60s (e.g. racial tolerance, treatment of women and minorities). The film also has a brutal hard edge to it when it comes to the violence, death and the mayhem that takes throughout. The score gives a sense of desperation and inevitability which enhances its hard edge. Unlike many films of the genre, there is no clear cut protagonist or antagonist. The characters are realistic and more than mere two-dimensional cartoon characters for which the viewer could identify with. Overall, it is a thought provoking film that deserves a look in.

A Western Adventure Morality Play!

[floridawar · 7/10 · 30 July 2002]

I first saw this movie as a small child on television, and twenty-two years later I finally got the guts to rent it last week to revisit it, and to see why I was so interested in it then. I recalled the exciting cavalry charges etc. and I even remembered the opening refrain of the strange musical score. I really enjoyed this movie unlike most of my childhood favorites. While the movie itself is alot like a John Ford Cavalry opera, it plays out alot differently. This one has more in common with the modern action movie, I think, than with most B-westerns of the 1960's. The fast pace of the movie, unearthly fates of the dead, anti-heroism of the protagonist (James Garner), and well done scenes of horse-borne combat combine to create a Western-Adventure-Morality Play that I certainly recommend. There are multiple forces at play here. Among them the bizarre, scorched desert scenery, Garner's quest for revenge for his dead Indian wife while pining over the married woman disgraced by her captivity with the Apaches, The underlying loyalty of Poitier's former soldier character to his former comrades (despite his overtly self-serving statements) contrasted with the underlying self-promoting purposes of Bill Traver's role as military commander. Too, I see shades of this one in 1993's Geronimo by Walter Hill (burning vistas, Apaches hidden in the ground, Garner's Remsberg character in Duval's Al Seiber etc.) The musical score is off-beat for standard western fare, but who needs more drum beats, flutes, and rattles?! I think the score compliments the movie well, and is perhaps the best indicator that this production thinks outside of the box, even if it remains within it subjectively. This may not qualify as a classic, but I definitely think its a great action flick, and a breath of western fresh air with intriguing insights into race, warfare, culture, and the winning of the west.

An action-packed exciting western

[jhawk-2 · 7/10 · 21 May 1999]

James Garner is a good lead in this rousing Cavalry v. Indians western. There are very good battle scenes between between the outnumbered soldiers and the attacking Indians. The underlying issues of prejudice add an interesting touch to the movie as well with James Garner's character struggling with the death of his Indian wife and the Bibi Andersson character struggling with raising her baby fathered by an Indian brave.

As in any good western, the scenery also plays an important part and the southern Utah settings are particularly striking. The musical soundtrack is a little off-beat for a western, but also very good. Dennis Weaver, Sidney Poitier, and Bill Travers all add to the movie with good supporting performances.

Looks like an even battle on both fronts.

[lost-in-limbo · 28 May 2007]

Lieutenant McAllister and a raw recruit of soldiers have to travel through Apache territory to deliver some much need ammunition to the awaiting Fort Conchos. Scout Jess Remsberg tags along with revenge on mind and horse broker / former trooper Toller who unwillingly receives an order to ride with them to finish off breaking the horses, if he wants the rest of his money. However McAllister and his small party find themselves trying to survive an Apache onslaught led by Chata, as the lady Ellen Grange that Jess rescued from the Apaches has something of importance to the chief.

A competently well-made and satisfying western that's highlighted by the prominent cast and exhilaratingly taut and unsparing action sequences. Ralph Nelson smoothly paces this drum-beating foray, with its adeptly bold and old-fashioned direction. His professional touch lifts the screenplay. Going a long way to giving it a real bravado feel amongst the gritty, dusty and sprawling rocky terrain, which is masterfully framed with a lot of ticker and claustrophobic channelling by cinematography Charles F. Wheeler. The main feature of the film that strikes a chord, has got to be composer Neal Hefti's effectively novel, melodic score that seems to match and illustrate the sequences and overall feel rather well, despite the uncanny tone for this type of film. I found the dynamic cues to be rather contagious. Albert and Michael M. Grilikhes' open screenplay (which is based on the Marvin Albert's novel, "Apache Rising") is pretty much to the point and a little lacking by simply going through the motions. But even with those vague moments, it still thrives on well-rounded dialogues from its sturdy script. In there are configurations of racism, and the unfair treatment of the Indians, but it's the personal confrontations and torment that makes for one gruelling exercise. It never lets any of this get carried away, but the starkly harsh nature stays throughout. The performances are richly devised, to stew up depth and realism due more to their favourable acting than in the way of the material. James Garner's winningly focused performance as rugged, seldom Jess is first-rate. Sidney Poitier classy turn as Toller is a different stroke and admirably good one. Bill Travers' growing performance is very strong and humane. Dennis Weaver eclectically solid. Bibi Andersson was mildly okay, but was hindered and the modest John Hoyt didn't see enough time as Chata.

Dated, but a well handled, compelling and tough as nails western, which finally shines through.

"Death comes soon enough, anyone who hurries it is a damn fool."

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 13 August 2007]

"Duel At Diablo" had me thinking about Sidney Poitier's role, and I'd love to hear his reason for taking the assignment. Considering his appearance in one of my favorite films, "In The Heat Of The Night", a classic study of racism and cultural fear, I wondered how he reconciled the role of a former black military officer helping the cavalry protect a supply wagon through Apache territory, with all the attendant characterizations of the red man as a hostile, savage brute. But Toller (Poitier) did have character, as demonstrated by the apology to Remsberg (James Garner) after learning of his wife's fate, that was an excellent scene.

Dennis Weaver surprised me with his portrayal of Will Grange, showing a range of ability that far surpasses my singular impression of him as Matt Dillon's deputy, Chester Goode. He figures in somewhat of a story twist when it's revealed that he had a hand in the death of Remsberg's wife. The showdown you were expecting for the entire film managed to play out in a manner that kept Garner's character honorable, even if revenge was served. It was an effective way to handle the conflict.

You know, I'm surprised that an obvious continuity issue hasn't been noted yet regarding the picture. When Remsberg leaves the soldiers for Fort Concho, he's riding a gray horse across the desert, but in the scene when the horse collapses from heat exhaustion, it's brown. A similar error occurs in the Western "Comanche Blanco" near the finale when William Shatner's horse changes color. It makes me wonder why film makers, or even the principal actor, can't remember how the scene started out so it can be finished without an obviously conflicting ending. They must have other things on their mind.

At least it was gratifying to see that mathematical accountability came into play regarding the strength of both the Indian band and the cavalry. As the soldier forces dwindled, references were made to that effect, and you had a sense of the attrition. Contrast that with other Westerns where it often seems like one side or the other winds up with just as many men as they started with.

You know, it wouldn't have taken much to turn this one into a John Ford/John Wayne cavalry Western. Most of the elements were there except the peaks of Monument Valley and a romantic interest for the leading man. Still, the inclusion of Ellen Grange (Bibi Anderson) as a conflicted white woman with an Apache baby added another layer of intensity to a film already chock full of angst driven characters. You knew she would make it to the end of the story, the question being, at what price.

Nice Western with Indians and soldiers plenty of action and lots of violence

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 16 October 2009]

This exceptionally hard picture deals about Jess (James Garner) who frees Ellen (Bibi Andersson)from Indians, she's married to mean trader (Dennis Weaver). Meanwhile lieutenant McAllister (Bill Travers) along with Toller (Sidney Poitier) are ordered transport ammunition throughout Apache territory where ravages an Indian chief named Chata (John Hoyt). Jess seeks revenge on the man who murdered and scalped his Indian wife. Then Ellen mysteriously flees again to unite them.

This violent Western and hard on racial themes is full of noisy action, thrills , chills and results to be quite entertaining. The gratuitous violence and tortures brought worldwide queues and much criticism in the newspapers, though Nelson declared that it was utterly necessary. However it was severely cut in some countries. Good duo protagonist as James Garner and Sidney Poitier, director's usual. Appears uncredited Richard Farnsworth and the filmmaker Ralph Nelson as Colonel Foster. Rare and non appropriate score for an Old West movie is composed by Hefty. Stark and atmospheric cinematography by Charles Wheeler.

The motion picture is well directed by Ralph Nelson. There were no half measures in this filmmaker. He would make sentimental movies or violent and gore films . Failure alternated with hits through the 1960s, though Nelson's direction was more than successful in ¨Lilies of the field¨with invaluable help of Sidney Poitier who won an Oscar as an African-American helping a group of German nuns to build a chapel. And of course his greatest success ¨Soldier Blue¨, also with cruel massacres and and blood fountained all over the screen. In the 7os Nelson went on to making strong movies , however, his films themselves were doing less successful at the Box office , numerous of those being barely seen outside US . As a violent Zapata Western titled ¨Wrath of God¨ with Robert Mitchum, as ¨Tick..Tick..Tick¨ in which the racial tensions arise when a black man being elected sheriff, ¨ The Wilby conspiracy¨ about the apartheid and again with Poitier and a Sci-fi movie titled ¨Embryo¨with Rock Hudson. Rating : Acceptable Western , Poitier fans will enjoy their idol.

good actors in standard western

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 31 August 2013]

Lieutenant McAllister (Bill Travers) is ordered to transport ammunition through Apache territory with only a small troop of rookie soldiers to guard them. Along for the ride is ex-scout Jess Remsberg (James Garner) who is trying to track down Ellen Grange (Bibi Andersson) who keeps running off to the Apache and away from her husband Willard Grange (Dennis Weaver). Also there is Toller (Sidney Poitier) who is breaking in the soldier's wild horses.

This is rough and tumble old fashioned western. The men are tough, and the Apaches are tougher. The landscape is even harder. All the characters are stock characters. The good news is that they are played by some of the best actors of all times.

Tense, gripping Western

[wsidejack1 · 9/10 · 4 April 2008]

A bloody, brutal Western where the action never stops.

First, the Bad (let's get that out of the way). Like all Westerns, the plot has its flaws -- with an Indian war party off the reservation they would not have sent a shipment of ammunition through a narrow canyon guarded by only one squad of green recruits on unbroken/partly saddle broken horses. But so what? In the classic Western Stagecoach the Indians would have shot the horses pulling the stage and then finished off the passengers as opposed to shooting at the people in the coach. Also, Sidney Poitier's silver vest remains immaculate throughout the long desert journey and several pitched battles.

However, the movie moves so fast that you never really have time to stop and remind yourself that you have to "suspend disbelief" to watch it.

Next, the Good. On one level, it's a classic cavalry vs. Indians story. But viewed through a different lens than in earlier Westerns; the Indians are shown with some perspective, if not total sympathy, which probably makes this one of the first Westerns to get beyond a one dimensional view of them. There are a variety of interesting subplots which flesh out the major characters and keep things twisting, turning, and moving along between the combat scenes. In fact, almost every one of the characters is angry about something, creating lots of tension between them. James Garner's character is looking for the men who raped and killed his (Indian) wife, Dennis Weaver's Will Grange is angry about almost everything, including that his wife was held captive by the Indians, Sidney Poitier's Toller (now a civilian) is mad that circumstances forced him to accompany the cavalry on this mission ....

Garner and Poitier give excellent performances and the other actors rise to the occasion, helping us forget that they are, in fact, Scottish or Danish.

At the end of the movie the various subplots are tied up and the issues are resolved with (in one case) a very surprising twist.

On top of that, you have a wonderful (almost superb, for this movie) Neal Hefti score, which always seems to correctly reflect the mood of the scene. It fits the movie even better because it makes heavy use of Western/military instruments: guitars, horns, drums, ....

Finally, the Ugly. There are some fairly graphic scenes here (although not exactly like in the Wild Bunch or Saving Private Ryan). The Apaches could torture with the best of them and some of that appears in this movie, although we're spared the close-ups.

All in all, I must say that this is one of my long time favorites. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do!!

Soap and shooting in the desert

[bygard · 7/10 · 11 May 2007]

"Welcome to gory bed or victory." Some gripping action and battle scenes filmed on magnificent locations in southern Utah desert. The guilt or revenge driven and money hungry citizens are accompanying a cavalry unit through Indian lands and trying to get a load of weapons and horses for those who need them at the other end of the journey. Some matrimonial and parental questions involving a halfbreed baby also need to be settled from the side of the white as well as the Apaches. The movie respectfully tries to make some good-hearted points at racism and greediness, but much of it is left open somewhere half way or gets left under the feet of the roaming action. Or maybe there simply isn't any real answers.

At the beginning I got the feeling like I was watching a western TV-series instead of a movie. That's probably because of the rather heavy use of period sound music. You get Apaches and whites dangling in the desert and the soundtrack is alive with the sounds of surf guitars and bongo drums. Not the best choice to my mind and I wandered if the makers had wanted to lure in young viewers or just had a bad taste. Don't get me wrong. I love the music and sounds from the sixties, but there are right as well as wrong places for it. Fortunately the soundtrack picks up tremendously along with the pace and action once we're on the way and far in the desert.

Good actors are able to bring some greatly needed life and interest into routinely scripted characters and situations. Sidney Poitier and Dennis Weaver have the biggest tasks of using their admirable skills and so make the most admired impressions. A kind of friendly nod to John Ford's cavalry westerns can be sensed from Bill Travers' Irish lieutenant. The biggest failure is that the few meaningful Indian roles have mostly been left in the traditional state of the wooden ones, the nonchalantly stiff enemy. For a dedicated friend of westerns this is a pretty decent entry in the genre. But others might well find it a lot less meaningful or worth a watch.

Stick em up for righteousness

[ed_two_o_nine · 5/10 · 3 November 2008]

What we have here is a b western whose messages are probably of more value than the film. This is not shot well, with a script that does not stand out and the action set pieces are obviously cheap, but well ahead of it's time we have no real good and evil here with flaws in both sides and it is here that the film excels. James Garner is the anti hero who is only persuaded to come along on the quest to see his ex-army colleagues through territory filled with hostile Apache because he is looking for revenge on the man who killed his Indian wife. Sidney Poiter is in the unusual position of an empowered black man who despite his statements has loyalty to his ex-army colleagues. In fact all the characters are multi faceted and I feel this movie could actually be remade extremely easily to great effect. Not a great film that I would not really go out of my way to view again but well ahead of it's time in terms of message.

The Fight At Diablo Canyon

[bkoganbing · 9/10 · 29 August 2008]

James Garner leaves behind his usual likable rogue that he normally plays for a role in Duel at Diablo as a grim and vengeful scout for the Army who's been told by Lieutenant Bill Travers and graphically shown that his Apache wife has been killed. If he goes on a mission scouting for Travers delivering ammunition and green troops to another fort, he'll meet up with the man who had the scalp, the marshal there, John Crawford.

Garner's not the only who's lived in both the white and Indian world. He rescues Bibi Andersson who's been held captive by the Indians and when he brings her back to her husband, Dennis Weaver, he's not exactly happy to see her. Decent white women were to do the honorable thing back in the day and commit suicide before being defiled by an Indian. Andersson's not welcome back in the white world.

In the end nearly the whole cast is in a desperate battle for their lives against Apaches who have jumped the reservation. Also in the battle is former buffalo soldier Sidney Poitier. And with a whole lot of green troops in the battle, Poitier being around comes in mighty handy.

Duel At Diablo is not a western for the squeamish, it gets pretty graphic at times. The themes that were explored in such films as The Searchers, Trooper Hook, and Two Rode Together are really explored far more here. There's also a little bit of Stagecoach in Duel At Diablo with Garner like John Wayne on a vengeance quest against the people who murdered his family.

Sidney Poitier's part is interesting in that there really is no racial reference as far as his blackness is concerned. In fact Poitier having been in the army and fought the Apaches has just about the same attitudes towards them as the white characters do.

This is a good western, maybe a great one, but not one for the faint hearted.

Very good...though famiiliar

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 4 August 2022]

During the last 100 years, Hollywood must have made several thousand westerns....and because they made so many, they couldn't help but start repeating and reusing themes. One of the more familiar ones is a group of people (often Cavalry) surrounded by marauding Indians...something which, incidentally, rarely actually happened. "Duel at Diablo" has such a theme...though it manages to make more of it than usual.

When the story begins, Jess (James Garner) rescues a white woman who was kidnapped by Apache warriors. Oddly, it turns she was kidnapped by these Apache....was returned to her husband and then she ran BACK to the Apache! Why? Well, see the film to find out more about this and why the Apache warriors later attacked a Cavalry formation with this woman, Jess and a scout named Toller (Sidney Poitier) among them.

One thing I loved about this familiar story is that never once did anyone make anything out of or mention Poitier's character was black. Perhaps this wasn't realistic for the 19th century, but it was nice to allow this fine actor to play a plot that didn't revolve around being a black man....and it must have been a nice change of pace for Poitier. I also thought the story was handled well and is enjoyable to watch. So, it's a nice example where although the plot is familiar, it still manages to be fresh.

The war for survival takes many victims.

[mark.waltz · 5/10 · 6 February 2016]

Natives of the continent now known as North America had to get guns somewhere, and it took the white man to see that they got them. Trading with the "Indians" didn't bring cash, but other products or sources of food that the white man wanted. Other white men came in, stealing land and other goods, and as civilized society moved west, it was accompanied by a lust for blood. In this western, the conflict between the Apaches and European immigrants turned more violent. James Garner, finding out that his Comanche wife has been scalped, helps out the Swedish Bibi Anderson who became the mistress of an Apache warrior after being separated by arrogant husband Dennis Weaver. With the war between the Apaches and army growing, the transfer of weapons to other troops becomes a struggle it itself with the Indians on their trail, and the battle for survival begins.

Enjoyable as a film but disturbing as reflection of our history, this leaves me with mixed emotions. The presence of Sidney Poitier as a well dressed black man involved in the transfer of weapons is simply star status added to the film because his character has no real impact on the plot line other than to seem to keep pulling Garner out of scrapes. British Bill Travets ("Born Free") is an odd casting choice as the leader of this mission.

Beautifully filmed on Utah locations, thus must have been stunning on the big screen. The canyons are majestic and the country side truly cinematic. A tense moment occurs as arrow attacks by an unseen enemy begins to blur the soldier's vision because of the hot, bright sun. If this is one of the films that made Brando take notice of the mistreatment of native Americans in films and protest by turning down an Oscar, I would not be too surprised. It never explains why the Apaches were so bloody, only treating them continuously like savages.

Over-Crowded

[dougdoepke · 18 February 2012]

What terrific production values—that trek across a hellishly barren Utah desert had me off the couch, running for a water pitcher. And catch all those cavalrymen, Indians, and wild horses, enough for at least ten more westerns. Then there's the great James Garner to headline, along with a spiffy Sidney Poitier. So, why isn't this a top-notch horse opera, given such promising prospects.

For one thing, there's about ten sub-plots too many. Heck, just the ordeal across the desert should be enough for most westerns without over-crowding the storyline. Sure, the script is making a good point about racism with Ellen's half-Indian baby. But do we need the soap opera sub-plot with husband Dennis Weaver that's mainly a distraction. Then there's Poitier showing it wasn't just white guys who won the west. And, of course, the screenplay has to carve out a large enough role for a second headliner. Add to that Garner's search for whoever scalped his wife that is sort of tacked on at the end, and we've got enough plot material for three more features.

Sure, the movie's heart is in the right place. But messages are one thing, while merging them into a fluid narrative is another, and here the sub-plots add to the general problem of too much storyline clutter. The root of the problem, I expect, was hiring too many name stars, even if Travers and Andersson are known mainly to foreign audiences. Speaking of the cast, Garner's unusual skills are largely wasted in a role any number of imposing presences like Clint Walker could have easily handled.

And I never thought it would happen, but by about the twentieth skirmish across the desert, I actually got a little bored with all the repetitive stunts and endless shooting. 'More', it seems, is not always better, and I suspect the lesson is there can be too much action even in an action movie.

Anyway, I don't want to simply dismiss the movie because of its excesses since there are also a number of good touches (Chata gets some respect as a leader of his people, even though we see him as cruel), along with the generous production values. I'm just sorry the movie doesn't succeed better given its praiseworthy side.

Injuns and cavalry duke it out in Utah

[helpless_dancer · 7/10 · 9 January 2001]

When the Army wants to transport a load of guns and ammo to another fort, a band of bloodthirsty savages, who are not good at reservation life, attack the soldiers. The pesky redskins lead the innocent Army men into a trap and begin wiping them out. However, the wiley officer in charge developes a plan to trick the sneaky, backstabbing redmen by doubling back after appearing to be going in another direction. Unfortunately, the bluecoats still kept on losing the fight. Exciting western with a predictable ending, filmed in the stark yet beautiful state of Utah.

Exploitative Western with Racial Morality Themes

[verbusen · 7/10 · 30 September 2017]

I DVR'd films with James Garner in it, and this film was recorded from the MGM channel as a result. When it started with the Bowie knife slashing the screen, I knew this would be a different western. The title cards were really weird, they used a white font similar to those I've seen on low budget drive in films next to a custom dark font that just seemed weird but interesting, it beckoned low budget to me. Then I watched the aerial shots of the beautiful scenery, which were amazing in HD, good job by MGM in presenting this film, watch it in this format and not on low quality like on a Youtube, it's a difference to the overall enjoyment. So I quickly reasoned, yes it's kind of low budget but the people involved considered it more then just a cheap western. The next scene starts with violence and graphic (for the time) torture, I knew pretty fast that this would be exploitative as far as the action goes. Spoilers, I predicted to my wife when the soldiers are riding out on the mission that 90 percent would die, and I nailed it. The morality tales concern race and mixed race relationships. The Indians are presented as really ruthless and willing to be killed off in droves which seemed over the top. The arrows are shown multiple times hitting soldiers in all body parts, however they did that, it was a very effective effect. I'm guessing they played the arrow scenes in reverse. Funny blooper that I caught, Poitier is twirling his pistol and when he puts the gun back in the holster he misses the holster and has to quickly pull it back and reset it. I'm surprised that wasn't re-shot but I guess the low budget comes into play. The woman character is played by a European with a thick accent and so is the Army Officer, which lowered my suspension of belief but I guess is plausible. Poitier's role seems unnecessary since the racial morality is already being addressed with the white woman and her mixed race child, luckily, it doesn't get over the top on the morality issues to the point that it detracts from the action. I noticed only one other black soldier and he has no lines and is only seen briefly which also made me question why Poitier is the only Buffalo Soldier around. Weaver's role is schizophrenic, one scene he's a total bigot, the next scene a caring husband. For those who like character actor roles, I enjoyed seeing William Redfield, he reminds me in this movie of a character I would be like, realistic. There is a tread in there about Garner's murdered Indian wife that loosely ties it all together but there are some bad plot holes and character motivations that I didn't think were realistic. With all that said, the film is entertaining and if you are looking for some good action check it out. 7 of 10, for this unconventional western, entertaining.

Plenty of cavalry vs. Indians shootouts in gritty western...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 7 April 2009]

For western fans who enjoy plenty of shootouts against eye-filling western locations, DUEL AT DIABLO fills the bill. It's got several strands of sub-plots going but spends most of its time featuring some action packed shootouts that don't leave much time for character development among the cast.

JAMES GARNER is a scout who saves a young woman who is being pursued by Indians. That's how the story starts, against brilliantly used Utah location shots. As the plot deepens, we find that she'd been captured by the Indians and was making her escape when he came to her aid. Meanwhile, back at Fort Creel, her husband (DENNIS WEAVER) is upset about her dalliance with Indians and the fact that she has a baby fathered by an Indian.

A hardly recognizable JOHN HOYT (in full Indian make-up) is Chatah, the Apache chief with the full-sized army of fighters who wants the woman and the baby back. Another story thread has JAMES GARNER seeking revenge for the man who killed his Indian wife. With all of these sub-plots merging, there's even more story element tying in SIDNEY POITIER and BILL TRAVERS, both of whom look out of place in this western saga.

If it's action you want, you get plenty of it here. Along with scenes of almost graphic torture and lots of arrows hitting their mark along with bullets and falling horses. It's not for the squeamish.

Too bad the film really never builds up enough tension to sustain its running time, even with a new battle breaking out every fifteen minutes or so. By the time the final skirmish is reached, the viewer will feel almost as exhausted as the players must have been.

Gritty all the way with a natural performance by Garner and good support from the others. Last but not least, a good score by Neal Hefti rises to the occasion with some nice flourishes.

Jim & Sid

[seveb-25179 · 6/10 · 23 September 2018]

James Garner and Sidney Poitier western. Sidney Poitier relishes the opportunity to play a cool gambler gunfighter dude, with less emphasis on racial connotations, but his character is not central to the story. James Garner is the central figure here, seeking the killer of his Indian wife. With Bibi Anderson as the woman who was captured by the Indians and had a child by the son of a chief, who is then rescued and treated as an outcaste back in the white mans world. While Dennis Weaver is her formerly loving husband who can't forgive her either. And Bill Travers is a cavalry Lieutenant who wants to make a glorious name for himself, is a friend of Garners, a former rival of Poitiers and due to be married in a few days... So it could have ended up being very soapy, but the director does a good job of keeping it all moving along with some decent action. And the film manages to have it's cake and eat it too, with the plight of the Indians treated sympathetically, while still casting them as the dangerous enemy who must be survived and defeated. The music and the opening credits have a distinctly swinging 60s flavour to them, but fortunately that doesn't spill over into the rest of the movie.

Intense Western, Not for the Squeamish

[tom-darwin · 9/10 · 24 June 2006]

The first & more watchable of 2 intense Westerns from Ralph Nelson, "Diablo" is one of the starkest examples of the tough, realistic Westerns that became popular in the late 1950s. Professional scout Remsberg (Garner) is out for vengeance on the "civilized" men who butchered his Comanche wife. His quest is interrupted when he's tasked to accompany an Army ammo convoy led by ambitious Lt. McAllister (Travers). Along for the ride are wrangler & ex-sergeant Toller (Poitier), shopkeeper's wife Ellen (Andersson), a former captive of the Apache who's regarded with disgust by her white neighbors, and her embittered husband (Weaver). They're intercepted by a large war party of the same Apaches who once held Ellen captive. As with films of this kind from "The Last Wagon" to "Ulzana's Raid," the male lead is a white man who understands the plight of the Indians, sympathizes with them but nevertheless works for the whites. There's nary a letup in the darkness & intensity. Ellen, the tortured, exploited victim of both sides, is no love interest, while the only humor in the film comes in occasional rueful exchanges among the tough guys. But there's plenty of action in scenes as well-done as any of the period & budget. What makes "Diablo" stand out is the clever, seamless depiction of the strategy as the ambushed convoy spars with the wily, ruthless Apache. It's far more engrossing than almost any war movie, including those with budgets many times larger. Andersson doesn't have much to work with but Garner & Poitier play their tough guys with just the right balance between expression & terseness. Weaver makes the most of his limited opportunity to develop the selfish husband who feels sorrier for himself than his wife over her horrifying torment. "Diablo" delivers action & adventure that never lags, along with a strong dose of historical-social awareness, but it's not the ticket for a light evening's entertainment. Director Nelson plays the colonel commanding the relief force.

Sadistic, Violent and Brutal

[angelsunchained · 7/10 · 17 June 2022]

I like Ralph Nelson films. He even managed to make cameo appearances in most of his movies. I found this film interesting enough with some decent performances, but the brutal and sadistic violence left a bad taste in my mouth. Anti-war theme I assume. It was the 1960s, so what can you expect.

Nothing Special.

[rmax304823 · 5/10 · 17 March 2013]

Lots of conflict and shooting in this rather routine Western of US cavalry versus Apaches. Bibi Andersson, who practically glowed in Ingmar Bergman's movies, is only a subsidiary character and looks like just another Hollywood blond. James Garner could be a fine actor when the role was right and Sidney Poitier was one of the most skilled of his generation. I have no idea why they dressed him up in a cowboy hat, fancy vest, skin-tight trousers, and black boots,.

But what can you do with a B script that's enlivened by a few unusual incidents. Here are two unusual incidents. The Apache are chasing a cook wagon. And what do they do? They SHOOT ONE OF THE HORSE and the wagon has to stop! Hallelujah! Finally, a move script allows the Indians to figure out that if you want to stop a wagon you don't necessarily have to pick off the guy driving it.

Here's another incident. Dennis Weaver is a miscreant who finally sides with the good guys. It doesn't save him from being brutally tortured over a fire by the Apache, to the point at which he later begs the cavalry men to kill him. The Apache, by the way, weren't racists. They were indiscriminately brutal, as many other Western tribes were. Weaver may have been roasted alive, but others were de-boned, beginning with their fingertips.

But these scenes can't redeem a B script that has a lonesome patrol fighting overwhelming odds and being picked off one by one until the final and inevitable rescue by the rest of the cavalry. Want to know what would have been REALLY innovative? They all die. But then who would have paid to see the movie?

Very nice location shooting though, among bluffs that alternate gray strata with rust, and the horses for some reason look beautiful, not like just any old horse.

A unusual western that is both modern and old-fashioned

[PTaylor129 · 8/10 · 19 May 2020]

Caught between Hollywood's traditional western genre and the revisionist western styles of the late 1960s and 1970s, Duel at Diablo seems both a little behind and ahead of its time. As an old-fashioned western, Duel at Diablo has traditional cavalry vs. Indian story line and well-executed, exciting battle scenes. Beyond this, the film also addresses racism and oppression towards native Americans in a complex and non-sentimental manner, through various inter-linked sub-plots. While the Apaches may be cruel and the instigators of attacks, it is clear that this is only because they have been oppressed to the point where they have no other resort. This is not a battle between "good guys" and "bad guys" and in the end nobody wins. Perhaps, the film could have delved a little deeper into the social and ethical issues it raises. At times, it appears that the movie itself is unsure whether it is primarily an action film or a message film. However, this is also the movie's strength as its messages do not detract from the story and action, and never appear simplistic or preachy as is often the case in westerns that take a sympathetic perspective on the plight of native Americans. Meanwhile, the excellent, rhythmic and moody musical score by Neil Hefti, while unusual for a western, is well suited to accompanying the unrelenting action sequences and conveying the tragedy and doom of a society and individuals caught in a vicious cycle of conflict and racism. The casting of the film further contributes to making Duel a Diablo a strong, atypical western. James Garner, who up to then had always played amiable leading men, sheds his typical persona to effectively portray a tough and rugged frontier scout, bent on avenging the murder of his Indian wife. Equally effective and very cool-looking in a 3-piece suit, Sidney Poitier is an army sergeant turned businessman, whose color is on the surface only incidental to the story beyond a couple of subtle inuendos (that said, it is really left to the viewer's interpretation whether his race is significant to the story, and it is somewhat ironic to see a black man taking charge among a regiment of white soldiers in shoot-outs against Indians). Europeans Bibi Anderson and Bill Travers also seem strangely out of place, respectively portraying what could be a Scandinivian emigrant and a Scottish-born American officer. And Dennis Weaver, who up to that time was mainly known as a simple good guy in TV's Gunsmoke plays the part of a nuanced villain. Add to this the beautiful cinematography of wide desert landscapes, and Duel at Diablo is a superior, exciting, and socially-conscious western, not a great one, but certainly unique.

7/10

[missbellu-43142 · 7/10 · 12 February 2019]

A friends father starred in this film so I decided to give it a watch. It's quite a good film, but just a once watch for me.

Conventional but Entertaining Western

[TedMichaelMor · 4/10 · 11 June 2010]

Strong portrayals by Bibi Andersson, as Ellen Grange, and James Gardner work here with skillful director Ralph Nelson to create a well acted, beautifully photographed, entertaining Western, even though some mannered performances by other actors as such Sidney Poitier distract from the natural feel Andersson and Gardner bring to the effort.

Utah locations are classic aspects of carefully imitated Western icons and tropes exploited to create a fifties look to this lovely film. If the icons seem clichés, they are formulae exploited to create standard entertainment. They do not develop the genre; they simply exploit it, perhaps, with some effectiveness. Counting the codes becomes part of the entertainment—does the film miss any one of them? However, watching Bibi Andersson in any film treats the viewer. Further, I doubt that James Gardner can make a bad movie. Dennis Weaver is perfect as he always is.