UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

gordonl56 ULZANA'S RAID 1972 This is simply one of the best western films to come out of the 1970's. This Robert Aldrich directed film stars, Burt Lancaster, Bruce Davison, Richard Jaeckel, Joaquin Martinez and Jorge Luke.The film starts, when a small group of Chiricahua Apaches leave the reservation to go on a raid. The group in led by Joaquin Martinez who has grown tired of the slow death that reservation life is. They plan on a bit of killing, burning and rape.The local Army fort sends a small detachment of troopers under a junior officer, Bruce Davison, to capture or kill the renegades. Old time scout Burt Lancaster and his Apache partner, Jorge Luke are also in the mix.Ulzana (Martinez) is working his way across the desert country killing several troopers and settlers. They also enjoy a bit of rape and torture with one of the settler women. The troopers, led by the inexperienced Davison, are always one step behind the Apaches.Davison is of course all for riding hard and heavy in pursuit of Martinez and the braves. Old hand, Lancaster tells Davison that they need to out think the Apaches in order to catch them.What follows is a real cat and mouse game between the Apaches and the troopers. Lancaster and his man, Luke, manage to outflank a couple of the Apache party and run off their horses. Now the pursuit turns all the more deadly, as the Apaches need to find some remounts. Needless to say there is going to be dead on both sides.This one is a top flight duster with the cast and crew all turning in good work. The film was shot on location in Arizona.The director, Robert Aldrich is best known for, VERA CRUZ, KISS ME DEADLY, THE BIG KNIFE, ATTACK, WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE?, HUSH…HUSH SWEET CHARLOTTE, THE LONGEST YARD, THE DIRTY DOZEN and THE FLIGHT OF THE PHOENIX.The look of the film is excellent, with 2 time, Oscar nominated and 1 time winning cinematographer, Joseph Biroc at the controls. His work includes, ROUGHSHOD, LOAN SHARK, WITHOUT WARNING, THE GLASS WALL, VICE SQUAD, WORLD FOR RANSOM, NIGHTMARE and THE GARMENT JUNGLE. His most famous films are likely, HUSH, HUSH SWEET CHARLOTTE and IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE.

Anssi Vartiainen Ulzana's Raid is a pretty efficient period piece about the horrors of the Indian Wars. It tells the tale of a young lieutenant Garnett DeBuin (Bruce Davison) as he is given the command to track and apprehend a small Apache war party, which has left the reservation led by their leader Ulzana (Joaquín Martínez). With him he has a veteran tracker and army scout McIntosh (Burt Lancaster).The star power of Lancaster, and to a lesser degree Martínez and Davison, cannot be denied. He is a classic gruff and tainted hero of American Wild West, shaded by life, but still willing to travel to the ends of the Earth for the right cause. Ulzana is also an intimidating figure, though given a pretty stereotypical treatment as the savage Indian, but at least they made him calculating and intelligent. DeBuin is the focus character, through whom we experience the story, and it's nice to see him growing from a total greenhorn into an actual officer.Unfortunately the story is extremely dull. Some might call it classic, I call it stereotypical and predictable. Nothing new is tried, it's merely old scenes and tricks after another. I could have told you how the story's going to end after the first five minutes.The pacing is also agonizingly slow and the dialogues are not interesting enough to give our characters any depth. Partly this is because of the time period and the conventions of the genre, but mostly it's just weak script.Ulzana's Raid is not the worst western I've seen, but it epitomizes all the things that I don't like about the genre. It's slow, formula-driven and ultimately pretty uninteresting.

SimonJack Of the many Native American nations, groups and tribes, the Apaches were among the most clever and fierce fighters. They raided with small bands among themselves and against any and all outsiders to gain goods. And they waged war in larger numbers at times with the Mexican government, U.S. Cavalry and other Indian groups. As with other American Indian groups, most movies and stories about the Apaches well into the late 20th century strayed far from the truth. Yet, history does record the almost barbaric savage behavior of some of the Apache groups in the 19th century American Southwest. "Ulzana's Raid" is a film set in the last years of the Apache Wars (1849-1886). Ulzana is the name of an Apache leader during that time, but he wasn't part of any insurrection and he died peacefully on the San Carlos reservation. So, his and other characters of this story are mostly fictitious. What this film does show is the brutality that was displayed at times by some of the Apaches, and some of the Apache culture that is considered barbaric by western culture. It also attests to the cunning, skill and strength of the Apache character in fighting and war. This is certainly one of the very best Westerns ever made that focuses on the cavalry and Indian confrontations. The acting, scenery and directing are all very good. The film gets its "R" rating from the several scenes, however short, that picture the graphic torture and mutilation of bodies. The plot is weak in places. It has some apparent lapses in story development between scenes. And the script is confusing in places, especially in the depiction of two of the characters. The first is Burt Lancaster as McIntosh. In early scenes at Fort Lowell (in present day Tucson, AZ) McIntosh describes the Apaches bitterly as ruthless barbarians out to kill and plunder. He seems clearly to hate the Indians. But, later in the film, he says he doesn't hate the Indians, but he does fear them. The second glaring incongruity of characters in the script is with Bruce Davison as Lt. Garnett DeBuin. He is only six months out of West Point and is given his first "battle" command. His father is a "man of the cloth." Early on DeBuin questions McIntosh and Apache scout Ke-Ni-Tay (played very well by Mexican actor Jorge Luke) about the Indians overall and the Apaches in particular. He is appalled at their brutality, yet he insists that the dead Apaches be buried. He wonders about White men misunderstanding and not knowing the Indians. Then, he says that he hates the Indians. At the start of the film, one senses that this young green Army officer will change his "naïve" views about the Apaches by the film's end. But the script doesn't play out that way, and instead, we have this conflicted character throughout. Toward the end, McIntosh utters a classic line after DeBuin has chastised some troopers for stabbing a dead Indian. "You don't want to think of the white man as being savage like the Apache," he says.

Robert J. Maxwell Nobody can accuse the writer (Alan Sharp) or the director (Robert Aldrich) of an excess of political correctness in this movie. The Chiracahua Apache Ulzana and his dozen or so followers are pretty brutal characters. They torture captives, rape women, mutilate the dead bodies of their enemies and are generally pitiless.As a matter of historical fact, the Indians of the high plains and the Southwest didn't fight according to the rules of fair play that governed Western armies. I don't know about rape. The ethnographies are too genteel to get into it. But the Apache in particular were given to deboning some prisoners beginning with the fingertips. And not just the warriors. The Mojave men turned their wounded captives over to the women, who REALLY knew how to deal with them. But let me get off that subject because it's beginning to remind me of my marriage.Ulzana is dissatisfied with the treatment his tribe is receiving on the reservation so he leads his band off on a series of raids, pursued by a green lieutenant (Davison), a detail of cavalry troopers, Burt Lancaster as the weary scout, and Jorge Luke as the reformed Apache guide. So far, so routine.But this is fairly well done. The renegade Indians may be savage but the troopers show that they can mutilate bodies too. And the inexperienced but well-meaning lieutenant reveals some subtle expressions of prejudice against a different race or, more accurately, a different culture. The script doesn't justify or explain the difference between the cavalry and the Indians. Rather, it describes them, and with reasonable accuracy. For instance, the Apache are shown as especially adept at fighting on foot, which was the case.Lancaster doesn't seem to put much into the role, a little surprising given his social and political leanings. Bruce Davison as the lieutenant is quite good. It's too bad he looks fourteen years old because he delivers his lines well and has the properly innocent features. But his voice cracks, a little like Jimmy Stewart's, as if he were pubescent, and his frame is diminutive.As usual, it's nice to see Richard Jaeckel in uniform again. Here -- grown a bit more husky with age -- he is top sergeant of Davison's detail. I do wish the poor guy could be promoted, maybe get a commission. He began as a mere Marine private in "Guadalcanal Diary" and had only made sergeant in the US Army by "The Dirty Dozen", a quarter of a century later. Now, five years after that, he's stuck in grade, but I understand he was finally retired as Warrant Officer and now lives in Coronado, California, where he spend his time cursing sea gulls and writing angry letters to the San Diego Union-Tribune about the deep need of Americans for more war in order to speed up promotions.This film isn't a masterpiece but the photography is nice, the action abundant, and the objectivity pronounced. If it isn't politically correct, at least it's not obvious propaganda like the Westerns of the 30s or "Stagecoach" or "Little Big Man." Polemics get tiresome and dated. This one opts for stimulating thought instead of binary emotions. As Lancaster's character puts it, "We'd be better off thinking' instead of hatin'." But the point is usually made with more subtlety.