Cimarron (1931)

Synopsis:

Forty years — from 1880s to 1920s — of Oklahoma history. The story is told from the perspective of attorney and newspaperman, Yancey Cravat (Richard Dix, The Ghost Ship) and his wife, Sabra (Irene Dunne, I Remember Mama).

Reaction & Thoughts:

“If we all took root and squatted, there would never be any new country.”

Cimarron entered the history books as the very first western to win an Oscar for Best Picture. It isn’t a western in the classic tradition, though. It’s essentially a two-generation melodrama based on Edna Ferber’s best-selling novel of the same name. Today, Cimarron is more of a curiosity than anything else. It’s a grandly filmed but creaky epic with stilted acting, whose highest card is the then innovative use of sound.

It’s an early talkie, therefore one can’t be too critical of the film’s technical flaws. Sound was a new thing, and shooting outdoors was extremely difficult in the early 1930s. I’m sure the filmmakers did their best under the circumstances. You also have to forgive the occasional stereotypical depictions of gender and race.

In any event, Cimarron‘s best scenes are at the beginning, specifically the truly spectacular recreation of the Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889. The early scenes of chaos and lawlessness are good as well. Sadly, the movie loses momentum towards the end. In addition, the story feels a little rushed — some subplots are left unresolved.

Flaws and all, the film has several interesting ideas. The husband, played by Richard Dix, is always challenging norms, while the wife, played by Irene Dunne, is a staunch supporter of the status quo. It’s fascinating to see the man, not the woman, as an agent of social change (after all, the book was written by a woman). But neither one has much common sense, which makes them very frustrating characters.

This brings me to my main issue with the film: the two main characters are so unlikable! We see the evolution of Oklahoma through the eyes of a morally-questionable couple, and that tainted the experience for me. The husband is selfish and flaky. His wife is racist and pretentious. They are supposed to be the founders of the state of Oklahoma, and deliberately or not, you feel that the territory was built by awful people.

As for the performances, they are a little exaggerated by today’s standards. Dix, in particular, tends to overplay the simplest scene. I’ve seen him in other movies, and he’s a good actor — Dix eventually learned to tone it down for the cameras. The charismatic actor does look the part of the fearless cowboy, and that helps a bit.

Dunne’s best performances isn’t all that great, either. As far as I’m concerned, Estelle Taylor (Street Scene), as a woman with a shady past, gives the best performance in the film. Edna May Oliver (Drums Along the Mohawk), steals many scenes as a snotty old maid. Also with Stanley Fields (Island of Lost Souls and William Collier Jr. (Little Caesar). Dennis O’Keefe (The Leopard Man) has a bit part.

Conclusions & Final Thoughts:

Is Cimarron a must-see film? Not really. Is Cimarron a watchable movie? Definitely. Although time has not been kind to the film — it’s one of the Academy’s weakest choices for Best Picture — it is by no means a waste of time. The film is, at the very least, a real curiosity. Remade in 1960. B&W, 125 minutes, Not Rated.