NekoHomey
Purely Joyful Movie!
Ariella Broughton
It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.
Mandeep Tyson
The acting in this movie is really good.
Spikeopath
1845 Texas, Independent, survived Alamo, Goliad and San Jacinto ... But Annexation? Quite often the joy in being a fan of genre film making, in this case Westerns/Southerns et al, is that a pic can coerce you into reading up on real instances. Thus making this particular picture a requisite requirement for literature delving.Directed by Vincent Sherman and written by Borden Chase (who would supposedly be irked by the depiction of his writing) and Howard Estabrook, Lone Star comes off as an "A" list film given "B" list production values. Nothing wrong with cast performances, Gable still has charisma in his fifties, Gardner oozes sexuality and Crawford dominates like a great presence should. However, it looks stagy, is overly talky as the makers try to make a politico pot boiler out of a sow's behind, while the action - in spite of a grandiose battering ram finale - just doesn't have an oomph factor.Romantic love triangle feels pointless in the context of such historical filmic tellings, but this is off set by the Sam Houston and Native American splinter of the narrative. Rendering this as a frustrating whole, not without merits, and above average for sure, but difficult to recommend as one to seek out as a must. 6/10
atlasmb
Starring Clark Gable, Ava Gardner, and Broderick Crawford, "Lone Star" is a rousing story of political intrigue based on the historical battle for The Republic of Texas. One side wanted annexation by the United States. The other wished to maintain the republic and set treaties with Mexico and other countries.The battle for the minds of Texans is an interesting one, involving many factions, including the native Americans of the territory. The year is 1845 and Andrew Jackson, who still wields tremendous influence from Nashville, advocates annexation. Andrew Johnson is against it. Sam Houston--a local hero--is a significant unknown entity who may sway the Texas government and Texas hearts. Gable plays Dev Burke, a Texas cattleman who agrees to represent Jackson's interests. Broderick Crawford plays Tom Craden, a significant influence around Austin, who has big plans for the republic. Ava Gardner plays Martha Ronda, editor of the Austin newspaper and "the woman" of Craden. Or is she?This historical drama contains a steamy love story that also involves principles. And like most westerns, the bullets and fists fly. I enjoyed this film, mostly due to its strongly drawn characters.
jpheifer1966
I can't believe all the great stars in this movie. Beulah Bondi, Lionel Barrymore (lookin' like hell), Broderick Crawford, William Conrad (playing a Frenchman) and Clark Gable. I hope I look that good when I'm 50. It's before he became the caricature of himself that he became in later movies. When he puts on his "Clark Gable face," I just cringe. I don't know what it is about Ava, but I can't bear to watch her. She doesn't gnaw on the scenery in this one, so, it's better than, say, Mogambo, or The Hucksters, but still. I think it's my loyalty to Frank Sinatra. It's a lovely movie and I really wish it was filmed in color. Does anyone know where this was filmed?
MartinHafer
If you watch this movie anticipating a Western B-movie, you won't be disappointed. There's action and romance a-plenty. However, if you realize that this was an A-picture and you hold the film to a higher standard, then you will be disappointed. This film is at best an average Gable film, in that the plot is VERY tired--looking like so many characters Gable played before. In fact, he is a very close variation on Rhett Butler--a cynical Southerner who is only looking out for himself (so he says), but ends up doing the right thing when the chips are down. Yes, there certainly is nothing new here.As far as other performances go, Ava Gardner is at her best. Broderick Crawford, though, does not come off nearly as well because his character is awfully stupid--especially at the end of the film. And, the utter stupidity of the end of the film is a major problem. One minute Crawford and his men are shooting up the town trying to kill everyone and the next all is forgiven and it's off too fight the Mexicans! Huh?! I truly hate clichéd, slapped on endings! There are many better Gable films out there. My advice is see them first and then give Lone Star a try.
