Hey! That Dynamite Doesn't Belong There! Part 1

I know that many Westerns did not strive for historical accuracy and we don't really expect them to. Western stories often deal with the mythical (rather than historical) Wild West and that's just fine. The mythical Wild West is a lot of fun to visit.

But there is one thing that can bug me. When an occasional Western is set prior to the Civil War or during that conflict, I'm a little bothered when obvious anachronisms such as Winchester rifles or dynamite are being used. I realize that anachronistic weapons show up in almost any Western, but I'm often okay with that--if only because I don't have the knowledge to tell a 1892 model Winchester from an 1873 model.

But if its set before the Civil War, such things do get a little on my nerves, since they are so obviously out of place. I wrote about 1953's The Man from the Alamo a few years ago and, despite praising the film, spent a paragraph or two whining about this.

Well, 1953 also brought us Kansas Pacific, staring Sterling Hayden. It's a fun movie, set in the months just before the Civil War, in which both Northern and Southern factions in Blood Kansas were raising havoc.

The government is trying to complete the Kansas Pacific railroad, opening up a steady supply route to western forts in anticipation of the war. Cal Bruce (Barton MacLane) is ramroding the construction, but despite his years of experience, he's stymied by continued sabotage carried out by Southern sympathizers.

The Southerners, by the way, are led by Bill Quantrill, who in real life led a blood guerilla campaign against the North during the war. Movie versions of him often portray him (I would argue accurately) as murderous. Brian Donlevy, for instance, gave us a quite psychotic Quantrill in the 1950 film Kansas Raiders. 

In Kansas Pacific, Quantrill (played by Reed Hadley) is a more generic bad guy who is rationally trying to accomplish his goals, though Hadley does bring across a sense of intelligence that makes him an effective antagonist.

The hero of the film is an army engineer named John Nelson (Sterling Hayden), who is sent by the military in an undercover role to supervise railroad construction and guard against the saboteurs. Cal Bruce is initially resentful of a guy he sees as his replacement, but the two soon come to respect each other, with Bruce eventually deducing Nelson's real identity.

The action in the movie is centered around Quantrill's various attempts to sabotage the railroad and Nelson's countermoves against him. Several times, all this involves large amounts of dynamite, so we get to see lots of stuff blow up. Later in the movie, Quantrill gives up on stopping railroad construction and moves on to using a cannon to blow up ammunition trains. 

The action is done well, with Hayden's performance as Nelson giving the plot a firm backbone. My understanding is that Hayden didn't really care for acting, but did it simply to earn a living and pay for his frequent travels. All the same, he always brought a real authority to his roles. Perhaps this was an outgrowth of his wartime work with the O.S.S., but whether Hayden played a hero or a villain, you always knew he could kick your butt without half trying.

I do like this movie and recommend it, but I do grind my teeth a bit at the dynamite (invented in 1867) and the Winchester rifles (invented in 1866). I know this movie is set in the mythical Wild West and the dynamite is effectively used to generate some fun action scenes. But, gee whiz, there must have been a few single-shot rifles and muskets in the studio's property department!

Oh, well, that's just me. Watching Sterling Hayden kick butt is still worthwhile.

Next week, we'll look at another Civil War-era movie that proves to be really good despite some historically inappropriate use of dynamite.