Download Our App XoStream

The Great Sioux Massacre

1965

Action / Biography / Drama / History / War / Western

Plot summary


Uploaded by: FREEMAN

Top cast

Nancy Kovack Photo
Nancy Kovack as Libbie Custer
Julie Sommars Photo
Julie Sommars as Caroline Reno
Darren McGavin Photo
Darren McGavin as Captain Benton
Philip Carey Photo
Philip Carey as Colonel Custer
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU 720p.WEB 1080p.WEB
933.16 MB
1280*542
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 41 min
P/S 4 / 26
1.69 GB
1920*812
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 41 min
P/S 5 / 61
840.67 MB
1280*714
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 31 min
P/S 2 / 14
1.6 GB
1920*1072
English 2.0
NR
23.976 fps
1 hr 31 min
P/S 1 / 17

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by bkoganbing5 / 10

View the film, count the errors

Hollywood got it wrong once again in retelling the tale of George Armstrong Custer and the battle he lost to the Sioux at the Little Big Horn. Pity that such a good cast was wasted on a mediocre western.

The film centers around the three commanders that led troops at the battle. Custer is played by Philip Carey and Major Marcus Reno is played by Joseph Cotten and Captain Frederick Benton (Benteen) was played by Darren McGavin.

It's come down in legend that Major Reno was an alcoholic and for most of this film he's just that. A southerner who enlisted in the army after the Civil War ended, Reno feels he's not getting his just due. He despises Benton for paying court to his daughter. Reno was never a southerner and he never had a daughter. His abrupt change of character including sobering up never happened in real life and was not believable here.

Nor was Carey changing from a decent soul with a decent regard for the rights of the Sioux to a bloodthirsty ambitious figure who wants to score a big military victory over the Sioux for political ambitions. It has come down to us in legend that Custer was angling for the Democratic nomination in 1876. As Custer was a hero from the Civil War, the Democrats who stigmatized as the party of secession could not be painted that with a Union general heading their ticket for once. They actually did do that with Winfield Scott Hancock in the next election in 1880 and almost won.

Bad script and mediocre direction characterize The Great Sioux Massacre. On the plus side the battle scenes are nicely staged. Historians might want to view the film to count the errors.

Reviewed by Leofwine_draca5 / 10

Only average, unfortunately

THE GREAT SIOUX MASSACRE is a re-telling of the famous story of Custer's last stand, but as a film it's the kind of production that wobbles all over the place and feels only average as a piece of entertainment. The titular event takes place right at the end and, while undoubtedly the best part of the production, feels somewhat anti-climatic at times. You wonder why you've had to wait so long to get to a scene which is neither as dramatic or as tragic as it should be.

As for the rest of the film, it's a typical western-type story enlivened by some interesting character actors but feeling a bit boring at times. The weird thing about the characters in this film is how they all transform and end up unrecognisable. Philip Carey's Custer starts out as a decent guy before becoming corrupted while Joseph Cotten plays an absolute idiot of a character before redeeming himself. Darren McGavin is just sort of there in the story without really doing much. THE GREAT SIOUX MASSACRE is watchable enough but a classic it isn't and the indifferent execution is the reason for that.

Reviewed by Tweekums3 / 10

A fairly poor western

This film is a highly fictionalised account of the events leading up to the Battle of the Little Big Horn; for example here we see Major Reno as a drunk and bitter former Confederate general when the real Reno was a Union officer...surely it would have been better to make an entirely fictional character. Another problem the film suffered from was the inconsistency of the characters; we are meant to believe that Custer risked his profession to make a stand against those abusing the native population then shortly afterwards when a senator suggests that with a few more victories under his belt he could run for president he instantly starts fermenting trouble and massacring Indians himself!

It isn't just facts and inconsistent characters that are a problem; in many places the film looks as if it was cut together with scenes from other films; in the 'exciting climactic battle' I found myself watching the sky switch from cloudless to totally overcast and back again in a matter of seconds! If you could ignore that the action wasn't bad and there is a fair amount of it.

The story is told from the point of view of a Capt Benton; an officer under Custer who is shocked at the way the Indians are treated; so much so that he reprimands his tracker for killing a captured and wounded Indian... no further action is taken though; presumably so we can see the man see the error of his ways and save an Indian child later. Benton is supportive of Custer until he starts killing the Indians. At one point he is court-martialled for striking Custer but the party taking him to trial is ambushed. He is spared because he spared Indians before; they take him to their camp where he sees the huge army they have amassed; as they take him away he is rescued and tells Custer of the Indian plans but because Custer is arrogant and history says he must die Benton is ignored.

Overall I'd only recommend this if you have nothing better to do and it is on television; it might provide a few unintentional laughs. Just don't consider it a history lesson!

Read more IMDb reviews