When a handful of settlers survive an Apache attack on their wagon train they must put their lives into the hands of Comanche Todd, a white man who has lived with the Comanches most of his ... See full summary »
After a cavalry charge during the 1916 U.S. "war against Pancho Villa," unheroic awards officer Tom Thorn (who is obsessed with the nature of courage) recommends 4 men for the Medal of Honor. He is ordered back to Cordura with them...and prisoner Adelaide Geary, gringo who sheltered the enemy. On the arduous journey, Thorn's heroes show a different face, and Thorn may have one last chance to prove he's no coward. Written by
Rod Crawford <firstname.lastname@example.org>
John Wayne said, "How they got Gary Cooper to do that one! To me, at least, it simply degrades the Medal of Honor. The whole story makes a mockery of America's highest award for valor. The whole premise of the story was wrong, illogical, because they don't pick the type of men the movie picked to win the award, and that can be proved by the very history of the award." See more »
Major Thorn improperly salutes Colonel DeRose in the opening scene when he is dismissed. He should have saluted and held his salute until it was acknowledged. Instead, he lowers his arm even before Colonel Rose acknowledges it. See more »
On the night of March 8th, 1916, a large mounted force of Mexican rebels under Pancho Villa crossed the American Border and attacked the town of Columbus, New Mexico, killing and wounding both American civilians and soldiers.
As a result of this action,the United States Army sent an expedition into Mexico with orders to capture Villa and disperse his forces.
It was during this campaign that one man, an United States Army officer,was forced to come face to face with two of the great fundamental questions that affect mankind:
What Is Courage? What Is Cowardice?
This is the story of his search for an answer. See more »
This is in response to comments on 'They Came to Cordura' regarding its dramatic weakness and flawed camera work and editing.
The flaws may be real, but they might not be the fault of the filmmaker (writer-director Robert Rossen).
Reportly, the film was taken out of Rossen's hands by the studio and drastically cut and re-cut. The director's original version, about 1/2 hour longer, was apparently much better, making much more dramatic sense.
Further, the movie was shot in CinemaScope, and comments on its poor cinematography and editing are likely based on viewing a crude pan & scan video copy. Such artificial flaws are common with panned & scanned widescreen movies.
26 of 33 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?