Watch The Far Horizons For Free

Very disappointing...

To me, this movie is perfection.

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Good movie but grossly overrated

Copyright 1955 by Paramount Pictures Corp. New York opening at the Criterion: 20 May 1955. U.S. release: June 1955. U.K. release: June 1955. Australian release: 8 February 1957. 9,826 feet. 109 minutes. Censored by 2 minutes in the U.K. in order to qualify for a "U" certificate.SYNOPSIS: In 1803 President Jefferson sends Lewis and Clark on a jaunt to map and explore the Louisiana Purchase.COMMENT: An impossible script, straight out of dime romance novels, almost defeats this commendable attempt to re-trace the exploratory achievements of Lewis and Clark. Fortunately, there are snatches of action to relieve the triangular tedium, and the scenery — in the hands of Daniel L. Fapp's Technicolor-VistaVision camera — is absolutely breathtaking. Heston tries manfully to overcome the script's deficiencies of dialogue and inadequate characterization, but is ultimately defeated by an especially unbelievable conclusion. Fred MacMurray had presumably read the script in advance. He doesn't even try. Demarest tries vainly to assert himself. Miss Hale is likewise wasted. Oddly enough, it is Donna Reed who is halfway convincing as the never-take-no Indian girl, despite her obviously too smooth make-up and a puerile fade-out that makes nonsense of her one- tracked devotion.A colorful Jefferson has the best lines, allowing Herbert Heyes to easily walk away with Far Horizon's acting honors, such as they are.Maté's direction homes in on the scenery, costumes and sets but makes little sense of the "story".

I think that the best thing this movie did to me was to unveil that wonderful character, namely Sacajawea, the Shoshone squaw who helped and guided the Lewis-Clark Expedition. After seeing it I discovered on a very old Reader's Digest issue something about her, just to realize that Sacajawea didn't have any romance with William Clark, because she was already a married woman, namely a guy named Charbonneau with whom she stayed till his death. The real Sacajawea story (or biography), as well as the real Lewis& Clark expedition, are certainly much more interesting than this Hollywood make believe-"historical" movie. For instance, it was lovely to know how Sacajawea was amazed to see a whale skeleton on a West Coast beach. However when she tried to tell this to her tribe's people, they just laughed at her, convicted that she was a liar, that no "fish" could be so big. So the "romantic" approach used in the screenplay, wasted a good opportunity to show either how fascinating the real expedition history has been or the cultural shock experienced by this simple Indian young woman when her tiny inner word was broadened by the unique opportunity she had to explore the unknown, together with the duo of white explorers and their fellows. Other than this, I remember how curious I was to differentiate the optical process used by Paramount (VistaVision) from the CinemaScope, the latter implemented by 20th Century Fox and other companies. Other than a sharper resolution, quite between us, it has been deceiving. In short, expeditions like the one the film stages, have a certain similarity with many similar expeditions carried out in Brazil, especially in the XVII century.The difference is that Lewis & Clark has been an official enterprise and the ones in Brazil have been a matter of private nature, mostly by adventurers, gold rushers, or cruel people seeking Indians for slavery, a thing that didn't work.Indians were either fragile as to Whites' diseases or too much independent to become slaves. So our Portuguese colonizers turned themselves to Africa.Too bad for it.But very good as to the splendid cultural heritage brought either by Africans or the mix of the three cultures:Indians,African and Portuguese Whites. Other than this I remember Donna Reed's performance, while I hardly remember Charlton Heston in his deep blue uniform. An I had forgotten Fred Mc Murray was on the film. In short, some thrill, some sightings in true Technicolor, but as to History, Hollywood just tried it...

If I would have seen the trailer (preview) of this film in the fifties I would probably not have missed it. It had everything to please , the colorful scenes on the river, the great scenery and potentially a great story about Lewis and Clark that wanted to get to the Pacific and faced all kinds of dangers. It had a lot in common with 'The Big Sky' with the advantage of being in color. But 'The Big Sky' was quite a film and 'The Far Horizons' failed. By casting Donna Reed as an Indian woman and making her character so important they went wrong. Reed is a good actress, but this part was not for her. Just comparing her with the Indian girl in 'The Big Sky' we realize why. It is not really her fault, but her character was too much of a cliché. SPOILER AHEAD. I thought the great moment of the film would be when they start seeing the Pacific Ocean. I kept thinking of 'Lawrence of Arabia', that spectacular moment when Peter O'Toole is walking in what seems like an endless desert and suddenly sees the Suez Canal. But in this film, who knows why, probably because they went over budget, this is not shown. The film cuts abruptly to when they are already in the Pacific, celebrating their achievement. Quite a letdown.

The "river " movie-as opposed to road movie- was born with Huston (African queen,1950),then continued by Preminger's"River of no return"(1954)."The far horizons" is an entertaining adventure yarn,with a nice cinematography ,a good use of the cinemascope and a very fine cast.Donna Reed stands out,her portrayal of the Indian heroine is very modern,and the last sequence is totally unusual in this kind of movie.The story is divided into a prologue ("civilization"),the main part (the expedition),and an epilogue (back to" civilization").The dialogue is wittier than in an average western.Some remarks about women's position in both societies are smart .The "river movie" will reach its artistic peak during the seventies with Herzog's "Aguirre,der Zorn Gottes"(1972)(also an expedition!),the same year as John Boorman's "deliverance".In the nineties,it was still hip,as "the river wild" (1994)shows.