DUEL AT DIABLO

US, 1966, 103 minutes, Colour.
James Garner, Sidney Poitier, Bibi Andersson, Bill Travers, Denis Weaver.
Directed by Ralph Nelson.

Duel at Diablo is an interesting Western with racial overtones. The emphasis is on violence, both Indian and white and its repercussions on those who experience it. It is also a film which has something to say about prejudice - against Indians and, with Sidney Poitier's presence, against Blacks. Director Ralph Nelson makes Westerns and adventures with touches of social comment which makes them more than routine. He directed Poitier's Oscar-winning performance in Lilies of the Field. His film closest in tone to this one is Soldier Blue (1970).

1. Was this a good conventional Western? Why? Was it original in its treatment of an old theme?

2. Was it enjoyable? Did the violence predominate over enjoyment? Was the discrimination against the Indians too strong for enjoyment? Why?

3. How well did the film use a sense of menace for its suspense? Tracking of the cavalry by the Indians and the blockade? The use of torture? The need for the scout to get through etc.?

4. What was the initial impact of the film? Ellen being saved by Jess and the. deaths of the Apaches? How did this carry on through the film?

5. Was Jess the hero? How successful a scout? His grief at his wife's death? How bitter was his need for revenge? How resourceful a person was he? How much was the audience meant to identify with him? How important was he for the questions about race: black, white and red? Was he too conventional a hero at times? Which sequences best illustrated his heroism?

6. Toller - was he too much of a Sidney Poitier typical character or not? The fact that he was a Negro, was this important? A self-made man, self-centred with his gambling, heroic with the horses, joining Jess, saving the group? The way he gambled? How resourceful a person was he? Was he too heroic a character by the end of the film, or was this normal behaviour for those under such pressures?

7. Collister - how good a man was he? A leader, living by the book? His ambitions to become a general, the nature of his heroism? Was he presented as being too heroic? Was the film unrealistic in its presentation of him, his wounds and dying?

8. How important was Ellen to the film? As a woman, an outcast, being rescued? Her love for her child? Her treatment by the Indians being better than her treatment by the whites? Her love for her husband? Being prepared for death? Her compassion at his torture? Was it too rosy for her at the end?

9. Grange - was he too much of a villain? Why was he so moody, concerned for appearances, his goods? His treatment of his wife? Were you surprised that it was he who killed Jess's wife? Your response to his being tortured? Did this make up for the evil that he had done? His being handed the gun? How important was he to the film?

10. The Indians - was their presentation conventional? Audience sympathy for them? The fact that they were oppressed on the reservations? The number of deaths? The final surrender?

11. Was the violence necessary for the style of film, especially the arrows, Granger's death? Who should have killed Granger or should he have been kept alive?

12. Do you think the ending. being saved by the cavalry, was too conventional; also the happy ending in store for the main characters?

13. What values of Westerns. racism. death, oppression etc., were being explored in this film? How successfully?