Drango

This film reveals a lot about the reconstruction era in the U. S. after the Civil War. It is amazing to see this era explained without an agenda or politically correct spins that Americans are fed now. The post Civil War era in the South shows the hardships the people faced and how one honorable Yankee military governor attempts to handle it.

A rather dour Reconstruction Western that's probably too earnest for its own good. Writer Hall Bartlett's heart is in the right place—reconciling North and South following the Civil War. Union Major Drango (Chandler) wants to unite rebellious Confederate town around a regime of humane occupation, despite widespread resistance. The supporting cast is familiar from about every popular TV series of the day—Stone, Phillips, Sande, Ankrum, Baer. Too bad the powerful Donald Crisp is largely wasted in a circumscribed role, and why Julie London's presence other than to build box-office appeal is unclear to me. In fact, her romantic subplot with Lupton sprawls the story without strengthening it.

Also, reviewer Lorenellroy is right—Chandler's major comes across as too stiff and unappealing for a central character. His besieged Major should be serious, but the seriousness is finally carried to a deadening degree. Bartlett was interesting as a producer, especially with Navajo and Unchained. Here, however, I'm afraid he tries to do too much with a screenplay that ends up in too many talky subplots. Then too, direction should have been left to a better stylist since the core material had potential.

In passing—note that no reference to slavery or appearance of a black person occurs anywhere in the movie, a rather startling omission for a film dealing with the post-Civil War South. My guess is that the producers, like others of the period, didn't want to risk dealing with a sensitive subject at a time when Jim Crow laws still prevailed below the Mason-Dixon Line. Anyway, considering the number of Westerns on TV and in theatres in 1957, it's probably not surprising that despite good intentions and a fine performance from Joanne Dru this dour little oddity has remained lost in the mix.

Its worth a watch because it is a decent Western with all the right mix except this one takes place right after the Civil War and shows you quite effectively the hatred the South had for the rest of the country. I found this depiction rather accurate right down to the prejudice, murders and realism as this really happened. Remember, people were so opposed to this war that they went to war to make their point. We got whiskey drinking, fighting, horses, love interest, lynchings, farms and a good look at things back then. The plot is a good one and it cost many people their life (in the move and out) to make the point of stopping what doesn't work and doing what does. Killing always starts with a reason and ends with a reason to stop as well. I had a hard time with the name of this movie i.e. "Drango". It makes no sense, doesn't capture a personality or point and leaves you with a sense of unfinished business even though it is the name of the main character. Obviously whoever named this movie wanted to get it over with or had an appointment elsewhere. Even when I accepted the name, hearing others say it took effort. It just doesn't have the Western flavor and in fact detracts. Pay close attention how people lived with the seasons as you needed a crop in one season to make it through the next one. Miss an opportunity and it can cost you your life and your farm in other words everything. Nice little portrait of an orphan family whose mom & dad were killed. They had shelter but lacked food and clothing. This is as real as it gets as well as the solution given. I like to eat during movie watching. This one is a sandwich or even some beef jerky with a tasty drink. Confederate or rebel, ride into this, dismount and sit a spell

DRANGO is a sturdy little western that has an interesting tale to tell but doesn't quite fulfill its potential as a saga about a town in Georgia that is still bristling with hostility over what the dirty Yanks have done to their burned out village. And what they have yet to learn is that Major Clint Drango (JEFF CHANDLER) had a large part in destroying and pillaging the town under orders from Sherman to do exactly that. Now he's involved in the town's reconstruction.

It's an interesting story, directed in crisp, no nonsense fashion with the major finding out just how hard his job is going to be the moment he sets foot in town with his helpmate Captain Marc Banning, played by JOHN LUPTON. He also has to contend with a woman (JOANNE DRU) who has her own reasons for despising him until she learns that he's a caring man who is only seeking justice in a town torn apart by hatred and fear.

The villain of the piece is Clay Allen (RONALD HOWARD), the man who opposes Drango every step of the way, leading an angry mob to hang Dru's father before his trial can even begin. Julie London is wasted in a colorless supporting role. Ronald Howard is the spitting image of his father, LESLIE HOWARD, only a bit finer in features--but he has the same walk, the same voice pattern and was, judging from this film, a very competent actor.

Overall, it's an unusual western with some slow spots but it's a western best appreciated by Civil War fans.

For a story set in Georgia in late 1865 the absence of any blacks in the town and surrounding rural areas is utterly absurd. The labor force the farmers would mobilize to replant would have included the freed slaves. They would certainly have been a source of support for the Union military government.

The movie perpetuates the cry-baby version of history that the state of Georgia has foisted on the consciousness of the nation. Sherman's armies did not ravage Georgia anywhere near as bad as they complain. They did NOT routinely burn down houses and churches and schools. They did destroy supplies that could help the military effort of the South. It was noted at the time that where Sherman marched through Georgia, hardly a house in any town was torched.

By contrast, when the same armies marched through South Carolina, hardly a house in any town was left standing. That was no accident. Sherman blamed South Carolina for the war and gave orders to his men to burn everything. When his armies crossed the border into North Carolina, his forces reverted to the milder policy they had observed in Georgia.

South Carolina was the only state of the Confederacy whose citizens did not supply at least one regiment for the Union army. In all the others there were Unionists who made their way north to enlist and fight for the United States.