One of my fave scenes from any Duke movie. It start's with the Duke threatening a nemesis and then saying,.."I won't,...I won't,...The Hell I won't!" KAPOWFOW!!! And knocks the fella' down into the mud pit. Then all heck breaks loose and a Big Party ensues with the Indian Chief wanting to know 'where' the Whiskey is. In 1964 it was relatively harmless, (at least to a ten year old as I was) But as we all know now, just a tad too stereotypical of Native Americans' want for Liquor. I haven't seen this flick in over 35-40 years, but I saw it at the Theaters and was entertained; albeit it wasn't quite the 'Rock-Em'-Sock-Em' Western I was used to seeing from The Duke. But that one scene will stay with me forever, that and the 'Spanking' scene. Also something we might never see again in a movie. Ha!
The 'mud pit' was not actually mud but bentonite which is used in the drilling of oil wells. It was not said but with all the 'clues' in the film, McLintock was probably set in Oklahoma, hence the oil drilling.
I understand, but they did say something about a mine as well.
I can never understand why the writers will sometimes leave us in the dark as to what state the story is taking place.
Another example is the very fine TV Mini-series "CHIEFS" Which takes place in the fictional Southern town of Delano, during the film they keep saying the state, the state, but no name and yet when the next Mini-series comes out "GRASS ROOTS" with some of the same roles (Both tales highlight the Lee family)we're told Delano is in Georgia just south of Atlanta.
It's good policy on a film. If a story takes place in a fictional or unspecified location, the viewer is free to (and has to) use their imagination to enjoy the film. Imagine being a New Yorker and seeing a movie set in New York. The director can't be as imaginative without changing the city to an unrealistic setting. And if the director does change too much, New Yorkers (a large chunk of the market) can't suspend disbelief and doesn't enjoy the movie as much. In comic books, Marvel uses real cities, and DC uses fictional ones. And DC Comics outsell Marvel more than 2-to-1. Creative license works better without the boundaries of an established environment.
I guess the meek can inherit the Earth now. It looks like the stupid aren't doing anything with it.
It was supposed to represent earthen mud though, not be a reference to oil drilling. McLintock was specifically referred to as a rancher and miner, no oil speculation.
In 1964 it was relatively harmless, (at least to a ten year old as I was) But as we all know now, just a tad too stereotypical of Native Americans' want for Liquor -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's unfortunate that you missed the rest of the movie. I recently watched it, and can vividly recall the pro native stance most all of the characters took. In fact, it was quite central to the main plot
You have the issues between John wayne and Douglass, one of which is over treatment of the "hostiles". Douglass and the indian agents treat the natives very poorly, and John wayne Definitely looks down on this
You have the scene in question (above) where the native is about to be hung for kidnapping a girl, and John wayne and his crew ride in to save him, knowing full well he wouldn't have done that. in fact, it was douglass who helped start the issue by suggesting it was the natives, and many characters pointed out the fallacy in this.
There's the scene where the Comanche war chief requests john wayne to speak on their behalf. Despite being old enemies, and both having nearly killed the other, they recognize each other as noble warriors and join together and fight on each other's behalf
There's the scene at the military trial where john wayne speaks up as a character reference for the natives, and shows his distaste for the entire process and the lack of justice. The natives are sent back to their reservations, but John wayne goes into the speech about how they are used to riding the prairies with no laws to govern them and do not understand having to take orders when they have given them their entire life
There's the scene where John wayne hires the hobo to break into the military car of the train and release the guns to the natives. This is done so that the natives can have one last 'hurrah' and lead the military on a wild goose chase. Then the military will investigate the whole incident, discover the poor treatment of the natives, and give them a fair trial
All in all, the treatment of the natives was mostly subtle, but well done and all but completely sympathetic. 1964 or not, they managed to shed some sympathy on the people and what changes they would have had giving up their way of life. Also when you look at the characters of who's considered the good guys, and who's considered the bad guys, the good guys are sympathetic towards the natives, such as john wayne, his wife, his crew, the sheriff, etc. The villains who are against the natives are mostly annoying bumbling buffoons who other people talk down on and are not so much likable characters, ie the military indian agent (the guy with the nasally voice), Douglass, his kid (Jerry Lewis as the actor playing his typical bumbling oaf character), and the pilgrims.
I wouldn't even call it a completely tasteless joke, because John wayne spent half the movie drunk or drinking himself. Alcohol was another main idea for the story, such as john wayne coming home drunk and throwing his hat on the weather vane (at least twice or 3 times during the movie) the scene where he gets plastered and falls down the stairs, the references to hangovers, calling the characters drunkards, saying they smell like beer, etc etc. If we show the white actors as drunks, is it really so bad showing 1 native as being an alcoholic? Not the most tasteful joke, but a little comic relief thrown in there
And it's a little comic relief at the expense of the natives, of course... but overall the movie shows them in a VERY positive and sympathetic light
In that sense, the plot was almost a remake of Fort Apache. Another film about that same time The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence also rehashed certain ideas from Fort Apache
But that was Jerry Van Dyke - NOT Jerry Lewis. You know the guy who played Craig T. Nelson's sidekick on Coach?
Come on now. Don't fall for that pc crap. My grandfather was a Choctaw who loved to drink with the best of them and he called himself an Indian, not this "native American" crap going around now. I thought anybody born in the continents of North and South America was a "native American" anyway. We need more movies nowadays that aren't tiptoeing around and trying to be pc. They'd be a lot better than what Hollywood has been boring us with for the past 20 or so years.
If you watch the whole movie you can see that it shows the Indians in a good light and shows how they were mistreated but that there were folks like John Wayne that worked to help them.
The Indian who said the quote was Running Buffalo but unfortunately I don't have a name for the person who played this character. I once saw a documentary on John Wayne and saw him and know he was in several John Wayne movies but I don't think until McLintock he never had a speaking part and only appeared briefly in the movies. He was one of the Indians at the end of The Searchers that was fighing the white men in the final ambush. Unfortunately they didn't list everyone in the cast unless they had fairly big roles back then and I was unable to find any information on him to my satisfaction. This may be one mystery that will never be known.